General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Replica clothes pass Everest test

Started by Andrew Priest · · Last activity · 8 posts · 345 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
14 June 2006
Last activity
17 June 2006
Original author
Andrew Priest
Posts
8
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
345
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–8 of 8
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. BBC NEWS
    Replica clothes pass Everest test
    By Janine Ainley

    The results of a unique experiment on Mount Everest confirm that the
    clothing of the 1924 climbers George Mallory and Sandy Irvine would
    not have prevented them from reaching the summit, as many had
    believed.

    The findings are a step closer to proving the men could have reached
    the top, 29 years before Tenzing Norgay and Sir Edmund Hillary.

    Over the past few weeks, climber Graham Hoyland has been putting the
    old-style clothing worn on the fateful Mallory expedition to the
    ultimate field test on the world's highest mountain.

    Wearing replica gear made from gabardine, wool, cotton and silk, he
    wanted to disprove the common myth that the 1920s climbers were
    ill-equipped to reach the summit.

    "This is just another brick in my wall of evidence," Hoyland said.

    Following the discovery of Mallory's body on the north face of Everest
    in 1999, a team of forensic textile experts from Lancaster, Leeds,
    Southampton and Derby universities embarked on an experiment to
    recreate the outfit from samples of Mallory's clothing which had been
    preserved in ice.

    Side by side

    The three-year project, lead by Professor Mary Rose and Mike Parsons,
    revealed that Mallory's clothing was highly effective at providing
    protection at high altitude.

    The layered natural materials used to construct the garments were
    found to be excellent at trapping air next to the skin.

    The outer layer of gabardine was hardwearing and water-resistant yet
    breathable. But the clothing was also lighter than modern gear - the
    lightest ever to be used on Everest.

    Parsons said: "The results stand out as a challenge for future outdoor
    innovators because Mallory's clothing and footwear was 20% and 40%
    lighter respectively."

    The results of Hoyland's in-the-field experiment have now confirmed
    the experts' investigations.

    Wearing the replica clothing for two days on Everest, Hoyland tested
    the suit alongside the expedition leader who was wearing a typical
    modern down suit.

    A good feel

    "I immediately found the underclothes warm to put on, whereas the
    modern polypropylene underwear feels cold and clammy," said Hoyland.

    "When exposed to a cutting wind blowing off the main Rongbuk glacier,
    I found the true value of the Gabardine outer layers. These resisted
    the wind and allowed the eight layers beneath to trap warmed air
    between them and my skin.

    "We both got too hot working on the glacier so we felt that Mallory's
    clothing would have been more than adequate to climb to the top in,
    although it would be hard to survive a bivouac near the summit."

    Hoyland also discovered that the clothes were more comfortable to wear
    than modern day gear.

    "Like most mountaineers, I am used to synthetic outdoor clothing:
    polypropylene underclothes and outer fleeces which are bought
    pre-sized, off the shelf and never quite fit properly.

    "They are unforgiving in stretch, and begin to smell unpleasant if
    worn for more than a couple of days. There is a harsh synthetic
    sensation next to your skin. By contrast, the Mallory clothing was
    made to fit me.

    "This meant that the shirts didn't ride up, exposing my kidneys when I
    stretched, and the whole ensemble felt of a piece when walking.
    Instead of feeling bulky, the layers fitted very well."

    Freedom of Movement

    But the main difference for Hoyland was the level of movement the
    clothing allowed - which can mean the difference between life and
    death when at high altitude.

    "The patented Pivot sleeve of the jacket enabled me to lift my arm to
    full extent when cutting steps with an ice axe without displacing the
    warm layers of air. If you can reach above your head and climb faster,
    you could get to the summit before nightfall."

    Mallory's clothing did have one major drawback, as Hoyland discovered.
    "The immediate problem was fastening buttons with cold fingers. I
    suspect Mallory and Irvine would have put the clothes on at Advanced
    Base Camp and left them on for the duration. Fly buttons may have been
    left undone as there are enough layers to interleave."

