Old & New mountain troops equipment

Not long ago,on Viasat Explorer(?)
A resercher,who was dealing for a while with the WW1 battles of Caporetto,made a very interesting reserch;
He made "on his own skin" an experience with the gear of WW1 and today's.
He dressed in a WW1 uniform of a German mountain troop.
After that he put on the latest military equipment Gore Tex etc etc.
The rezults were unbelivable: The old uniform and gear were far better then the new ones.
A soldier in todays gear couldn't survive at all in the battle conditions of Caporetto!
He made during a few days all the possib.tests.In each one the old uniform and gear were far better.
A similar experiment was made also with a Viking gear on a Long Ship.
Also the 1000 years old gear was better then today's.

I find that very hard to believe. Modern mountain climbing equipment and technique are far superior to what it was 50 years ago, not to mention 90 years ago. And this is not proven by a TV show, but by reality. If it was so, everyboidy would be climbing Everest like Edmund Hilary and Tenzing Norgay did.

Well this guy was from a respected British university.
He did the research together with a Swise army experst in survival in snow and low temp.
That expert KNEW the results before the experiment started.
He agreed that the wool clouths are far better then the sintetics.
They did tests in many situations . They kept for example a person for 30 min in -20c dressed in a German equip.and he had to fire 10 rounds.After a while they did the same with modern clouths.The results were far better in the old uniform.
The tests were made in almost all possib sit. under intens monitorisation by computers.
Today climbing is better because of the logistics and equipnemt that includs the oxigen,food suplies ,drugs,medical treatment,weather forecast and others.
So next time you go hiking,try your grandfather equipnemt.It may look unfashioed,but it's surely better.

Well, both of you are right. At 'normal' low temperatures some advanced synthetic materials behave comparable to (if not better than) natural ones, while having better 'wear-and-tear' properties. But as the temperatures drop, synthetic materials worsen dramatically in properties and fail spectacularly below -20C.

C-2, for a person who's mountain experience is limited to going from Cota 1400 to Vf. cu Dor, you surely seem to have a lot of useful advices.

First of all, statements such as

or

are too radical and they need to be backed up with solid proof, coming from serious sources or own experience. Since you lack the latter, you might provide something from the former, but I really doubt you will find such a thing except a dubious TV show, which holds little value IMO.

Modern fabrics permit the evaporation of sweat, are much lighter, dry much easier and get wet harder than the ones. It is true that wool provides the best heating, but operating in such extreme conditions doesn't mean just staying around at -20 C (I doubt they faced such low temperatures at Carporetto) and shooting a couple of rounds. Staying still at -20C is crazy no matter what you wear, as the cold ultimately gets to you, and wars aren't won by sitting, but by maneuvering. Trust me, there is a huge differences between todays possibilities and 1917. And it is not due to logistics (which are about the same, you still have to carry your own pack), better communications or weather forecast. It is about new technical possibilities created by new better materials and climbing technique.

Caroil I,
I don't know if synthetic materials dramatically lose their qualities below -20C. Polartec 300 is guaranteed down to -51C.

As you mentioned already,Edmunted did very well in the "old equipment".No Goretex was needed.
And a lot of Goretex posesors ,died trying to follow him.
And for someone who his medical knowledge comes from the fact that your sister is a doctor,you surely know "a lot".
And about the -50c,you schouldn't belive everything you read in advertising.
It remainds me about someone who bought a Seiko divers watch.
It was guaratied for 200m.
He tied it to a submarine and he blew at about 80m.
If you want to hear more about this particular incident ,contact me via pm,since I cannot tell more details.

This post has been edited by C-2 on November 13, 2005 08:13 pm

I do not know about this particular material, but low temperature survival experts recommend natural products for temperatures below -20/-25C for the reasons stated.

We are not talking here about some Star Treck clouths!
It's about regular army mountain equip.!
Maybee Victor is right and there is a very good equip.but if it costs 5000 $ a piece,you cannot equip an army with it.
For that price,10.000 soldiers x2 pairs each (and that's the minimum)x 5000$=a big part of the defence budget.

This has not been my experience at all. I have never worked in -20C, but close, -15 in ice storms and snow. I have worn 1950s technology US gear (similar to World War 2) and modern --1990s and newer. Honestly, I cannot think of a single piece of modern military winter gear that is not better than its historic equivalent.

-- it's lighter
-- it absorbs less water and sweat and dries quicker
-- it's warmer per comparable volume
-- waterproof does not mean rubber or wax, which are heavy and make you sweat
-- plastic buckles and velcro are easier to use than leather straps and metal buckles and snaps
-- modern ski mountaineering skis with adjustable bindings are much easier to ski with than wooden skis with fixed bindings

I just find it hard to believe today's mountaineers are all idiots being manipulated by advertising. There are always people out there willing to try the old gear, and if it worked so much better word would get around.

Sir Edmund did well because of his training, experience, planning, and luck. You said it yourself... many who attempt Everest today should not be there, not because they wear Goretex, but because they have more money than they have climbing experience and physical conditioning. The reason more die on very high peaks is simple... many more people have attempted them in recent years, and they are still dangerous places.

This post has been edited by Jeff_S on November 14, 2005 05:22 pm

Again you simplify things to the extreme, like you did in the first place. Many of those that died on Everest in the past years weren't always following the steps of Edmund Hillary and Tenzing. There are several other ways of attacking the summit, more difficult from the technical point of view. Nature is far from being mastered by man, but at least we make some progress.

The Polartec 300 isn't that expensive. It may not hold down to -51 C as they say, but probably it exceeds -20 C. You already told me the Seiko story (when we went to visit Capbatut, remember?).

I will stick to my opinion that present-day equipments is a serious improvement over what there was decades ago. Like Jeff says, all those people using them aren't morons that wear them because they look better.

My winter boots are still old-fashioned ones: just leather, no Gore-Tex or other synthetic materials. After 4-5 hours of walking through deep snow, they get soaking wet and dry up with difficulty. Not a very pleasant feeling, but I have other priorities than new winter boots, which aren't cheap for the average Romanian.