Jökull - 01.12.1967, Side 19

the glacier, did not come to rest in the great
heap describccl above, but was transported
farther. The glacier tongue in front of that
heap became covered with an almost continu-
ous sheet of fragments of rock and ice.
Contrary to the high ancl rugged heap of
debris above, this cover of debris on the glacier
had a comparatively uniform thickness of only
2—5 m for most of its area. In this respect
it resembles the cover of debris deposited by
the Sherman landslicle in Alaska in 1964 (Shreve
1966). However, the pronounced pattern of
longitudinal grooves seen on the Sherman
Glacier has not been observed on Steinsholts-
jökull.
For some weeks after tlie Steinsholt rockslide
the cover of debris on the glacier consisted of
about equal volumes of rock and ice fragments.
Fig. 5. Deposits of the rockslide from Innstahaus. — 1, scar, a in rock, b in ice; 2, lieap of slidden
ancl fallen rocks, 10—75 m thick; 3, heaps of ice blocks a little mixecl with rock debris, > 10 m
thick; 4, cover of debris, consisting of rock and ice, resting on the glacier tongue, < 10 m thick;
5, rock debris < 5 m thick; 6, scattered blocks of rocks ancl ice; 7, wall of ice fragments border-
ing the hlaup track; 8, less conspicuous margin of the lilaup track; A— B, section shown in Fig. 4.
5. mynd. Nýmyndanir framhlaupsins úr Innstahaus. A—B: snið á 4. mynd; >: meira en; <:
minna en.
JÖKULL 17. ÁR 253