Kind of wanted to keep that one a secret to get the FA, but seems like it was going to get figured out anyway (c'mon luke you guess too well ).John's link contains the mystery 12er, as well... Good luck to all who attempt it!
*PSA* - Ranked Lists Changing based off LiDAR Analysis
Forum rules
- This is a mountaineering forum, so please keep your posts on-topic. Posts do not all have to be related to the 14ers but should at least be mountaineering-related.
- Personal attacks and confrontational behavior will result in removal from the forum at the discretion of the administrators.
- Do not use this forum to advertise, sell photos or other products or promote a commercial website.
- Posts will be removed at the discretion of the site administrator or moderator(s), including: Troll posts, posts pushing political views or religious beliefs, and posts with the purpose of instigating conflict within the forum.
For more details, please see the Terms of Use you agreed to when joining the forum.
- jkirk
- Posts: 66
- Joined: 7/19/2005
- Trip Reports (0)
- Contact:
Re: *PSA* - Ranked Lists Changing based off LiDAR Analysis
- HikerGuy
- Posts: 1408
- Joined: 5/25/2006
- 14ers: 58
- 13ers: 426 8
- Trip Reports (9)
Re: *PSA* - Ranked Lists Changing based off LiDAR Analysis
I've read the posts on here and facebook and I'm too lazy to go back over them, so I may have missed it, but will peaks be demoted as well as promoted? I know it is exciting to add ranked peaks, but the exercise seems pointless if the peaks just over the criteria by map contours are not investigated as well.
- bdloftin77
- Posts: 1090
- Joined: 9/23/2013
- 14ers: 58 1
- 13ers: 58
- Trip Reports (2)
Re: *PSA* - Ranked Lists Changing based off LiDAR Analysis
It'll be interesting seeing everything sorted out in the end. Some new peaks will be added, others will be removed. For the 14ers, Challenger Point is right on the cusp, and I think it will be unranked. Mt Bross is at 312', so there's the possibility of it being removed as well (to much rejoicing). Though both would still be named, and thus still part of the 58 on this site.HikerGuy wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 12:07 pm I've read the posts on here and facebook and I'm too lazy to go back over them, so I may have missed it, but will peaks be demoted as well as promoted? I know it is exciting to add ranked peaks, but the exercise seems pointless if the peaks just over the criteria by map contours are not investigated as well.
Last edited by bdloftin77 on Tue Oct 26, 2021 12:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- jkirk
- Posts: 66
- Joined: 7/19/2005
- Trip Reports (0)
- Contact:
Re: *PSA* - Ranked Lists Changing based off LiDAR Analysis
Eliminating error-range peaks will be phase 2. Then elevations for all peaks/saddles phase 3. Probably worth looking at all peaks with 240+ prominence in terms of map interpolation as I'm sure at least a couple could make their way to 300' with analysis. I'm hoping technology gets easier to leverage because right now it is rather time-consuming to analyze just one peakHikerGuy wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 12:07 pm I've read the posts on here and facebook and I'm too lazy to go back over them, so I may have missed it, but will peaks be demoted as well as promoted? I know it is exciting to add ranked peaks, but the exercise seems pointless if the peaks just over the criteria by map contours are not investigated as well.
I'll add that the main driver is being more confident that lists we say we finish are actually complete lists, which cover all possibilities as priority #1, and rule out possibilities already included as priority #2. People who have completed the lists as they were have already done the false positives, in other words.
- supranihilest
- Posts: 723
- Joined: 6/29/2015
- 14ers: 58 42
- 13ers: 709 1 8
- Trip Reports (113)
- Contact:
Re: *PSA* - Ranked Lists Changing based off LiDAR Analysis
Good thing Whiley and I have raging fetishes for soft-ranked peaks.
- Chicago Transplant
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: 9/7/2004
- 14ers: 58 12 24
- 13ers: 697 39 34
- Trip Reports (66)
Re: *PSA* - Ranked Lists Changing based off LiDAR Analysis
Thanks for sharing your progress, and thanks for the putting the effort in to it. I agree with your earlier post - they were already ranked we just didn't know about it.jkirk wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 11:50 am As much as I'd like to keep the cat in the bag until a more thorough listing is available, I'll share my findings thus far. Some of it is random, because there are areas I have been wanting to visit and seeking out "new peaks." Since I'm doing the work, I may as well be selfish about what comes first.
The goods:
https://listsofjohn.com/lidar/lidar.php
Enjoy!
Looks like I have a little work to do on a few of my lists to re-complete them. Somehow I knew not climbing "Pink" (aka East Red) would come back to haunt me. Glad to see 11716 in Camp Hale added to the ranked list, that one has some fun tree skiing off the north!
