South Noddle Head vs. North Noddle Head - elevations

[Jeremy Hakes]

South and North Noddle are both shown as elevation 8,224'. We found survey pins in the rock a foot or two below the summit of S. Noddle. I wonder how they got the elevation on N. Noddle - triangulation? Calculus? Helicopter? It is definitely a technical summit to reach... And it appears higher to me. Until I backsight S. from N., anyway...

Also, after talking to Mike G, I wonder if the USGS map is in error for S. Noddle - the map shows closed contour at 8,200, then another closed contour inside that one (8,240'), which would interpolate to an elevation of 8,260'.

Anyone? Anyone?

[John Kirk]

I changed South Noddle to 8260 since there definitely appears to be an additional contour. Let me know what you find out about North Noddle.

[DSunwall]

Jeremy, when you say appears higher, is that simply looking or using a hand level? Using a hand level N. Noddle "appears" higher to me, sighting from S. Noddle. I will have to make sure I remember my hand level when I climb the north Noddle.

If a summit is given an elevation on a USGS map, doesn't that mean they used other means to determine the elevation? other than interpolation from the lines. My point being, why would you change S. Noddle elevation to 8260 just because of an extra topo line? I would think the surveyed elevation would at least be closer to correct.

to me N Noddle should be 8223'. or S Noddle should be 8225'

[Jeremy Hakes]

Dwight - got to where Beau did - within 20'ish of the summit. Stymied! Ran out of: rope, daylight, and courage.

From where I was, S. Noddle looks lower. I didn't have my handlevel with me (since I was on lead), but S. definitely appeared lower.

I'd like to know what the survey pins exact elevation are - there are two of them on the S. Noddle summit - you'd think they'd have the exact elevation for those...

North - I have no idea how or if they have the elevation for N. *sigh*

[DSunwall]

there are too many objects to confuse eye sight levels, no way can you use plain eye balls to decide one point is higher than another, especially when they are that close in elevation.

[John Kirk]

If a summit is given an elevation on a USGS map, doesn't that mean they used other means to determine the elevation? other than interpolation from the lines. My point being, why would you change S. Noddle elevation to 8260 just because of an extra topo line? I would think the surveyed elevation would at least be closer to correct.

The problem is there is no way to tell what the spot elevation refers to, and since the lowest possible elevation of the extra contour is 8240', 8224 doesn't make sense.

[Jeremy Hakes]

Anyone ever go over to VABM 8075', just a hair SW of S. Noddle? Maybe next time, my third, I'll go check out the BM.

Dwight? You ever go over there?

[DSunwall]

no, why would I go over there? I don't have a 200' tall measureing stick.

I suppose we could trianglulate, GPS has good horizontal distances, we can use an inclinometer for the angle.

[DSunwall]

The problem is there is no way to tell what the spot elevation refers to, and since the lowest possible elevation of the extra contour is 8240', 8224 doesn't make sense.

well, jeremy's GPS read 8217'. If USGS gives a summit elevation, is it not generally the highest point?

that second contour line is a mistake.

[Jeremy Hakes]

Ha! :) I don't know - I just like checking out survey points related to peaks nearby. And, of course, because I'm a dork.

[Jeremy Hakes]

well, jeremy's GPS read 8217'. If USGS gives a summit elevation, is it not generally the highest point?

that second contour line is a mistake.

Uh-oh! Don't get John started on GPS accuracy!

Also, don't forget they screwed up on Dakan - that spot elevation was definitely not on the HP. There is a higher closed contour south of the spot elevation there, too. Maybe they just didn't do a good job on Douglas Co. :)

[John Kirk]

Uh-oh! Don't get John started on GPS accuracy!

Definitely - I wouldn't want to put GPS gain down in my TR from last Saturday since TOPO! (and simple map math) measures 8700' gain. Using the "Turtle Mountain Factor" aka "Jeremy's GPS", I'd have ended up with 16,000' gain or something like that:

http://listsofjohn.com/PeakStats/TripReport.php?Id=655

[Jeremy Hakes]

Hey hey hey!! Easy, now!

Good lord, John! I don't know how you do it. Nice job, though! And as usual, a great TR.

[DSunwall]

hmm, I think we will have to give John the rope and all the gear when we do Gannett Peak.