    But Hoyland says: "All the other climbers thought the jacket was
    stylish and wanted to know where they could buy their own versions of
    the clothes!"

    The summit attempt and subsequent deaths of Mallory and Irvine sparked
    the biggest mountaineering mystery, which continues to puzzle the
    climbing world today.

    Norgay and Hillary are credited with the first successful summit, in
    1953. But a few, like Hoyland, still believe Mallory could have
    reached the top and are gradually piecing together the evidence to
    prove it.

    Hoyland is a great nephew of Howard Somervell, one of Mallory's
    climbing companions who lent Mallory his camera and was one of the
    last to see him heading for the summit.

    Hoyland believes the Kodak camera, which is still to be found, could
    also hold vital clues about Mallory's ill-fated climb.

    Story from BBC NEWS:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/5076634.stm

    Published: 2006/06/13 20:29:44 GMT

    © BBC MMVI

  2. Quoted message said:

    Wearing the replica clothing for two days on Everest,

    Get back to us when he's used it for two months. Note the article never
    states the altitude, temperature, or weather conditions. If they're
    overheating on the glacier, it wasn't very high or nasty. And he appears
    to be comparing it to shoddy "modern" gear if fit and mobility are
    issues. Modern polyester underwear is far better than polypro (or
    merino). How did the nailed boots that are "40% lighter" climb on the
    rock crux at the Second Step? Much ado about nothing.

  3. "Clyde" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Wearing the replica clothing for two days on Everest,

    Get back to us when he's used it for two months. Note the article never
    states the altitude, temperature, or weather conditions. If they're
    overheating on the glacier, it wasn't very high or nasty. And he appears
    to be comparing it to shoddy "modern" gear if fit and mobility are
    issues. Modern polyester underwear is far better than polypro (or
    merino). How did the nailed boots that are "40% lighter" climb on the
    rock crux at the Second Step? Much ado about nothing.

    Well I think some of the points are quite intersting. We live in an age
    where the modern is very much seen as an improvement on things that have
    gone and this clearly proves that they arent always the case. You may be
    right about the lonevity but I have to say that a lot of kit I buy doesnt
    get to longevity if it is uncomfortable, ill-designed or unhelpful

  4. Rob Devereux said:

    "Clyde" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Wearing the replica clothing for two days on Everest,

    Get back to us when he's used it for two months. Note the article never
    states the altitude, temperature, or weather conditions. If they're
    overheating on the glacier, it wasn't very high or nasty. And he appears
    to be comparing it to shoddy "modern" gear if fit and mobility are
    issues. Modern polyester underwear is far better than polypro (or
    merino). How did the nailed boots that are "40% lighter" climb on the
    rock crux at the Second Step? Much ado about nothing.

    Well I think some of the points are quite intersting. We live in an age
    where the modern is very much seen as an improvement on things that have
    gone and this clearly proves that they arent always the case. You may be
    right about the lonevity but I have to say that a lot of kit I buy doesnt
    get to longevity if it is uncomfortable, ill-designed or unhelpful

    Nah, it just proves that BBC is gullible. It takes more than two days of
    testing in mild conditions by one person to really test the performance
    of a clothing system. Not even a question of longevity. Having started
    out in the era of wool, cotton, leather, and wood climbng kit there's no
    doubt modern gear is better if you compare high-end to high-end.

  5. Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > Wearing the replica clothing for two days on Everest,

    In article <[email hidden]>,

    Clyde said:
    Rob Devereux said:

    "Clyde" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Get back to us when he's used it for two months. Note the article never
    states the altitude, temperature, or weather conditions. If they're
    overheating on the glacier, it wasn't very high or nasty. And he appears
    to be comparing it to shoddy "modern" gear if fit and mobility are
    issues. Modern polyester underwear is far better than polypro (or
    merino). How did the nailed boots that are "40% lighter" climb on the
    rock crux at the Second Step? Much ado about nothing.

