Elevation profile

[Grumpy Ol' Pops]

Those profiles indicate more than just elevation changes. If you get a copy of the USGS map "directions" you'll see that the contour lines do, indeed, indicate elevation change, but it's equally important to realize that they also are a graphic representation of the effort required to ascend or descend mountains, the directions in which rivers run, level spots (for all the stealth campers out there), and other necessary information. For anyone who hikes the deserts, they indicate arroyos that, in a flash rainstorm, will flood quickly and possibly trap a hiker against steep, unclimbable canyon walls. These indications are not in words, but are indicated by the closeness of contour lines (wall steepness) as well as "pointed" contour lines away from or toward your destination.

[Kirby]

A lot of the AT maps I have seen have a V/E of 5.28. The Smokies profile map, just by looking at it, seems absolutely useless.

Kirby

[mudhead]

course learning how to read topo maps and how to navigate with a map and compass.

taking a first aid course at the Red Cross too
Thomas

I am certain you will never regret taking these courses.

[Alligator]

That 5.28 is contrived so that 1000ft in elevation equals 1 mile horizontal on the profile. It's just kind of convenient.

[Cindy from Indy]

When I go to the ATC website to buy the maps, what am I looking for??? I don't want to buy every states guidebook, I just want the maps.....

[Kirby]

https://www.atctrailstore.org/catalo...d=190&compid=1

Kirby

[Cindy from Indy]

Thanks Kirby...........

[dessertrat]

I like them. They help me plan. However, you have to be careful not to get suckered by a fairly flat profile into thinking it will necessarily be easy-- there are some hard sections of trail that don't show much change on a topo map or elavation profile.

[Kirby]

I like them. They help me plan. However, you have to be careful not to get suckered by a fairly flat profile into thinking it will necessarily be easy-- there are some hard sections of trail that don't show much change on a topo map or elavation profile.

Exactly, the first 15 miles of the 100 mile wilderness are, by profile standards, "flat", those were the worst 15 miles of the whole trips. Lot and lots of puds. Just realize when something is flat on the profile map, that is just telling you that there are no major mountains, but there will be ups and downs, a lot.

Kirby

[dessertrat]

Exactly, the first 15 miles of the 100 mile wilderness are, by profile standards, "flat", those were the worst 15 miles of the whole trips. Lot and lots of puds. Just realize when something is flat on the profile map, that is just telling you that there are no major mountains, but there will be ups and downs, a lot.

Kirby

Kirby, that is exactly one of the places I was thinking of! There is a great hill in that section, though, where you get almost the same view as the one you get from the barren ledges, but lower down-- do you know the one I mean?

[Kirby]

Kirby, that is exactly one of the places I was thinking of! There is a great hill in that section, though, where you get almost the same view as the one you get from the barren ledges, but lower down-- do you know the one I mean?

I don't have my maps in front of me, so I am unsure. I don't recall having any good views in the first 15 miles, I just remember that it was miserable, and that I was beat at the end of the day.

Kirby

[WalkinHome]

I have to chime in here because I cannot resist giving Kirby a jab. Map 3 in Maine starting in Monson clearly shows a bunch of pud's. I'm sorry but that ain't flat. You want to see flat, go to Map 1 - there is a bunch of flat or almost flat there and in Maine, that is as flat as the AT gets. Now class, put Map 1 and Map 3 over one another and tell me which profile has flat in it LOL. If you have been on the AT for more than 30 minutes you know you will be going up and down all day. When in doubt, look around, find the highest point and go up. That is probably where you are heading. All of you have a great and safe hike and take all the profiles with a grain of salt LO

[BR360]

The map is not the territory. The profile is not the reality of elevation change.

Maps and profiles are scaled analogs for the reality of the landforms and terrain that the trail passes over. They cannot represent all the reality (they do not refer to the difficulty of the treadway for instance, whether it has roots, rocks, etc.) of the path. Got to be careful "interpreting" topo maps and profiles.

They are useful. As an outdoor educator I've taught several hundred people to navigate with topo maps and compass. While everyone can learn it, some are much more natural at it than others.

Some are intrigued with the mental "picture" that a topo can provide , others never could relate the picture of the map and the physical terrain without extreme effort.

Personally, I love maps and profiles. They give me information I find valuable. I don't always pay attention to it, but when I am "confused" or tired, I am glad to have it. (That's also why I hike with a GPS---tho I would not carry one on a thru-hike due to the weight.)

[ki0eh]

All maps lie, a map must lie to be useful. (Round earth, flat surface, you know...)

USGS 7.5' quad maps do lie too. In many places in Central PA at least, these show trails where there is absolutely no way a trail could ever have gone where the map says. There was a lot of hand work that went into these and some of that must have been on Monday morning before coffee or Friday afternoon.

7.5' map derived products lie too, such as computerized elevation matrices taken from interpolating the contour lines that might have been drawn on Friday afternoon.

Elevation figures on a GPS lie, due to extremely disfavorable trigonometry of elevation differences vs. positional differences wrt orbiting satellites. The old analog procedure of altimetry is still more accurate.

Soon for PA at least, we will supposedly have radar derived elevation data available, finally liberating us from what someone thought the terrain looked like after looking at too many stereopairs in 1946.

Maybe then I'll venture to create a profile of a footpath... without getting roasted.

[Toolshed]

....

Elevation figures on a GPS lie

I get a kick out of driving up the Northern Extension and through the tunnel under the AT. My GPS map keeps saying I am climbing over the ridge my sat elevation says I am not. a real conundrum

[Kirby]

I have to chime in here because I cannot resist giving Kirby a jab. Map 3 in Maine starting in Monson clearly shows a bunch of pud's. I'm sorry but that ain't flat. You want to see flat, go to Map 1 - there is a bunch of flat or almost flat there and in Maine, that is as flat as the AT gets. Now class, put Map 1 and Map 3 over one another and tell me which profile has flat in it LOL. If you have been on the AT for more than 30 minutes you know you will be going up and down all day. When in doubt, look around, find the highest point and go up. That is probably where you are heading. All of you have a great and safe hike and take all the profiles with a grain of salt LO

There were a lot more PUDS in the first 15 miles than that stupid map says. (Nice to hear from you Ray, great presentation).

Attention:
The Maine AT is never flat. Thank you.

I'm gonna go lick my wounds now,
Kirby

[RITBlake]

Attention:
The Maine AT is never flat. Thank you.


Kirby

I'm guessing you haven't walked the length of the AT in Maine then....