SOUTH POLE - RACE TO THE TRAGEDY

The Terra Nova Expedition, officially the British Antarctic Expedition, was led by Robert Falcon Scott with the objectives of scientific research (meteorological, .

Race to the South Pole - Tragedy at the South Pole | HD National Geo Tv | Discovery HD Channel | 720p Documentary 2014 history channel, bbc network, nat .

Race to the South Pole: Tragedy at the South Pole Antarctica - Documentary Subscribe: .

Nikos Deja Vu - The Race For The Poles (Historical Documentary) At the beginning of 20th century there were only 2 regions of our planet that were completely .
The first expedition to reach the geographic South Pole was led by the Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen. He and four others arrived at the pole on 14 December 1911,[n 1] five weeks ahead of a British party led by Robert Falcon Scott as part of the Terra Nova Expedition. Amundsen and his team returned safely to their base, and later learned that Scott and his four companions had died on their return journey.

Amundsen's initial plans had focused on the Arctic and the conquest of the North Pole by means of an extended drift in an icebound ship. He obtained the use of Fridtjof Nansen's polar exploration ship Fram, and undertook extensive fundraising. Preparations for this expedition were disrupted when, in 1909, the rival American explorers Frederick Cook and Robert E. Peary each claimed to have reached the North Pole. Amundsen then changed his plan and began to prepare for a conquest of the South Pole; uncertain of the extent to which the public and his backers would support him, he kept this revised objective secret. When he set out in June 1910, he led even his crew to believe they were embarking on an Arctic drift, and revealed their true Antarctic destination only when Fram was leaving their last port of call, Madeira.

Amundsen made his Antarctic base, which he named "Framheim", in the Bay of Whales on the Great Ice Barrier. After months of preparation, depot-laying and a false start that ended in near-disaster, he and his party set out for the pole in October 1911. In the course of their journey they discovered the Axel Heiberg Glacier, which provided their route to the polar plateau and ultimately to the South Pole. The party's mastery of the use of skis and their expertise with sledge dogs ensured rapid and relatively trouble-free travel. Other achievements of the expedition included the first exploration of King Edward VII Land and an extensive oceanographic cruise.

The expedition's success was widely applauded, though the story of Scott's heroic failure overshadowed its achievement in the United Kingdom. Amundsen's decision to keep his true plans secret until the last moment was criticised by some. Recent polar historians have more fully recognised the skill and courage of Amundsen's party; the permanent scientific base at the pole bears his name, together with that of Scott.

[gabrielmicu]

Back then were real, brave and strong men. They didn't abandon Scott.

[jantyszka]

It's hardly fair to dismiss Amundsen's journey as a mere "dash to the Pole" - he pioneered a completely new route over unknown country, and he planned for it meticulously. If anything the different outcomes illustrate a different approach to achieving the goal: the British intended to beat Nature using data and scientific reasoning; the Norwegians respected Nature and knew what it could be capable of. In the same dilemma as Scott I think Amundsen would have been far more adaptable and pragmatic.

[davidrotter]

