Relative height

[johnathanx]

Hello! New to this site, but had a small query.

When looking at the page for a mountain, the altitude is shown.

I don't seem to be able to find the relative height of the mountain though, does anyone know if that's displayed anywhere? If not, is there a reason for that not being present?

[prog99]

Because its not desperately useful?

[dav2930]

There is no single 'relative height' value that can be given for a hill, since every hill has a multitude of 'relative heights'. If you want to know the amount of ascent involved in walking up a particular hill, then that all depends on where you start from and which route you take. On the Walkhighlands page for a given hill the altitude above sea-level of the summit is shown, then if you click on 'Detailed route description and map' you'll see the amount of cumulative ascent for the particular route described (which may include the ascents of other hills as well). You can also plot your own route on the digital 'our route' map which is available in the 'new walk report' (or blog entry) section, and that will show a reading for the cumulative ascent of your plotted route (as well as one for the distance).

[jmarkb]

There is no single 'relative height' value that can be given for a hill, since every hill has a multitude of 'relative heights'.

Relative height (or topographic prominence) can be well-defined: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topographic_prominence for several equivalent definitions.

The definitive reference for the British Isles is the Database of British and Irish Hills http://www.hill-bagging.co.uk/, and keeping this site synced with all their updates would just be a pain, I would guess!

[dav2930]

There is no single 'relative height' value that can be given for a hill, since every hill has a multitude of 'relative heights'.

Relative height (or topographic prominence) can be well-defined: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topographic_prominence for several equivalent definitions.

The definitive reference for the British Isles is the Database of British and Irish Hills http://www.hill-bagging.co.uk/, and keeping this site synced with all their updates would just be a pain, I would guess!

Thanks jmarkb, fair comment since I should have realized that by 'relative height' the OP probably meant topographic prominence which, as you say, is clearly defined and actually very interesting. I suppose I took the term 'relative height' at face value and thought 'relative to what?'

Notwithstanding updating issues, I guess it would be interesting to see prominences listed alongside altitudes!?

[johnathanx]

Thanks everyone. That all makes sense, I understand that this number might be hard to decide upon depending on where one starts their walk.

I think my definition of 'relative height' was from the peak to ground level around the mountain, as opposed to sea level. I see now this definition isn't correct.

Just to provide some context: I'm doing these walks with my mum who is looking at the altitude listed on here as exactly how many meters she will have to ascend, and I'm trying to explain that the ascent will most likely be a fair bit less, depending on how high we park the car. I think I was just looking for a "closest car park to peak" sort of height.

Thanks for the responses and advice!

[Paul Webster]

If you look at our detailed walking routes, the ascent figure given there is the amount of ascent that that walk includes. I think this is the figure you are looking for.