LiDAR: Colorado 13ers and 14ers Completed

Colorado peak questions, condition requests and other info.
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.
User avatar
9patrickmurphy
Posts: 324
Joined: 7/16/2018
14ers: 55  1  2 
13ers: 429 35 2
Trip Reports (2)
 

Re: LiDAR: Colorado 13ers and 14ers Completed

Post by 9patrickmurphy »

So I guess John Kirk is still analyzing peaks, and this is still shaking up the list. I'm just now finding out that the point formerly known on this site as UN 13,020 B is now considered unranked, with a prominence of 292'. This is recent as of this week, the LiDAR Analysis page says this was analyzed on Nov 13th.

John, I'm curious if you are actively sifting through the entire list again, and if we should expect more changes to be discovered?

This is a bit inconvenient as Bill is just now updating the 14ers.com elevations, which I guess will now be out of date again?
User avatar
HikerGuy
Posts: 1459
Joined: 5/25/2006
14ers: 58 
13ers: 502 8
Trip Reports (9)
 

Re: LiDAR: Colorado 13ers and 14ers Completed

Post by HikerGuy »

Nice catch! It used to be #627 on both the LiDAR list and 14ers list. Time to review my spreadsheet again. We finally lost one on the total count, 583 now.

Looks like another unranked 13er was added as well, "North Conejos Peak".
User avatar
9patrickmurphy
Posts: 324
Joined: 7/16/2018
14ers: 55  1  2 
13ers: 429 35 2
Trip Reports (2)
 

Re: LiDAR: Colorado 13ers and 14ers Completed

Post by 9patrickmurphy »

HikerGuy wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2023 2:56 pm We finally lost one on the total count, 583 now.
If "West Eolus" becomes ranked it'll bump us back up to 584!
User avatar
jkirk
Posts: 89
Joined: 7/19/2005
Trip Reports (0)
 

Re: LiDAR: Colorado 13ers and 14ers Completed

Post by jkirk »

9patrickmurphy wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2023 2:44 pm John, I'm curious if you are actively sifting through the entire list again, and if we should expect more changes to be discovered?
I went through and checked all 13k+ peaks (and subsequently all other CO peaks analyzed so far) against Joe Grim's algorithm results. There were also a few saddle swaps that resulted in prominence changes (all less than 30 ft). There should be no further edits. I emailed Bill about it the day I made the changes.
User avatar
9patrickmurphy
Posts: 324
Joined: 7/16/2018
14ers: 55  1  2 
13ers: 429 35 2
Trip Reports (2)
 

Re: LiDAR: Colorado 13ers and 14ers Completed

Post by 9patrickmurphy »

jkirk wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2023 8:32 pm
9patrickmurphy wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2023 2:44 pm John, I'm curious if you are actively sifting through the entire list again, and if we should expect more changes to be discovered?
I went through and checked all 13k+ peaks (and subsequently all other CO peaks analyzed so far) against Joe Grim's algorithm results. There were also a few saddle swaps that resulted in prominence changes (all less than 30 ft). There should be no further edits. I emailed Bill about it the day I made the changes.
I see, so Joe Grim's algorithm was able to discover some discrepancies that were missed by hand such as saddle swaps. Looks like that was the issue with 13015 in the Elks. Thanks for the reply, I was panicking just a tad when I noticed there were even more updates! Good to hear there shouldn't be any more updates, though I'd love a resolution on "West Eolus". Maybe I'll just consider it ranked so we can get back up to 584 :-D
User avatar
Boggy B
Posts: 862
Joined: 10/14/2009
14ers: 58  7 
13ers: 781 76
Trip Reports (49)
 

Re: LiDAR: Colorado 13ers and 14ers Completed

Post by Boggy B »

9patrickmurphy wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2023 8:58 pm I'd love a resolution on "West Eolus". Maybe I'll just consider it ranked so we can get back up to 584 :-D
I'd bet on it. Horizontal resolution of the survey is 1m. If you slice off the top 6" of W Eolus you'll have a chunk of rock you can carry back to camp..
User avatar
HikerGuy
Posts: 1459
Joined: 5/25/2006
14ers: 58 
13ers: 502 8
Trip Reports (9)
 

Re: LiDAR: Colorado 13ers and 14ers Completed

Post by HikerGuy »

Hey Bill, it appears that the summit coordinates for Huerfanito are incorrect. I posted a gpx file for my 13,656 trip report and noticed my track went beyond the map marker you have for Huerfanito. Lidar moved the summit about 100 feet to the eastern tower (37.58476, -105.46391).
User avatar
HikerGuy
Posts: 1459
Joined: 5/25/2006
14ers: 58 
13ers: 502 8
Trip Reports (9)
 

Re: LiDAR: Colorado 13ers and 14ers Completed

Post by HikerGuy »

Hey Bill, me again. It appears that the updated coordinates of the LiDAR summit moves never made it to the 14ers.com map/database with the exception of Buckskin. Flora is incorrect as is Cirque, Babcock and Huerfanito. Those are the ones that come to mind, I think there may be a few more.
User avatar
kyrawhitworth
Posts: 41
Joined: 5/27/2020
14ers: 58  6  13 
13ers: 236 8 19
Trip Reports (5)
 

Re: LiDAR: Colorado 13ers and 14ers Completed

Post by kyrawhitworth »

HikerGuy wrote: Tue Jan 02, 2024 10:21 am Hey Bill, it appears that the summit coordinates for Huerfanito are incorrect. I posted a gpx file for my 13,656 trip report and noticed my track went beyond the map marker you have for Huerfanito. Lidar moved the summit about 100 feet to the eastern tower (37.58476, -105.46391).
Huge thank you for that GPX file. I checked that and LOJ when we were up there an embarrassing number times to figure out where the summit was for Huerfanito. My uploaded track also goes a bit beyond the marker on the 14ers map. The relief I felt when I saw it wasn't the tower I could see even further east when I pulled up LOJ was audible.
User avatar
supranihilest
Posts: 815
Joined: 6/29/2015
14ers: 58  42 
13ers: 747 2 8
Trip Reports (121)
 

Re: LiDAR: Colorado 13ers and 14ers Completed

Post by supranihilest »

"T 3" and "T 4" also erroneously share the same summit coordinates (this is absolutely critical given the thousands of ascents of each, and by that I mean eight combined).
kyrawhitworth wrote: Mon Mar 31, 2025 2:37 pm
HikerGuy wrote: Tue Jan 02, 2024 10:21 am Hey Bill, it appears that the summit coordinates for Huerfanito are incorrect. I posted a gpx file for my 13,656 trip report and noticed my track went beyond the map marker you have for Huerfanito. Lidar moved the summit about 100 feet to the eastern tower (37.58476, -105.46391).
Huge thank you for that GPX file. I checked that and LOJ when we were up there an embarrassing number times to figure out where the summit was for Huerfanito. My uploaded track also goes a bit beyond the marker on the 14ers map. The relief I felt when I saw it wasn't the tower I could see even further east when I pulled up LOJ was audible.
If you have a LoJ account John has a tool you can use to export peak data as GPX, CSV, etc. based on a number of criteria like state, elevation range, prominence, etc. You can just download the entire 13er list and add it to a phone, watch, handheld GPS, or other device. Bill also has a similar utility but there's some errors in the data still and you can't filter by prominence or other criteria. To be fair to Bill the fourth line of the export does say:

Code: Select all

  <desc>The information contained in this file may not be accurate. Use with caution.</desc>
:wink: