Thorn Tree travel forum

1

Actually, I thought this was the highest? (18380 ft = 5602 m)

2

Hello PQ,

Well, that's interesting! And possibly annoying. I have to accept some of the blame for having "something on the net that follows the Indian version of things".

When we were there, we had no instruments for measuring altitude, so I can't claim to have measured it myself. But I've just had a look at NI 43-8 (the US Army Survey map of the area). Your 5310 m works out as 17421 ft. The yanks have the road crossing both of the 17500 ft contours (both clearly labelled as such near the pass) and both of the 18,000 ft contours. They actually also have the road crossing the 18500 ft contour which would make the pass higher than 18380 ft, but this line changes from brown to blue which may mean that it is not definitive or something. Either way, the American survey puts the pass no lower than 18000 ft or about 5500 m. I often see slightly optimistic pass signs, but usually only a few metres. I find it hard to imagine that the survey is 300 m/1000 ft in error.

With respect to your results:
1. In my experience barometric altimeters are very good; actually better than GPS. When and where was yours last calibrated?
2. If you've cycled over the Taglang La on the way from Shimla, you're probably pretty well acclimatised and wouldn't necessarily suffer AMS. Out of four of us, only one had problems.
3. We estimated it as a cycle of about 40 km with 2100 m climbing. This is only a 5% gradient on average, quite reasonable.
4. Fair enough. We were the only ones who did it when we were there.

Can you please post us your list of the Top Ten?

s.

3

5000m ........ 5300m ........... splitting hairs, I die by the time I hit 3000m

4

According to the Guinness Book of of Records its 5,682 metres (18,640 foot):

http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/content_pages/record.asp?recordid=43819

And Wikipedia agrees:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khardungla_Pass

I was about to say that this is the definitive answer, but I just realised that there is at least one error in the Guinness entry (its says its between Leh and Manali). The Wiki entry gives a more accurate description.

'Travel is the art form available to Everyman. You sit in the coffee shop in a strange city and nobody knows who you are, or cares, and so you shed your chequered past and your motley credentials and you face the day unarmed. Bravery! Adventure! Defeat! Survival! And onward we go and some day in the distant future, we will stop and turn around in astonishment to see all the places we’ve been and the heroes we were.' Garrison Keillor

5

You say that the road isn't long enough to gain that much altitude.
If i remember right, Leh is at an altitude of about 3500m. If Kardung la is 5600 m, then the gain is
2100 m in about 38 km. This is about 5,5 % which could be perfectly possible.
After the checkpoint, i had the impression that the road was much steeper than 5,5 %

6

Hi all,

Can't put my two pence worth in just yet as I'm still in Delhi and heading for Manali tonight. This is one of my goals when I reach Leh and I shall check my watch barometer (set correctely) that was set to 0' at the waters edge in Istanbul a couple of days ago.

I'm looking for some trekking or day/night stopovers partners for the period I'm in Leh which will be about the 20/08/05 until 18/09/05.
If anybody needs someone to make up a trekking party then please send me a personal message. I have a host of day trips planned of which one will be walking down from the Kardung La to Leh but not using the road, should take about 4-5 hours. (thanks burntfoot)

Cheers Pol

PogoWasRight.org: Privacy news, data breaches, and privacy-related events from around the world

7

According to a guide book I have ("Trekking in Ladakh") the highest road in the world is in Bolivia. The road reaches some volcano at 5,900m!!!

8

Well, to reply to some of the comments:

1. With the altitude sickness thing, I was sick over every single pass on the Manali-Leh road after the Rohtang. I acclimatise very badly so I would have expected to be sick at 5602m, even though most people wouldn't having ridden in from Shimla.

2. My comment about the length of the road is related to how much altitude was being gained per kilometer. I didn't take notes, but the altitude gain was very consistent all the way up - it would have needed a few extra km to reach 5602, although I agree that the ascent would be possible on a 38km road.

3. I haven't been able to calibrate my altimeter for ages because roadside altitude signs are so inaccurate. However the reading here in Leh is right, and the height gain it registered during the ride is consistent with the pass being 5310m. My altimeter also "locks" when I'm not riding so is less affected by pressure changes than altimeters which are on all the time.

