From a2c242711469979affc75168ac760c7b4cdfb3e7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Philip Sargent Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2021 22:15:04 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] 114 and 228 may be identical --- cave_data/1623-114.html | 166 ++++++++++++++++++++++------------------ cave_data/1623-228.html | 62 +++++++++------ 2 files changed, 129 insertions(+), 99 deletions(-) diff --git a/cave_data/1623-114.html b/cave_data/1623-114.html index ab4add32d..80963725f 100644 --- a/cave_data/1623-114.html +++ b/cave_data/1623-114.html @@ -1,94 +1,108 @@ - + + -False -1623-114 -Verlorenhohle 114 -1623 -5 -0 + ? -114 -2018-ps-01 +False +1623-114 +Verlorenhohle 114 +1623 +5 +0 + ? +114 +2018-ps-01 - 1623-114 - + 1623-114 + -CUCC 1980, 2019 -2018-07-18: Rock-filled rift ~1m high and wide goes 260 degrees magnetic into hillside (descending approx. 15 degrees). Hole in floor near ent. is a climbdown, then a 22cm squeeze (Radost did it) to where it continues - tight. No draft. - -Going over the hole in the floor the more obvious route leads after 14m from ent.to a 2m climb down and a drafting flat-out hole leading to a vertical (upwards) solution (?) shaft filled with rocks. [Since the hillside is very steep here, this may be ~20m or more to the surface.] Could be dug, but ideally not from the bottom where Radost was. -Whole cave drafts cold air out slightly - less in 2019 than 2018 possibly due to snow choke elsewhere. No snow visible anywhere near it. - -The roof of the rift is flat and slopes to the south, about 30 degrees from vertical. This is very similar to rifts in Schnellzughohle and Stellerweghohle nearby, but in this cave there are no flow scallops. -Roof is solid rock and floor is blocks and rocks [and relic vadose features]. -
-Explored properly by Radost & Philip in 2019. 2019-07-168 No survey. -none. Chilly draft and scramble so shorts not advised. -1980 logbook - +CUCC 1980, 2019 +Is this possibly the same as 228 ? +2018-07-18: Rock-filled rift ~1m high and wide goes 260 degrees magnetic into hillside (descending approx. 15 degrees). Hole in floor near ent. is a climbdown, then a 22cm squeeze (Radost did it) to where it continues - tight. No draft. + +Going over the hole in the floor the more obvious route leads after 14m from ent.to a 2m climb down and a drafting flat-out hole leading to a vertical (upwards) solution (?) shaft filled with rocks. [Since the hillside is very steep here, this may be ~20m or more to the surface.] Could be dug, but ideally not from the bottom where Radost was. +Whole cave drafts cold air out slightly - less in 2019 than 2018 possibly due to snow choke elsewhere. No snow visible anywhere near it. + +The roof of the rift is flat and slopes to the south, about 30 degrees from vertical. This is very similar to rifts in Schnellzughohle and Stellerweghohle nearby, but in this cave there are no flow scallops. +Roof is solid rock and floor is blocks and rocks [and relic vadose features]. +
+Explored properly by Radost & Philip in 2019. 2019-07-168 No survey. +none. Chilly draft and scramble so shorts not advised. +1980 logbook + identified with previously issued 114 - -Logbook: 2018-07-14 -
Photos taken from turn-off point [from Stoger Weg]: "a barely discernable trod" to cave. -This "trod" is much more overgrown than it was in 1982. -
-I have just (May 1990) found an old note book which says this was explored by John, Tony and Andy C, but gives no detail on where or what. -There is a strong suspicion that the cave was one of the "promising leads" found on their trip to Wildenseealm. However, the only -published account refers the reader to the 1980 log book. This latter is, unfortunately, missing.

