Glaciers in Austrailia
Oct 8, 2017, 10:45 pm
#2
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: MEL CHC
Posts: 21,009
Glaciers? Australia or Austria?
But if you are keen, in the Au territory near the Antarctic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heard_...Donald_Islands
You need to go to New Zealand to see glaciers.
But if you are keen, in the Au territory near the Antarctic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heard_...Donald_Islands
You need to go to New Zealand to see glaciers.
Oct 9, 2017, 1:46 am
#4
Join Date: Mar 2014
Programs: BAEC Silver
Posts: 635
But if you are keen, in the Au territory near the Antarctic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heard_...Donald_Islands
With regard to glaciers, unfortunately there is no permanent snow pack or glaciers in Australia (sub-Antarctic and Antarctic Territory notwithstanding). If you are really interested, you can download a KML file for Google Earth of the GLIMS glacier inventory and see where glaciers do occur: http://glims.colorado.edu/glacierdata/
Oct 15, 2017, 2:46 am
#5
Moderator, Hilton Honors
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: on a short leash
Programs: some
Posts: 71,422
Oct 20, 2017, 5:48 am
#6
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: AVV
Programs: QF, HH
Posts: 1,112
No. As others have suggested, although we have seasonal ski-fields and so-called 'alpine' country in regional New South Wales, Victoria and Southern Tasmania, glaciers aren't a thing here.
This past winter we Australians had what we would consider a great 'dump' of snow, and my friends who went to Mt Thredbo some weeks ago commented on the power-like consistency at the time. Mt Feathertop and the Mt Hotham region are popular with hikers in the summer time and even cross-country skiers during the winter. However, having been to Chamonix in the French Alps, I laugh at the thought of what we call the Victorian 'Alps'
In fact, the highest peak in Australia is Mt Kosciuszko at a mere 2,228m (7310 feet). This is a pimple compared to the likes of Mt Cook (12,349 feet) and the New Zealand Alps.
Yet even Mt Cook is a hobbit in size compared to Denali (20,300 feet) in Alaska – just to give you an idea of how short we are down here in this part of the world!
That said, the NZ Alps are stunning and certainly worth a visit, particularly since they are relatively accessible.
The next best thing – although very much exotic and certainly not the easiest to get to without a paid expeditionary tour – is Puncak Jaya in the Indonesian province of West Papua. That's just over 16,000 feet in altitude. Amazing location, and I think one would find glaciers there.
What did you have in mind, as far as travel goes? Are you keen on climbing mountains and visiting glaciers?
This past winter we Australians had what we would consider a great 'dump' of snow, and my friends who went to Mt Thredbo some weeks ago commented on the power-like consistency at the time. Mt Feathertop and the Mt Hotham region are popular with hikers in the summer time and even cross-country skiers during the winter. However, having been to Chamonix in the French Alps, I laugh at the thought of what we call the Victorian 'Alps'
In fact, the highest peak in Australia is Mt Kosciuszko at a mere 2,228m (7310 feet). This is a pimple compared to the likes of Mt Cook (12,349 feet) and the New Zealand Alps.
Yet even Mt Cook is a hobbit in size compared to Denali (20,300 feet) in Alaska – just to give you an idea of how short we are down here in this part of the world!
That said, the NZ Alps are stunning and certainly worth a visit, particularly since they are relatively accessible.
The next best thing – although very much exotic and certainly not the easiest to get to without a paid expeditionary tour – is Puncak Jaya in the Indonesian province of West Papua. That's just over 16,000 feet in altitude. Amazing location, and I think one would find glaciers there.
What did you have in mind, as far as travel goes? Are you keen on climbing mountains and visiting glaciers?