I have watched and read a great deal about the expeditions to both poles. There are puzzling elements to these accounting’s and the various outcomes. The idea that indigenous peoples priceless information about survival in these environments was simply ignored and thought of as “uncivilized and or coming from inarticulate, ignorant savages” is beyond just perplexing. Even more perplexing is the fact that Scott, the meticulous planner, had planned every detail regarding their supplies and their daily rations, for 4 adult Men. At the very most critical moment, Scott then chose to add another adult Man, but with no additional rations of fuel, foods and supplies with which to accommodate this additional companion. Although the weather was unusually intemperate in the Antarctic that year, there are few records in existence that have documented a blizzard in the Antarctic lasting more than 3 to 4 days, and both Amundsen and Scott were there at the Pole within weeks of each other. I have read some accounts regarding the condition of Robert Scott and his ability to continue onto “One Ton Depot”. There are those who believe that Scott’s two surviving comrades could possibly have made it to the cache of desperately needed supplies, but that Scott would have perished alone in that tent, freezing and starving to death while waiting for rescue. I do not for one moment believe that Robert Falcon Scott was an incompetent bungler, and I doubt we shall ever know why he added that 5th Man at the last moment nor of his absolute refusal to use any of the life saving advice of those who live in this sort of weather, the Inuit. Cook, Amundsen and Peary, all listened to the Inuit, whereas Scott thought it to be inferior information and so discarded it with biased prejudice. It was an abnormal weather year, nonetheless, even if Scott had added more food per man, (Amundsen planned for 10 times more food per man, per day, than did Scott!), he still would have come in 2nd place🥈to Amundsen. If he had added more food to accommodate the additional 5th Man, he and his companions more than likely would have survived and that would have been far better than the tragic deaths of these incredibly brave and hearty Men. To say that Amundsen had forgone careful planning is an outright and total fabrication. He had planned so well that he was feeding chocolate bars 🍫 to the Huskies he had brought with him. Not only that, but the diets of the two teams were vastly different. Scott did not survive on just “Dried Meat and Lard”, The 5 Men had whole wheat biscuits, cocoa, pemmican and lard every day they were on the plateau. Amundsen had a special pemmican made with Vegetables and Whole Oats, and he planned for 5 times the amount of Cocoa than did Scott. He also hunted Seal and Penguin to augment his team's diet. Amundsen planned so well, that he only brought 19 Men in total, not close to the 65 men of Scott's crew. Also, Amundsen chose to listen to the Inuit population about diet and survival in polar regions. They advised him to eat raw seal 🦭 meat in order to get the valuable nutrients needed to stave off Scurvy! Also, Amundsen sealed all of his fuel containers with extra solder and when these containers were dug up decades later, all were in tact without leaking. Scott sealed his fuel containers with leather washers which leaked constantly. Frostbite could have been avoided by the use of animal furs. Scott's Polar Party died due to freezing and starving and so more fuel and more food still equals 2nd place to the Pole but no death. Susan Solomon says at the 12:50 mark that it wouldn’t be fatal feeding 5 men with exact rations for four. She says that this starvation would lead to discomfort, uh, they all died due to lack of food. Robert Falcon Scott is no doubt an Antarctic hero, but to say that Roald Amundsen made an ill planned gambling dash to the Pole, is patently insulting to his legacy, his accomplishments and our collective intelligence. This video and it’s contents seem radically biased towards Scott being a scientific hero that came across some bad luck, while portraying Amundsen, the greatest Polar Explorer 🧭in the history of the world, as a no plan gambler who lucked into being first to reach the South Pole. It is heartbreaking to know what Scott and his loyal comrades went through, and from my comfortable position of perfect hindsight and warmth, what I feel for all of these brave men is nothing less than complete admiration. Thank you very much for posting.

[igorrromanov]

They were starving and exhausted long before they've reached Birdmore in their trip TO the Pole. Lack of vitamins and in general ill-balanced diet - plus blunt shortage of calories; all this combined with inadequate attire and the torture (yes - pure torture!) of man-hauling. Horror movie.

[johngal]

Excellent documentary about a story that has fascinated me all my life.

[todd.goslin]

I can't imagine anyone criticizing such an undertaking. Certainly heroic by all involved.

[UnDead]

I find it really interesting how black and white this comment section is about the 'Scott the bungler' narrative. First of all, it's not surprising that Amundsen beat Scott to the pole. That was Amundsen's sole aim. In a way, he was running a very 'athletic' expedition, much more akin to modern mountaineering. For him it was all about the challenge of getting there. Scott was running his expedition along very different lines, the Terra Nova expedition was first and foremost a scientific venture. He wasn't necessarily 'racing' Amundsen to the pole, although I'm sure he hoped to get there first.

That being said, it's fair to say that Scott made a number of questionable decisions. One thing this doc didn't mention was that he and Amundsen had both been advised by arctic legend Fridtjof Nansen who, at that point, was one of the world experts on dog driving and polar survival. Nansen had urged Scott to become more proficient on skis and base his transport planning around dogs rather than manhauling. He'd received similar advice from Robert Peary as well, actually. I'm not sure anyone really knows why but Scott did not follow the advice he was given and it's known that he had a certain, sentimental, reverence for the act of manhauling. Possibly because dog-sled travel usually involves a certain amount of animal-cruelty and he couldn't bring himself to do that. Which, you know... fair enough. But because of that decision, he required herculean efforts on the part of himself and his men. And, most critically, built himself next to no margin for error if things went wrong. Another thing this doc doesn't mention is that Apsley Cherry-Garrard had been ordered to take additional supplies to One-Tonne depot by dog sled and if Scott wasn't there, proceed south along the polar party's proposed route to meet up with them. Cherry-Garrard made it to one-tonne in early March but didn't feel he could proceed south. Scott and the other 3 men (at that point) were about 70 miles away. That fact haunted Cherry-Garrard for the rest of his life. If he had met them, then it's likely that the entire polar party (including Lawrence Oates) would've survived. But because Scott had stretched their margins so thinly, that one malfunction sealed their fate. And as Scott's journals indicate, he and his men knew exactly what risks they were taking and they all took them willingly.

