Welcome to SP!  -

Colorado's Most Prominent Peaks Additions and Corrections


[ Post an Addition or Correction ]
Viewing: 1-10 of 10    

mpbroElbert can't be right!

mpbro

Hasn't voted

The "saddle" posted for Elbert is in California! Certainly Elbert couldn't have more than 5000 feet of prominence(?).

Morgan
Posted Apr 5, 2006 3:02 am

RyanSRe: Elbert can't be right!

RyanS

Hasn't voted

This is actually correct, though perhaps counterintuitive if you're just looking at Elbert from the Arkansas River valley.

Prominence by definition favors range highpoints. Since Elbert is the highest point in all the Rocky Mountains, you have to follow divide lines through WY's Wind Rivers, UT's Uintahs, & NV's Great Basin ranges all the way to California to find Elbert's key saddle with Mount Whitney & the Sierra Nevada. Elbert, of course, has a saddle with the high peaks of Mexico, as well, but this saddle is lower than Elbert's saddle with Whitney, so that's the one that defines Elbert's prominence.

For more information, please refer to Bob's "Ultras" page (http://www.summitpost.org/view_object.php?object_id=174556), peaklist.org, and specifically to this map: http://peaklist.org/USPcells/P5000s/P5000cells.jpg
Posted Apr 5, 2006 3:56 am

mpbroRe: Elbert can't be right!

mpbro

Hasn't voted

Ah, I see. I guess I like area of visbility as a definition of prominence, but this measure favors lone peaks in flat areas, like Mount Diablo in CA, which is not a great peak of the world by anyone's definition, but something like the 3rd most visible peak in the world.
Posted Apr 6, 2006 1:06 am

RyanSRe: Elbert can't be right!

RyanS

Hasn't voted

Yes, to be most accurate, this is called "topographic prominence", which can vary from one's own idea of prominence :)

How is area of visibility calculated?
Posted Apr 12, 2006 4:23 am

mpbroRe: Elbert can't be right!

mpbro

Hasn't voted

Not sure how others do it. I once tried something where I traced straight rays from the earth's surface on a digital elevation model...like this. You can see that it's not rigorous, and doesn't account for geometric bugaboos like earth's curvature, varying ray density (on the earth) as a function of angle, etc. But it was a comical diversion and kept me daydreaming about the mountains in grad school. ;-)
Posted Apr 12, 2006 7:28 pm

RyanSRe: Sleepy Cat Peak

RyanS

Hasn't voted

Oops, thanks for the heads-up, Scott!
Posted Aug 29, 2006 12:52 am

Sarah SimonThirtynine Mile Mountain

Sarah Simon

Voted 10/10

Ryan,

I've attached Thirtynine Mile Mountain to this page. Here's the URL: http://www.summitpost.org/view_object.php?object_id=616384

Cheers,

Sarah
Posted Apr 27, 2010 3:49 pm

DeanTanks Peak

Dean

Hasn't voted

I've had a summitpost page for this one up since 2011.
http://www.summitpost.org/tanks-peak-co/752005
Posted Jul 28, 2014 7:03 pm

RyanSRe: Tanks Peak

RyanS

Hasn't voted

Thanks, it's added
Posted Jul 29, 2014 11:44 am

ScottMore

Scott

Voted 10/10

I was going to add these myself, but I didn't want to mess up your formatting (it is a little different from the method I have used to built charts).

Here are some more:

#16

North Mamm Peak

#29

Summit Peak

#71

Elk Mountain

#137

Diamond Mountain

#147

Buck Mountain

#158

Buckeye Peak

#243

Farwell Mountain

#269

Lost Ranger Peak

#314

Diamond Mountain

#352

Sugar Loaf Mountain

#369

Sheep Mountain

#390

Bear Ears

#423

Escarpment Peak

I'm sure there are more, but I knew these off the top of my head (partially because I have many of the pages). Anyway, when I get some more time I can go through the list more.

Also, the map links don't seem to work for me.
Posted Aug 23, 2014 12:22 pm

Viewing: 1-10 of 10    
[ Return to 'Colorado's Most Prominent Peaks' main page ]