-

This does not appear to be in the Austrians' Kataster. -

-AERW email 30 June 2020: -The name Verlorenschacht was probably invented by me, and in the absence -of the 1980 logbook, there is no real reason to believe it was a schacht, -just something they thought worth a number in a year when we were making -the effort to actually number stuff we found. It is _probably_ not (as you -might hope) somewhere between 113 and 115, but it _might_ be ... There is -something in that area that one steps over on a particular (probably -obscure) route from one cave to another. I don't *think* it got a -number but it *might* be 114. If that surmise is anywhere near, then it -is between the Stogerweg and 113, rather than close to 115. -

-> But it is definitely not a "Schacht": more a horizontal scramble with a -> couple of pits. [Philip] - -That doesn't sound like the thing in the 113 area I'm thinking of - that -was at least a bit of a climb down at the entrance (enough not to venture -in without at least a handline). Of course, if it was something on the -Wildenseealm walk, then it is nowhere near 113/41/115. -

-The missing 1980 logbook really is critical to this one. -

-Philip Sargent email 1 July 2020 to Wookey: -

-> According to AERW it might or might not be the same cave, or be might -> be remembering something else; but it is arguably in the right place -> as at least two groups have found it while looking for 115 coming from -> the path - and 113 is on the other (upper) side of the path - so it is -> topologically between 113 and 115 even if not geometrically between 113 and 115. -> -> I say let's go for it and rub out the uncertainty. -> Which means I had better write up a sketch survey for all 15m of it. -

-I've not followed the whole thread/saga, but at this stage I think this sounds reasonable. Almost anything would be an improvment and so long as we're reasonably sure that the original 114 is not marked as such in a way that might one day be noticed (and it seems unlikely that the 1980 logbook will surface at this point) any reasonable effort to get a cave in about the right place should suffice. -

-Wookey - - -25 -5 + +Logbook: 2018-07-14 +
Photos taken from turn-off point [from Stoger Weg]: "a barely discernable trod" to cave. +This "trod" is much more overgrown than it was in 1982. +
+I have just (May 1990) found an old note book which says this was explored by John, Tony and Andy C, but gives no detail on where or what. +There is a strong suspicion that the cave was one of the "promising leads" found on their trip to Wildenseealm. However, the only +published account refers the reader to the 1980 log book. This latter is, unfortunately, missing.

+

This does not appear to be in the Austrians' Kataster. +

+AERW email 30 June 2020: +The name Verlorenschacht was probably invented by me, and in the absence +of the 1980 logbook, there is no real reason to believe it was a schacht, +just something they thought worth a number in a year when we were making +the effort to actually number stuff we found. It is _probably_ not (as you +might hope) somewhere between 113 and 115, but it _might_ be ... There is +something in that area that one steps over on a particular (probably +obscure) route from one cave to another. I don't *think* it got a +number but it *might* be 114. If that surmise is anywhere near, then it +is between the Stogerweg and 113, rather than close to 115. +

+> But it is definitely not a "Schacht": more a horizontal scramble with a +> couple of pits. [Philip] + +That doesn't sound like the thing in the 113 area I'm thinking of - that +was at least a bit of a climb down at the entrance (enough not to venture +in without at least a handline). Of course, if it was something on the +Wildenseealm walk, then it is nowhere near 113/41/115. +

+The missing 1980 logbook really is critical to this one. +

+Philip Sargent email 1 July 2020 to Wookey: +

+> According to AERW it might or might not be the same cave, or be might +> be remembering something else; but it is arguably in the right place +> as at least two groups have found it while looking for 115 coming from +> the path - and 113 is on the other (upper) side of the path - so it is +> topologically between 113 and 115 even if not geometrically between 113 and 115. +> +> I say let's go for it and rub out the uncertainty. +> Which means I had better write up a sketch survey for all 15m of it. +

+I've not followed the whole thread/saga, but at this stage I think this sounds reasonable. Almost anything would be an improvment and so long as we're reasonably sure that the original 114 is not marked as such in a way that might one day be noticed (and it seems unlikely that the 1980 logbook will surface at this point) any reasonable effort to get a cave in about the right place should suffice. +

+Wookey +25 +5 20 - - -1623/114 + + +1623/114 diff --git a/cave_data/1623-228.html b/cave_data/1623-228.html index 760806af5..3aaada810 100644 --- a/cave_data/1623-228.html +++ b/cave_data/1623-228.html @@ -1,40 +1,56 @@ + - + + -True -1623-228 -Kleine Schnellzughöhle -1623 -7 - -228 - +True +1623-228 +Kleine Schnellzughöhle +1623 +7 + +228 +2020-XX-01 - 1623-228 - + 1623-228 + -ArGE (Nils + Kai Schwekendiek, August 2000) - - - - +ArGE (Nils + Kai Schwekendiek, August 2000) +Is this possibly the same as 114 ? + + + -In dataset - - - +In dataset + + + -caves-1623/228/228.svx - -1623/228.html +caves-1623/228/228.svx + +1623/228.html