My new (not early XIX or XX Century's) Italian map (1:50.000) shows an altitude of 3.823 m, and the French ones (1:50.000) have an altitude of 3.823 m (1:25.000) and 3.819 m (1:50.000).
It is usual (at least in the Alps) that local authorities measure their mountains. Thus when the French draw a map they would take the altitude from the Italians or the Swiss. The exactitude of the Swiss topography is 1 cm today. Maybe it is 3819.xx m, and my reading is rounded.
No alpenkalb, what I'm saying is that topography is not an exact science. The measurements depend on many factors and different editions of maps give different heights for the same top. Some people here, as gordonye, could tell us the differences on measurements using different projections, measuring systems, etc.
One difficulty of doing a good measurement is because it's very difficult to find a model for the geoide, the theoretic extension of the seas under the continents.
I don't think that it's a doleful affair. Why? The mountains have ever marked the frontiers between countries. However, mountaineering is aside politics in many cases, so I don't think that rating the climbs or views of Mont Dolent from different territories would be interesting.
Anyway it's curious that story of the Ohio River. Thanks for reading my page.
My new (not early XIX or XX Century's) Italian map (1:50.000) shows an altitude of 3.823 m, and the French ones (1:50.000) have an altitude of 3.823 m (1:25.000) and 3.819 m (1:50.000).
It is usual (at least in the Alps) that local authorities measure their mountains. Thus when the French draw a map they would take the altitude from the Italians or the Swiss. The exactitude of the Swiss topography is 1 cm today. Maybe it is 3819.xx m, and my reading is rounded.
No alpenkalb, what I'm saying is that topography is not an exact science. The measurements depend on many factors and different editions of maps give different heights for the same top. Some people here, as gordonye, could tell us the differences on measurements using different projections, measuring systems, etc.
One difficulty of doing a good measurement is because it's very difficult to find a model for the geoide, the theoretic extension of the seas under the continents.
I don't think that it's a doleful affair. Why? The mountains have ever marked the frontiers between countries. However, mountaineering is aside politics in many cases, so I don't think that rating the climbs or views of Mont Dolent from different territories would be interesting.
Anyway it's curious that story of the Ohio River. Thanks for reading my page.
Diego Sahagún - Jun 23, 2003 6:58 pm - Hasn't voted
Untitled CommentMy new (not early XIX or XX Century's) Italian map (1:50.000) shows an altitude of 3.823 m, and the French ones (1:50.000) have an altitude of 3.823 m (1:25.000) and 3.819 m (1:50.000).
alpenkalb - Jun 24, 2003 1:13 pm - Hasn't voted
Untitled CommentIt is usual (at least in the Alps) that local authorities measure their mountains. Thus when the French draw a map they would take the altitude from the Italians or the Swiss. The exactitude of the Swiss topography is 1 cm today. Maybe it is 3819.xx m, and my reading is rounded.
Diego Sahagún - Jun 25, 2003 2:51 am - Hasn't voted
Untitled CommentNo alpenkalb, what I'm saying is that topography is not an exact science. The measurements depend on many factors and different editions of maps give different heights for the same top. Some people here, as gordonye, could tell us the differences on measurements using different projections, measuring systems, etc.
om - Jun 25, 2003 12:00 pm - Hasn't voted
Untitled CommentSwiss exactitude is not a legend...
Diego Sahagún - Jul 19, 2003 5:39 am - Hasn't voted
Untitled CommentOne difficulty of doing a good measurement is because it's very difficult to find a model for the geoide, the theoretic extension of the seas under the continents.
desainme - Jul 19, 2003 8:28 pm - Voted 10/10
Untitled CommentA doleful affair.
It might be interesting to
rate the climbs or views of Mt. Dolent from different territories. It is said that the
state of Ohio relinquisthed its half
of the Ohio River to Kentucky so that the Commonwealth might have the priveledge of maintaining the bridges.
Diego Sahagún - Jul 20, 2003 4:41 am - Hasn't voted
Untitled CommentI don't think that it's a doleful affair. Why? The mountains have ever marked the frontiers between countries. However, mountaineering is aside politics in many cases, so I don't think that rating the climbs or views of Mont Dolent from different territories would be interesting.
Anyway it's curious that story of the Ohio River. Thanks for reading my page.
alpenkalb - Jun 22, 2003 2:16 am - Hasn't voted
Untitled CommentThe french border does not touch the summit. The meeting point of the 3 countries is the gendarme 3751 m of the NNW ridge.
The altitude of Mont Dolent is 3820. 3823 was measured about 100 years ago, before the error between sea leavel and Geneva (ca. ) was detected.
Mont Dolent is a Swiss/Italian mountain.
Diego Sahagún - Jun 23, 2003 6:58 pm - Hasn't voted
Untitled CommentMy new (not early XIX or XX Century's) Italian map (1:50.000) shows an altitude of 3.823 m, and the French ones (1:50.000) have an altitude of 3.823 m (1:25.000) and 3.819 m (1:50.000).
alpenkalb - Jun 24, 2003 1:13 pm - Hasn't voted
Untitled CommentIt is usual (at least in the Alps) that local authorities measure their mountains. Thus when the French draw a map they would take the altitude from the Italians or the Swiss. The exactitude of the Swiss topography is 1 cm today. Maybe it is 3819.xx m, and my reading is rounded.
Diego Sahagún - Jun 25, 2003 2:51 am - Hasn't voted
Untitled CommentNo alpenkalb, what I'm saying is that topography is not an exact science. The measurements depend on many factors and different editions of maps give different heights for the same top. Some people here, as gordonye, could tell us the differences on measurements using different projections, measuring systems, etc.
om - Jun 25, 2003 12:00 pm - Hasn't voted
Untitled CommentSwiss exactitude is not a legend...
Josh - Jun 25, 2003 12:39 pm - Hasn't voted
Untitled CommentBlah...
Diego Sahagún - Jul 19, 2003 5:39 am - Hasn't voted
Untitled CommentOne difficulty of doing a good measurement is because it's very difficult to find a model for the geoide, the theoretic extension of the seas under the continents.
desainme - Jul 19, 2003 8:28 pm - Voted 10/10
Untitled CommentA doleful affair.
It might be interesting to
rate the climbs or views of Mt. Dolent from different territories. It is said that the
state of Ohio relinquisthed its half
of the Ohio River to Kentucky so that the Commonwealth might have the priveledge of maintaining the bridges.
Diego Sahagún - Jul 20, 2003 4:41 am - Hasn't voted
Untitled CommentI don't think that it's a doleful affair. Why? The mountains have ever marked the frontiers between countries. However, mountaineering is aside politics in many cases, so I don't think that rating the climbs or views of Mont Dolent from different territories would be interesting.
Anyway it's curious that story of the Ohio River. Thanks for reading my page.