"We want the unpopular challenge. We want to test our intellect!" - Snapcase
"You are not what you own" - Fugazi
"Life's a mountain not a beach" - Fortune Cookie I got at lunch the other day
"You are not what you own" - Fugazi
"Life's a mountain not a beach" - Fortune Cookie I got at lunch the other day
-
- Posts: 532
- Joined: 3/7/2009
- Trip Reports (0)
Re: *PSA* - Ranked Lists Changing based off LiDAR Analysis
"Pink Pk" is an interesting case. The map shows a 12960' contour, so at one time it was listed as a ranked peak with an interpolated elevation of 12980'. Then some people who climbed it said the actual high point was at the 12945' benchmark, and claimed that the 12960' contour was spurious. So it got demoted off the ranked list. Now it seems that with the LiDAR elevation of 12983', then maybe that 12960' contour is real after all.
Every village has at least one idiot. Successful villages choose someone else to be their leader.
- HikerGuy
- Posts: 1408
- Joined: 5/25/2006
- 14ers: 58
- 13ers: 426 8
- Trip Reports (9)
Re: *PSA* - Ranked Lists Changing based off LiDAR Analysis
Excellent! I totally get the focus on the soft ranked peaks first. Thanks for doing the tedious work.jkirk wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 12:17 pmEliminating error-range peaks will be phase 2. Then elevations for all peaks/saddles phase 3. Probably worth looking at all peaks with 240+ prominence in terms of map interpolation as I'm sure at least a couple could make their way to 300' with analysis. I'm hoping technology gets easier to leverage because right now it is rather time-consuming to analyze just one peakHikerGuy wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 12:07 pm I've read the posts on here and facebook and I'm too lazy to go back over them, so I may have missed it, but will peaks be demoted as well as promoted? I know it is exciting to add ranked peaks, but the exercise seems pointless if the peaks just over the criteria by map contours are not investigated as well.
I'll add that the main driver is being more confident that lists we say we finish are actually complete lists, which cover all possibilities as priority #1, and rule out possibilities already included as priority #2. People who have completed the lists as they were have already done the false positives, in other words.
- bergsteigen
- Posts: 2391
- Joined: 6/14/2008
- 14ers: 58 52 18
- 13ers: 538 100 12
- Trip Reports (237)
- Contact:
Re: *PSA* - Ranked Lists Changing based off LiDAR Analysis
Top of my list for demoted peaks is Bartlett. Please please! I know it will happen eventually.
"Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports ... all others are games." - Ernest Hemingway (or was it Barnaby Conrad?)
Your knees only get so many bumps in life, don't waste them on moguls!
“No athlete is truly tested until they’ve stared an injury in the face and come out on the other side stronger than ever” -anonymous
http://otinasadventures.com @otina
Your knees only get so many bumps in life, don't waste them on moguls!
“No athlete is truly tested until they’ve stared an injury in the face and come out on the other side stronger than ever” -anonymous
http://otinasadventures.com @otina
Re: *PSA* - Ranked Lists Changing based off LiDAR Analysis
Don't hate on poor Bartlett. It's not its fault that it sucks.bergsteigen wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 1:58 pm Top of my list for demoted peaks is Bartlett. Please please! I know it will happen eventually.
Plus, you get to go full ninja to clandestinely hide from Climax Mine staff.
Peter Aitchison on the risks of rock climbing and mountaineering: "That's life, isn't it? We think the challenge and satisfaction you get from doing this is worth the risks."
"Respect the mountain. Train hard. Hope you can sneak up when it isn't looking."
"The mind is always worried about consequences, but the heart knows no fear. The heart just does what it wants."
"Respect the mountain. Train hard. Hope you can sneak up when it isn't looking."
"The mind is always worried about consequences, but the heart knows no fear. The heart just does what it wants."
- Tornadoman
- Posts: 1438
- Joined: 7/30/2007
- 14ers: 58 8
- 13ers: 266 35
- Trip Reports (12)
Re: *PSA* - Ranked Lists Changing based off LiDAR Analysis
As for potential demotion, I am curious about UN 13,577 in the Sangres. I took measurements at the saddle (with 13,660) and summit with my phone app (seems reasonably accurate, but not great) and it showed the peak to be a bit under the requisite 300 vertical. This is an interesting topic!
Climb the mountain so you can see the world, not so the world can see you.
Re: *PSA* - Ranked Lists Changing based off LiDAR Analysis
Yeah I'm leaving that one behind. Soon it will cease to be ranked, or even a 13er I bet.bergsteigen wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 1:58 pm Top of my list for demoted peaks is Bartlett. Please please! I know it will happen eventually.
Sidenote, for anyone using true GPS to measure saddle or summit altitudes, I think most ones have a vertical accuracy of like +-50 feet. Not super crazy precise
After climbing a great hill, one only finds that there are many more hills to climb. -Nelson Mandela
Whenever I climb I am followed by a dog called Ego. -Nietzsche
Whenever I climb I am followed by a dog called Ego. -Nietzsche