| Welcome to SP! - Sign-In | Register | ||
| | |
| MbPost.com -- It's SP for Mountain Biking! | ||
|
| Lowlands climber | Untitled Comment | |
Hasn't voted | Mathias, can you give me the reference to the German guidebook, so I can add to the book list? Thanks, Jan. | |
| Posted Apr 14, 2005 3:01 pm | ||
| Mathias Zehring | Untitled Comment | |
Voted 10/10 | You already listed the guidebook by Flaig of 1996 - I don't know what is written there about the east ridge. My book is a previous edition: Walter Flaig, Alpenvereinsfuehrer Silvretta, Bergverlag Rother Munich, 10th edition 1987 | |
| Posted Apr 14, 2005 3:19 pm | ||
| Lowlands climber | Untitled Comment | |
Hasn't voted | Thanks, I see. The author has actually removed the E-ridge from the book. All routes above grade II have actually been removed from the new version. | |
| Posted Apr 14, 2005 4:23 pm | ||
| Lowlands climber | Untitled Comment | |
Hasn't voted | done, thanks. | |
| Posted Oct 4, 2005 4:21 pm | ||
| Mathias Zehring | Untitled Comment | |
Voted 10/10 | hmm - you only inserted 2 numbers behind the decimal point. Is there a reason for this? | |
| Posted Oct 28, 2005 12:42 pm | ||
| Lowlands climber | Untitled Comment | |
Hasn't voted | Yes, there is a reason for this. This is related to one of my professional deformations :-). It relates to how you determined the coordinates . If these were really determined on the spot by triangulation or military quality GPS (or from a list of coordinates added to the map) I would be in favor of more than 2 decimals. However if you got them from a cursor reading from a digital map, than there is of course a measurement error. That is why is used two decimals to start with. So if you can be more specific on the way you obtained the coordinates from the map I would be willing to add more decimals. | |
| Posted Nov 3, 2005 4:57 pm | ||
| Mathias Zehring | Untitled Comment | |
Voted 10/10 | hmm - I believe that the coordinates from digital map are more accurate that 2 decimals. A major feature for the coordinates is the correct setting for the summit symbol on the "interactive map" on the left bar. Clicking on it shows that now the summit symbol is placed somewhere between Silvrettahorn and Schneeglocke. I don't know how much decimals you need for this - but surely more than two. | |
| Posted Nov 4, 2005 12:47 am | ||
| Lowlands climber | Untitled Comment | |
Hasn't voted | ok, sounds convincing. | |
| Posted Nov 4, 2005 6:33 am | ||
| Mathias Zehring | Untitled Comment | |
Voted 10/10 | the german guidebook praises the E-ridge as one of the finest routes of the Silvretta: UIAA III. But because of melting ice the approach via the Schneeglocken glacier may be tricky | |
| Posted Apr 13, 2005 4:24 pm | ||
| Lowlands climber | Untitled Comment | |
Hasn't voted | Mathias, can you give me the reference to the German guidebook, so I can add to the book list? Thanks, Jan. | |
| Posted Apr 14, 2005 3:01 pm | ||
| Mathias Zehring | Untitled Comment | |
Voted 10/10 | You already listed the guidebook by Flaig of 1996 - I don't know what is written there about the east ridge. My book is a previous edition: Walter Flaig, Alpenvereinsfuehrer Silvretta, Bergverlag Rother Munich, 10th edition 1987 | |
| Posted Apr 14, 2005 3:19 pm | ||
| Lowlands climber | Untitled Comment | |
Hasn't voted | Thanks, I see. The author has actually removed the E-ridge from the book. All routes above grade II have actually been removed from the new version. | |
| Posted Apr 14, 2005 4:23 pm | ||
| Mathias Zehring | Untitled Comment | |
Voted 10/10 | are not fully correct: I took these one from digital Alpenvereinskarte map: 46.858222 N 10.0925278 E | |
| Posted Oct 3, 2005 12:16 pm | ||
| Lowlands climber | Untitled Comment | |
Hasn't voted | done, thanks. | |
| Posted Oct 4, 2005 4:21 pm | ||
| Mathias Zehring | Untitled Comment | |
Voted 10/10 | hmm - you only inserted 2 numbers behind the decimal point. Is there a reason for this? | |
| Posted Oct 28, 2005 12:42 pm | ||
| Lowlands climber | Untitled Comment | |
Hasn't voted | Yes, there is a reason for this. This is related to one of my professional deformations :-). It relates to how you determined the coordinates . If these were really determined on the spot by triangulation or military quality GPS (or from a list of coordinates added to the map) I would be in favor of more than 2 decimals. However if you got them from a cursor reading from a digital map, than there is of course a measurement error. That is why is used two decimals to start with. So if you can be more specific on the way you obtained the coordinates from the map I would be willing to add more decimals. | |
| Posted Nov 3, 2005 4:57 pm | ||
| Mathias Zehring | Untitled Comment | |
Voted 10/10 | hmm - I believe that the coordinates from digital map are more accurate that 2 decimals. A major feature for the coordinates is the correct setting for the summit symbol on the "interactive map" on the left bar. Clicking on it shows that now the summit symbol is placed somewhere between Silvrettahorn and Schneeglocke. I don't know how much decimals you need for this - but surely more than two. | |
| Posted Nov 4, 2005 12:47 am | ||
| Lowlands climber | Untitled Comment | |
Hasn't voted | ok, sounds convincing. | |
| Posted Nov 4, 2005 6:33 am | ||
|
