+- Death Valley (https://dv.netllama.us/dv)
+-- Forum: Death Valley (https://dv.netllama.us/dv/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: General (https://dv.netllama.us/dv/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: Lidar elevations (/showthread.php?tid=25970)
RE: Lidar elevations - trailhound - 2021-12-28
Quote:most folks with common sense don't day hike Whitney's summit
All 5 of out summits were day hikes. Some of those who have done it both ways say day hiking is easier. You don't have to lug a heavy pack up the trail. It is a great sense of accomplishment to know that you did the 22 miles and 6300' vertical gain in one day.
RE: Lidar elevations - DeathValleyDazed - 2021-12-28
(2021-12-28, 12:38 PM)trailhound Wrote:Quote:most folks with common sense don't day hike Whitney's summit
You don't have to lug a heavy pack up the trail. It is a great sense of accomplishment to know that you did the 22 miles and 6300' vertical gain in one day.
Great point and I'd usually rather come back in the dark than lug all that overnight camping gear but there are times when the sole purpose is to camp out that lugging the pack is well worth it.
Now that i remember details of my Whitney day hike, I summited just after sunrise which left me the entire day to enjoy a "take it all in" descent to the portal. I even stopped to nap under a huge fallen pine tree making it back mid afternoon and in time to grab a car camp at the BLM camp below the portal in the drainage canyon. I also lucked out by scoring a Whitney hiking permit after the September Labor Day weekend rush had subsided. I literally walked into the Eastern Sierra Visitor Center and up to the desk without a line. There were still many campers in the meadows before you started up the switch back stair cases.
RE: Lidar elevations - Candace66 - 2021-12-30
(2021-12-23, 05:00 PM)MojaveGeek Wrote: And as for White Mtn, my understanding is that Mt. Elbert in CO is second to Whitney?
The newly calculated Lidar elevation for Elbert is 14,438'.
LOJ Lidar analysis results page
(2021-12-24, 10:28 AM)MojaveGeek Wrote: Well Whitney (I have not climbed) is a damn sight harder the Elbert (have been up), that's for sure! Some of the CO 14ers are really tough, probably out of my league, but most are (sometimes long) straightforward walkups, easily done in a single day, and those in the know are usually off the peak by 2 or so due to thunderstorm potential. But I've been up only a few, I think Candace has been up a bunch of them.
The 14ers are also incredibly popular On a weekend I would choose a nice 13er, because I prefer solitude (and almost no one seems to go for the 13ers!)
Seems like Whitney is not THAT much beyond what you do. It's class 1 with a good trail. The several miles in the forest you can easily hike in the dark. Avoid the permit lottery hassle by doing it in mid-November like I did!
My Nov. 12, 1999 Whitney trip report
I've done 42 of the 53+ CO 14ers. The ones I haven't done are class 3 or higher; a very long outing barely feasible or unrealistic as a day hike; on private property and thus requiring an advance reservation and large fee; or some combination of the above.
As you noted, the 14ers are crowded. But not only on weekends. This is leading to measures such as trailhead shuttles, a ban on parking along the roads leading to TH's, etc.
Here are estimates of 2020 hiking traffic on the 14ers: click here
My last visit to CO was in 2017. Even during the week I found plenty of people at or near the 14er TH's, making it difficult to grab an informal camp site. I was able to score a great campsite along the popular South Colony Lakes Road in the Sangres (the usual access to the Crestones, Humboldt, and high 13er Columbia Point) by arriving on Tuesday, lol.
So, I may well not be checking off any more CO 14ers! Even if I decide the route is technically possible for me AND within dayhike range.
Speaking from experience, even climbing 13ers during the week doesn't assure you solitude. Especially if they require you to start at or near 14er TH's, or from any easily accessible TH.
RE: Lidar elevations - GowerGulch42 - 2021-12-30
I've been playing around with lidar (none in the Badwater basin) and have made some interesting findings. I'll do a new thread about it at some point. The gist is that as of 2013 (the most recent elevation data available for badwater basin) gives a minimum altitude of -282.64 feet (-86.15 m) at a point much closer to the Badwater parking lot than the traditionally-held coordinates. I'll show my work and everything when I get to that!
RE: Lidar elevations - MojaveGeek - 2021-12-31
Well, continuing the digression to Colorado... Candace, that's a lot of 14ers! Maybe you should partner with someone for the class 3 peaks. I've seen some videos (the Maroons) and they look... tough. I had not realized the bit about paying $100 to climb Culebra (Snake, in Spanish). That's funny.
So one weekend I was avoiding 14ers and headed to a nice looking 13er, Quail, which is just down the road and a bit north of Missouri. I was pleased with myself as I passed, early early, the full Missouri parking lot, with cars already lining the road, and found my parking area empty. Joy! So I hiked up (this soon becomes part of the CDT after a short approach) and it was a beautiful morning, all alone, up above the trees, nice switchbacks to the pass (the peak itself has no official trail, but a clear use trail), but what? I saw a couple of people dressed warmly with what looked like radio gear at the pass?
