UKC

Did a run today and it was impossible for me to gain height as I was running down a hillside and then along some flat. Logbook tells me however that I gained 149M in height. This is impossible.

So, why the wrong data and does that make all the height gain records open to question?

In reply to ksjs:
Did you log it manually, or via a GPS?

hey Kieth, try this:

http://www.heywhatsthat.com/profiler.html

In reply to ksjs: Can you post or email a link to the diary entry with the wrong height data?

Also, try drawing the same route with our new Route Cards system - it is using different altitude data, so it would be interesting to see how different the final height gain number is:
- http://www.ukhillwalking.com/logbook/r/edit.php

Thanks

In reply to Toreador: Manually.

In reply to owennewcastle: Pretty cool!

In reply to Nick Smith - UKC: 2nd entry here:
http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/e.php?d=20111010&u=32582

Just tried the route card option which is excessive for a casual run. Also, the height is still way out: it suggests I lost 25m while the contours show something around 250m.

The height profiler linked to above shows a decrease in altitude for the run of 935ft to 154ft, some 800ft, a bit more than 25m!

In reply to ksjs:

Well you can see from the height profile graph, it thinks there are some small uphill bits, even though the overall route is downhill. The bigger uphill bits may well be mistakes in the height data.

Remember that it is reporting cumulative height gain, not the difference between start altitude and finish altitude. After all, if you go up a mountain and back down again, you don't care that your height difference start to finish is 0m, you want to know how much uphill there was.


The Route Cards use different height data, which is why I suggested trying it - interesting to see what difference it makes. It doesn't report height loss, it reports height *gain*. So it is saying a cumulative height gain of 25m over your downhill route, which sounds far more likely than 149m!

I've run that route myself, so I know how steeply downhill it is, but it only takes a gentle 1m rise on a flattish section which you don't even notice, and they quickly add up.

In reply to ksjs: I tried that other profiling site, and I think it was saying the cumulative gain for your route was 110m, and the cumulative loss was 360m ? The graph looked very similar to the one produced by our diary code, so I'm assuming that it is using identical height data.

Cheers