4. Other height markers on roads around here are very obviously wrong. For example the double Lachlang La/(forgotten the name of the other one) between Manali and Leh are marked as being within a few metres the same height. In fact the Lachlang is around 250m higher than the other, which is obvious when you're there because you look down on the first pass from the second one. Other roadside markings are inconsistent - for example showing a drop in altitude after a long climb. My guess is they're taken from old British surveys done without modern equipment.

5. The military map thing is interesting - in my experience they're pretty accurate, at least topographically.

I'm still unconvinced, but I really want to believe it's as high as they say!

9

It's nothing new that road signs in Asia overestimate the height of the climbs. On the road 219 in China, north of Himalaya, every single marked pass was overestimated by 100 to 300 m, compared to my altimeter (~50 m accuracy) and to the data I gathered from the net.

10

Well, I guess there's nothing for it:

PQ, you'll just have to bum a GPS off someone and do it again, together with calibrating your altimeter in Leh before the start. Sorry about the hassle mate, but it's all to the glory of Science (:

-I've got a book about Everest, which includes a history of the nineteenth century British Survey of India. Those guys were pretty good, and pretty meticulous. So while they didn't have satellites and lasers, they wouldn't have been 300 m out. Maybe a few feet.

-My Collins World Atlas gives the Khardung La height as 5582 m. I've no idea where they got that number from.

Pamir Nomad:

We had that Ladakh Trekking book as well. The volcano in question is Uturuncu in the deep South of the country, and we went to check it out in July. We gave the nod to the Khardung La instread of the Bolivian road, as "Although it is slightly lower at 5602 m, it has the advantage of being a real road that is tractable the whole way to the summit on wheeled transport, whereas the Uturuncu mine “road” is more of a notional than actual entity. Above about 5200 much of it is unrideable even with wide MTB tyres, at least on the ascent. The road is blocked to motor vehicles from about 5600 m where the landslide was, and vanished completely at about 5750 m on the spur below the mine". (Quote from an article I wrote for the OCD club magazine).

s.

11

Hey!

It's nothing new that Khardung la is lower than 5.602m. Lots of bikers have measured it (www.betzgi.ch, www3.utsidan.se/corax-e ...) with al kind of equipment (GPS, barometric) and it always shows around 5.350m. Although when I was there I asked an Indian officer in the army base just a few kms under the pass (nubra side) and he was persuading me that they measured the pass with accurate instrumets and the height was 5.602m. But I guess they just want to have official world highest pass even though it is not.

Bye,
GoGi

12

this is from the mountaineering handbook by craig connally: a barometric altimeter is an air-pressure gauge calibrated in elevation. This calibration is possible because atm air pressure decreases in a regular, roughly exponential manner as altitude increases. there are many factors in addition to altitude that affects air pressure. errors due to weather, temperature, and wind. he goes into much more detail than i have time to summerize. in short, barometric altimeters are not accurate. you can test the temp deviation by placing it into the fridge. the altimeter should read higher than your actual elevation.

13

#2 -- no chance you could look for the map and tell us who did the survey and when. If tis the series I'm thinking of, the original data for the maps are very old, going back to the "Great Game" days (I've a few of these for the Pakistan areas). Blue contour lines are usually those crossing permanent ice (i.e. glaciers).

Independent bioinformatics scientist - job offers in off-beat locations most welcome!

14

As #12 points out, the actual barometric pressure will affect the elevation reading on a barometric-type of altimeter.

Stay in the same location, and the elevation reading can change, as the weather changes. Generally speaking, as the weather deteriorates, the atmospheric pressure drops, and a stationary altimeter will indicate a higher elevation (even if it hasn't changed location). You can actually use this feature to predict the weather.

And so, you need to set your altimeter to a known elevation frequently (e.g. at least every day). The elevation reading should be reasonably accurate for several hours thereafter, especially if the weather is not changing.

However, if the weather is changeable, or if it is a couple of days since you last set the altimeter to a known elevation, then you are out of luck. Some altimeters have a special scale, so that you can calibrate the intrument if you know the 'sea-level-equivalent' of the barometric pressure at a given place; this you can sometimes get from weather forecasts, or by phoning a friendly weather station.