Turns out the Leadville 100, one of the most famous "ultramarathons" was that day, and they were excited as the lead runner was only minutes away! Eeek. I headed up to the peak. I have a friend from Montana who runs those things and I texted his wife to see if he was running - it would have been a gas to surprise him on the route - but he was elsewhere. So I figured I would take a long lunch and enjoy the long views up there, maybe take a nap, and by the time I came down, the trail would be clear.
Well... not. It turns out such races have huge ranges of times, as the runners spread out. As I descended the main trail, I was being passed from behind by outbound runners, and approached from the front by returning runners (who at the turn are allowed to pick up an escort buddy to help them along). Oh they were all very polite and I heard a lot of "Thank you sir" but it was NOT solitude. Still a race official at the pass (basically counting people, and there to turn them back at the pass if weather was incoming) pointed out a group of bighorns frolicking in some snow up on the other side of the pass, and I might not have seen them otherwise.
All in all, a very strange trail experience!
RE: Lidar elevations - Candace66 - 2022-02-06
(2021-12-28, 12:38 PM)trailhound Wrote:Quote:most folks with common sense don't day hike Whitney's summit
All 5 of out summits were day hikes. Some of those who have done it both ways say day hiking is easier. You don't have to lug a heavy pack up the trail. It is a great sense of accomplishment to know that you did the 22 miles and 6300' vertical gain in one day.
Judging by the numbers of people applying for permits, it appears day hikes are pretty popular! At least through September and the first weekend of October.
2021 Whitney lottery results
RE: Lidar elevations - Candace66 - 2022-02-06
Back to LiDAR peak analysis, and in particular the vertical accuracy of the results... More people over at 14ers.com have gotten involved. A recent post examines in detail how and why two different sets of data might yield different elevation readings for saddles and especially peaks.
"Moral of the story: the determination of summit elevations by airborne LiDAR data has several feet of uncertainty in sharp/rocky areas due to the unknowable effects of the laser footprint on each point's reported Z coordinate. Highly technical aspects of LiDAR data (like the point density and the laser footprint) can make or break a peak's ranked status in some cases..."
Click for original post on 14ers.com
RE: Lidar elevations - Candace66 - 2022-02-06
(2021-12-31, 06:34 PM)MojaveGeek Wrote: ... Candace, that's a lot of 14ers! Maybe you should partner with someone for the class 3 peaks...
LOL, if I'm going to hook up with anyone to help me make it up some summits, it will be for the "Desert Summits" peaks that I couldn't do on my own.
Regarding Hope Pass and the Leadville 100, in 2016 I climbed Mount Hope, planning to head over to Quail. But t-storms moved in by the time I got back to Hope Pass, so I ended up going down. Along the trail, I encountered a woman heading up to the pass in the cold rain and thunder, hanging flagging tape, etc. to mark the race course.
Also, I was once in Leadville when the last finishers were coming in, including one who barely beat the end of race cutoff time. However, fortunately I was never sharing the roads or trails with them.
IIRC, they hang plenty of signs around the area (including the dirt roads and trails that are involved) with the race dates, I'm surprised you didn't see any.
RE: Lidar elevations - GowerGulch42 - 2022-02-07
(2022-02-06, 02:49 PM)Candace66 Wrote: ...airborne LiDAR data has several feet of uncertainty in sharp/rocky areas due to the unknowable effects of the laser footprint on each point's reported Z coordinate. Highly technical aspects of LiDAR data (like the point density and the laser footprint) can make or break a peak's ranked status in some cases...The best way to improve this issue is by accessing the point cloud - the actual 3D web of laser reflections and manually selecting individual points which reflect true topographic features. In areas bare of vegetation this can be pretty good, and knowing what year the lidar was flown (the actual lidar unit might be in the metadata) can allow you to estimate the ground resolution, often between a square meter and a square foot in bare ground.
Of course, to really get super good data you need a total station or other kind of differential GPS with cm - mm of accuracy. There's a new Geoid model coming out later this year so it will be important to re-calculate elevations across the country once that model is complete.
RE: Lidar elevations - DeathValleyDazed - 2022-02-07
(2022-02-07, 11:56 AM)GowerGulch42 Wrote: There's a new Geoid model coming out later this year so it will be important to re-calculate elevations across the country once that model is complete.Candace and GG42, sure appreciate your expertise here. What follows may or may not have relevance to his this thread?
Summer 2016 I came across this University Nevada Reno seismograph station number SGR located near Brier Spring and Phinney Canyon. It was placed there May 1998 securely anchored to bare rock (ground).
I called the phone number and spoke with someone at UNR who informed that it not only helps measure for earth quakes but also for tectonic plate movements over the long haul of time. So I'm wondering if these stations of which there are at least ten located around DEVA help calibrate slow elevation changes and slow earth crust movements?
Here are some more links about these stations and their locations in case it's helpful. If this is not useful for the thread topic, just ignore please.
http://ds.iris.edu/mda/SN/SGR/
http://ds.iris.edu/gmap/#network=SN&station=SGR&starttime=1998-05-07T00:00:00&endtime=3000-01-01T00:00:00&planet=earth
The DEVA listed stations are spread throughout this spread sheet: (Major undertaking setting these up!)
http://www.seismo.unr.edu/Monitoring
https://www.eri.ucsb.edu/search/node/death%20valley