Forum of Lists

I did this one yesterday. I note that LOJ uses the benchmark elevation of 1856 and coordinates at roughly the bm spot. But the highest ground I found is a few hundred feet further up at the end of the gated road going to the microwave(?) equipment on top where there is also a stone house. I'd guess the hp is at least 10 feet higher than the bm location ( I did not find it, by the way) and about 100 to 125 yards slightly south and west. I note that a few other LOJ members have climbed this one. What was your impression?

drdickie Dick Oestreicher

You are correct about the BM being less than the true HP. I have confirmed it with LIDAR. Elevation is always important in setting a control point but as long as the light could be seen it was not always necessary for the BM to be at the highest point. The towers could easily make up for the ocasional few feet of differential.

Updated:
http://www.listsofjohn.com/peak/118076

Thanks for the LIDAR info Doug.

John,

I am attaching a copy of the LIDAR map and a short topo profile. The reason why I didn't elaborate more on the forum is that although the LIDAR passed QA/QC, the Kessler BM has a elevation of ~1853.8 at the coordinates given on the NOAA website. The NOAA data sheet lists the elevation at 1856. The LIDAR picks the highpoint of the mountain at 36.01820716/-94.21992552 with an elevation of 1857.4 which is higher than the elevation at the BM. Although the Kessler BM is a VERTCON mark and should be close, it may be off slightly? Regardless, I think that all you can safely say here is that the true highpoint lies south of the BM and is approximately 3.6-feet higher. I have not fooled with the vertical datum shifts as it is minimal in this part of the Mid-Continent.

Doug

doug72901 wrote:The NOAA data sheet lists the elevation at 1856. The LIDAR picks the highpoint of the mountain at 36.01820716/-94.21992552 with an elevation of 1857.4 which is higher than the elevation at the BM.

Based on this info, I've interpolated within the contour for the elevation of 1858.

Thanks
John