Omg this has gotten long. Anyway, the point is, what Scott and his men did was nothing short of awe inspiring. And, of course, it shouldn't be forgotten that ultimately Scott's legacy would become far more important in the way Antarctica is utilized today than Amundsen's. But, at the same time, I don't think Amundsen saw any virtue in exposing himself or his men to needless suffering. He built a much simpler, more efficient plan with redundant supplies to increase his margin of error. As a result, his trip was almost easy by comparison. Perhaps a good way to put it is that Amundsen deliberately made his trip to the pole as easy as he could. Scott, deliberately made it more difficult for himself. In a way that's what makes the Polar Party's achievements so incredible. But was it really necessary to do it that way?

Hope I've made my point here lol. Both of the legends of 'Scott the Polar Hero' and 'Scott the Bungler' are true. But separating the two and deciding which should take precedence isn't an easy thing to do.

[nickcrosby]

Amundsen had 'forgone careful planning' -- total utter rubbish. Amundsen spent the Winter with his men meticulously adapting, improving and honing his plan, equipment food etc. His was the true triumph of both planning AND adaptation. And enormous cold weather experience. Check out the Norwegian histories and Fram museum on this.

[charlesmcmillion]

The scientific method has nothing to do with planning and expedition. SMH.

[celticlofts]

I've heard claims that Scott was more interested in the scientific discoveries of the Antarctic than being the first to reach the pole. I think that theory is a load of absolute nonsense. Being first to the pole was his ticket to fame and fortune as he was told he had no future in the Royal Navy. Robert Hall, who led an Everest expedition, reminded me of Scott. He too was a very meticulous planner who spent hours talking to his climbers about the need to stick to a plan and yet he died on the big hill because he changed his plans at the last minute. Scott did the same and paid the same price.

[Stripeyperch]

Scott is a national hero, its to easy to discredit him from the comforts of our warm homes.

[mikemhoon]

I can’t imagine walking that far in a temperate zone, much less in the frigid weather they put up with!

[glennmandigo]

Amundsen did what Franklin couldn't in Canada and what Scott couldn't in Antarctica
A lot of similarities

[mauricedavis]

So fascinating, brave souls indeed, frostbite is no joke(I suffer from it myself), amazing men who sacrificed in the name of science and for all humanity...R.I.P.🙏😷

[MA-lbdq]

Scott's ending journey is indeed sad. He was very brave. But he was also arrogant which was a typiacal british mentality at that time and also a fool. Amundsen was wise and a meticulous planner because of his experience living in Nordic region.

[FreeThinking]

Scott was killed by his attempt because he tried to revive a lackluster Navy career by attempting a project for which he had not developed adequate expertise. He was an expert at being ‘British” and asserting “British preeminence.”

[paulallen]

Amundsen planned his expedition with one priority: To get to the South Pole first. All other considerations were secondary.
He was well aware he couldn't afford to bring lots of scientific equipment and have a thorough excursion as if he was surveying unchartered parts of inland Africa. Others could take the glory in the scientific discoveries later, he would get there first. Hence he traveled light and fast. Wise man.
Scott may have been thorough and may have prepared accordingly, but his original outlook on what the ultimate goal of the mission was made him lose the race to Amundsen. Scott's starting point was what lost him the race.

Listen. Scott perishing on the return trip is almost irrelevant and a separate topic altogether. He still lost the race to the South Pole. Let's hypothetically say bad weather didn't prevent them from reaching safety. What happens now? Scott still has to admit defeat publicly, face a long scrutiny from his own people in how he "lost the race" and shake Amundsen's hand. He has to live the rest of the life as the man who "almost reached the South Pole first". The tragic deaths of him and his party actually was a hidden blessing. Had he lived there'd be no "hero's welcome" home for him. Since he died doing his duty he was remembered as a "hero". We always speak well of the dead - whether they deserved it or not.

[Stripedbottom]

It has to be remembered though that Amundsen did not conquer the pole by sheer luck and chance either; his planning was every bit as meticulous and scientific as Scott's. Probably even more so and definitely better, as in the event he conquered the pole faster and more efficiently (his team actually _gaining weight_ during the journey) without losing a man AND unlike Scott, he did it over mostly uncharted terrain. There's actually some evidence that both were previously adviced by the famous Norwegian explorer Fridtjof Nansen and that Amundsen took heed of it, while Scott decided to stick to his own ideas.

[petermckenzie]

Dr Solomons closing words are incredibly moving 😊

[KiamatDusk]

That last theory was total garbage Pretty sure Scott would notice if the blizzard had stopped because the wind would not be howling and blowing against the sides of the tent. Also, gloves and socks should be worn against the chest while sleeping to keep them from freezing. Shackleton knew this and so did Amundsen who got short thrift on this documentary.