Page 1 of 1

Benchmark vs. interpolated elevations

PostPosted: Fri Sep 11, 2020 10:03 pm
by Scott Patterson
I'm just curious about this one.

If a benchmark doesn't show up on the 7.5 minute maps, but has a marked elevation, would it be best to use the benchmark elevation vs. the interpolated one?

Take this summit for example:


28121.jpg (88.17 KiB) Viewed 72 times

I'm just curious, rather than debating. Personally I would use the benchmark elevation, but it wouldn't matter much either way for a peak such as this since it would be tanked either way.

Re: Benchmark vs. interpolated elevations

PostPosted: Sat Sep 12, 2020 8:28 am
by TeresaGergen
I won't offer an opinion about your actual question, but I'll note that in general changing the elevation of a ranked peak can, in fact, matter to where it falls on elevation-oriented lists, which can affect if peaks move in or out of lists (highest hundred group cutoffs, or even potentially boundaries between 5ers, 6ers, etc.) This has happened on LOJ in the past for various reasons when elevations are found to be inaccurate.

Re: Benchmark vs. interpolated elevations

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:11 am
by John Kirk
I'd say it makes sense when the stamped elevation is not contradictory, rather it is complimentary (within range of the map contours). In this case it contradicts the contour interval it is found in (5680+40').