

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 11 guests
Annoying Geographic Question | |
---|---|
![]() |
|
Highjohn
Posts: 221
|
Why isn't Armageddon Reef covered in ice. It is on the south pole, Safehold is colder on average than earth and the north pole is covered in ice. So why isn't Armageddon Reef covered in ice?
|
Top |
Re: Annoying Geographic Question | |
---|---|
![]() |
|
Graydon
Posts: 245
|
Antarctica wasn't covered in ice -- there was ice, central Antarctica had continental glaciation, but the whole of the continent wasn't covered to the coasts -- until the gap between Antarctica and South America got wide enough for the Antarctic Circumpolar Current to form, which put the whole place into the freezer because warmer water from more tropical areas could not longer reach that far south. So if I look at the big map, Armegeddon Reef isn't on the pole; there's a landmass there, but it's not the Reef, and there's too many little landmasses, so it looks like you couldn't get a circumpolar current going anyway. Depending on where you are and what the currents are like, Armegeddon Reef could have a climate like Iceland or Greenland or the Faroes, sort of thing; not necessarily all that cold even if does get really dark in the winter. |
Top |
Re: Annoying Geographic Question | |
---|---|
![]() |
|
InvisibleBison
Posts: 45
|
"Armageddon Reef" is a continent (or perhaps a part of a continent; the map I'm looking at is ambiguously labelled). The south pole is on Armageddon Reef, but the continent itself is quite large. The parts we've seen so far - where the battles of Rock Point and Crag Reach took place - is about as far south of the equator as central Chisholm is north of the equator. Now, Chisholm can get pretty cold, but it's not arctic - they don't have snow on the ground year-round, for instance. While there is certainly some variance in climate between the two areas, I wouldn't think that the weather in northern Armageddon Reef and central Chisholm would be too terribly different. (Oh, and the map I'm lookng at is here: http://infodump.thefifthimperium.com/en ... hold/338/1) |
Top |
Re: Annoying Geographic Question | |
---|---|
![]() |
|
Highjohn
Posts: 221
|
Thanks for the explanation. I remembered Armageddon Reef being farther south. Actually centered on the pole.
|
Top |
Re: Annoying Geographic Question | |
---|---|
![]() |
|
niethil
Posts: 151
|
Assuming we are looking at a rectangular projection map, the south pole is not on Armageddon Reef. Neither is the north pole on Trellheim. If either poles were on a continent, the said continent would be stretched over the entire length of the edge of the map (it is possible that the northern most part of the map is missing though in the case of Trellheim). As far as I know any rectangular projection will inevitably lead to this result.
Many geographic societies recommend not to use these projections for reference maps, because of the strong distortions. For exemple Mercator is designed to be used for navigation (because loxodromies appear as straight lines), but is unsuitable for most other purposes. -------------
'Oh, oh' he said in English. Evidently, he had completely mastered that language. |
Top |
Re: Annoying Geographic Question | |
---|---|
![]() |
|
Highjohn
Posts: 221
|
I'm aware I remembered the map being different.
|
Top |
Re: Annoying Geographic Question | |
---|---|
![]() |
|
niethil
Posts: 151
|
The map in my paperback edition of OAR does look different. It has some additional parts in the north and is cut differently in the south, so that Armageddon Reef is indeed cut by the southern edge of the map.
-------------
'Oh, oh' he said in English. Evidently, he had completely mastered that language. |
Top |