    Well I think some of the points are quite interesting. We live in an age
    where the modern is very much seen as an improvement on things that have
    gone and this clearly proves that they arent always the case. You may be
    right about the lonevity but I have to say that a lot of kit I buy doesnt
    get to longevity if it is uncomfortable, ill-designed or unhelpful

    While your points are truem Clyde has the edge.

    Quoted message said:

    Nah, it just proves that BBC is gullible.

    Dave Roberts, Rafting with the BBC, where the first line begins:
    "They are dead. All dead..."

    Quoted message said:

    It takes more than two days of
    testing in mild conditions by one person to really test the performance
    of a clothing system. Not even a question of longevity. Having started
    out in the era of wool, cotton, leather, and wood climbing kit there's no
    doubt modern gear is better if you compare high-end to high-end.

    I have to go get my Alaskan laundry.
    ....

    --

  6. Clyde said:

    Nah, it just proves that BBC is gullible. It takes more than two days of
    testing in mild conditions by one person to really test the performance
    of a clothing system. Not even a question of longevity. Having started
    out in the era of wool, cotton, leather, and wood climbng kit there's no
    doubt modern gear is better if you compare high-end to high-end.

    But modern kit increasingly uses wool and leather after completely
    eschewing them for a while. While plastic boots may be better for 8000m
    peaks, for Alipne use composites are now far more common and merino wool
    is favoured by those without allergic reactions in many cases to
    polyester underwear. Ventile has never gone away as preferable polar
    wear for many people.

    While I prefer my carbon fibre kayak paddles for the most part, when it
    comes to windage and easy rolling a traditional wood Greenland paddle
    /is/ a better tool. It isn't just a case of "old stuff is worse, period".

    Pete.
    --
    Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
    Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
    Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
    net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

  7. In message <[email hidden]>, Clyde
    <[email hidden]> writes
    <snip>

    Quoted message said:


    Nah, it just proves that BBC is gullible. It takes more than two days of
    testing in mild conditions by one person to really test the performance
    of a clothing system. Not even a question of longevity. Having started
    out in the era of wool, cotton, leather, and wood climbng kit there's no
    doubt modern gear is better if you compare high-end to high-end.

    Himalayan conditions are completely different to the UK - very, very dry
    - so clothes that work really well here may well not work well there,
    and vice versa. Ventile is an example - it's a cracking material for
    keeping out wind, but in a UK downpour Goretex is preferable.

    --
    Surfer!
    Email to: ramwater at uk2 dot net

  8. In rec.backcountry Surfer! said:

    In message <[email hidden]>, Clyde
    <[email hidden]> writes
    <snip>

    Quoted message said:


    Nah, it just proves that BBC is gullible. It takes more than two days of
    testing in mild conditions by one person to really test the performance
    of a clothing system. Not even a question of longevity. Having started
    out in the era of wool, cotton, leather, and wood climbng kit there's no
    doubt modern gear is better if you compare high-end to high-end.

    Quoted message said:

    Himalayan conditions are completely different to the UK - very, very dry
    - so clothes that work really well here may well not work well there,
    and vice versa. Ventile is an example - it's a cracking material for
    keeping out wind, but in a UK downpour Goretex is preferable.

    I had a ventile mountain coat which I wore happily in many UK
    downpours. I used to keep it showerproof by not washing with detergent
    and spraying on some showerproofing stuff about once a year. When I
    had completely worn it threadbare I replaced it with what was alleged
    to be a more modern and much superior goretex mountain coat (which was
    also well over twice the price). It was [censored] compared to the ventile,
    the biggest problem being internal condensation due to sweat making me
    far wetter than the rain which got through the shower-proofed ventile
    ever did.

    I never have found anything again quite as good in all respects as
    that cheap old ventile coat, although I haven't gone so far as to try
    modern coats which cost hundreds of pounds. I'm impressed by the
    Buffalo and Montane stuff I've tried and read about, and suspect it
    might well be possible to better my old ventile with that kind of
    technology.

    IMHO goretex is the mountain coat equivalent of Micros**t software, a
    triumph of superb marketing over rubbish performance.

    --
    Chris Malcolm [email hidden] +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205
    IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
    [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.