Inclusion of Turkey in the SOTA Program

Online Resources SOTA Mapping
1

Hello esteemed SOTA members,

I would like to learn about the entire process of adding Turkey’s peaks to CQ SOTA and any related requests. What can we do in this regard?

In the past, I have observed issues with the existing mapping. There is also a discussion on this topic in the forum, but it has been approached differently.

Turkey has an official mapping system that is constantly updated by government institutions. There is an advanced Topographic (Raster) map system available for peak points. This site can be accessed by everyone at “ https://atlas.harita.gov.tr/ ”. It is the current mapping system of the General Directorate of Mapping.

There are thousands of candidate peaks for SOTA in Turkey, and there are also dedicated climbers. Isn’t it time to make a good start? :slight_smile:

Thank you in advance for your support.

TA1ODM 73.

19 Likes
2

Contact the SOTA Team via the form: https://www.sota.org.uk/Contact

4 Likes
3

Hello SQ9MDF

I sent a message a few days ago via this link, I’m pending.

Thank you for your time and support.

2 Likes
4

Hi OM,

We would all welcome the forming of a SOTA Association in Turkey! What is needed is a local ham operator with a love of the outdoors and some spare time.

Please align with the SOTA Management Team and pull this through!

Welcome to SOTA,
73 Heinz

4 Likes
5

Hi OE5EEP

I hope that we will soon have the opportunity to work on this issue with the SOTA team and get detailed information about how the process will work regarding whether we are suitable for the activity or not.

Thank you for your kind approach.

73 Kaya.

4 Likes
6

Hello Heinz and Kaya

Best not book next years summer holiday then in case Turkey becomes a new SOTA Association!

Good luck Kaya, I hope the accurate map data needed is available to bring this about. I can see from your QRZ page that you are an “outdoor type”.

73 Phil G4OBK

4 Likes
7

Mapping with enough resolution is available at a very high price. What group will take-up a collection to pay for it?

Elliott, K6EL

2 Likes
8

Hi Phil

I will be happy to assist you when I receive a return e-mail for all necessary information and document requests.

As far as I understand, the landforms in the link I left for the map do not meet the conditions such as height, etc.
This is how we can proceed legally in the current system.

as an example, a short video Topographic; Topographic (Raster-TURKEY) Sample map for SOTA

This is how the highest and most ideal detailed map is provided by the mapping authority. I can’t really imagine the possibility of it being at a higher level. There will be many possible reasons for this, such as security, etc.

I think they will answer the procedures that must be met exactly regarding the organization of the association by e-mail.

You are quite quick to respond. When it comes to how mountains stand up to your speed, I think SOTA is the best answer! :slight_smile:

Hi Elliott

Good question.

If we can get an answer from an authority about payments and other matters, we would like to do our part as well.
Our main goal is to understand exactly how we can participate.

–
Thanks for your feedback.

73’s Kaya.

2 Likes
9

Dear Kaya,

the high resolution topographic maps of https://atlas.harita.gov.tr already look fine, as they show height points (for the summits) and contour lines for the height of the surrounding terrain.
To set up a SOTA association all summits with a prominence of more than 150 m have to be identified. Not only the summit height but also col to the next higher summit has to be identified. Finding the correct col is the demanding task. In principle this could be done with the contour lines of the maps but this is an incredible cumbersome way. The SOTA management team (MT) does this programmatically with some GIS software. This requires a digital elevation model (DEM) of the area. The NASA SRTM-data is one of the older, low resolution DEM which is available for free. But of course more accurate data, often provided by local authorities is preferred.

Apart from the technical prerequesites the MT requires a local acting as association manager (AM). The AM assists the MT in setting up a summit list based on the raw results of the col/peak search results.
If your mindset is “Ok, let’s spend a few days to set up an assocation and then go activating the new summits next month.” then stop thinking about it. It will not work this way.
If your mindset is “Ok, I am willing to spend a significant amount of time over weeks or even months. I really want to take care of the summit lists.” then proceed.

I am only used to maintain an existing association (DM). For the exact workflow for setting up a new association please await the instructions of the MT.

73 de Michael, DB7MM

9 Likes
10

I’m looking at the map linked and I can see contours but only every 100m. Is there finer resolution contour maps available?

4 Likes
11

Unfortunate that the map suggested above has too big a height change between contour lines to make this possible. The contour lines in the area that I looked at were at 150m intervals, when we need at most contour intervals of 10m.

The MT are just as eager as Kaya to include Turkey in SOTA, but unfortunately at present we lack the tools to do the job. Even if we were given or purchased the tools (the maps) it would be impossible to complete the job before the New Year at the earliest.

4 Likes
12

When I have investigated previously I have seen a larger scale topographic map series (1:50k probably) that looked Ok, but nobody has been able to obtain access to it.

An alternative would be access to robust height data and indeed I see mention of LIDAR.

Just as soon as either usable national mapping or DEM data become available we can progress with a TA call area. So if TA ops can please just keep monitoring what is available from HGM / DGM and let us know if / when there is something that would be great. As it stands now we’ve not seen anything suitable, but I expect the situation will change eventually.

3 Likes
13

Dear Michael,

Thank you for your excellent and detailed response.

We believe that if the necessary conditions for mapping are met, we can assist with the formation of an association and progress step by step.

Of course, in the time left from my current work life, I am ready to personally assist MT with planning and technical details. SOTA’s unique approach is truly commendable. Including my country in an activity that progresses with such perfection will make us very happy. I will personally apply for an “official” request to obtain online support containing technical data for the “10 m contour” map.

As a radio amateur who spends a lot of time in the mountains, I want to be part of SOTA, and I believe that many of my enthusiastic friends, along with amateur/professional mountaineering associations, will also participate in this activity with excitement.

–

MM0FMF Hi. Currently, we do not have an up-to-date map other than the HGM / DGM = atlas.

G4TJC Hi. I am continuing to research. I hope we will succeed.

G8ADD Thank you for recognizing my request from afar with your heart

Finally, We confirm that we fully understand the requested data. If we can provide you with a digital content containing suitable visual and technical data regarding the map, we will do our best with all our efforts and time management for the other steps as well.

If there is any new development regarding the map, we will inform you without any delay.

I would like to express my heartfelt thanks and gratitude to each of you for taking the time to respond.

Best regards.

73 Kaya

13 Likes
14

You can find a map at SOTLAS that shows a 10-meter contour map of Turkey, which is more detailed than the map site you gave me. See also.

4 Likes
15

The underlying data for sotl.as uses SRTM and the data is not accurate to 10m vertically, despite the 10m contours, so sotl.as - great tool that it is - can’t be used to accurately survey a new association.

4 Likes
16

Would it be conceivable, as a first step, to accept the vertical elevation accuracy of the SRTM as sufficiently accurate for all non-forested summits?

4 Likes
17

Time to prepare for a SOTA trip to Turkey, let’s go!

2 Likes
18

The problem is that prominence is a relative measure, so if there are two summits nearby with similar heights then SRTM will often pick the wrong one, so no matter what you need to check against government mapping of some description. That risk is independent of forested/snowbound summits.

Having reviewed thousands of summits for SOTA I have less faith in SRTM to find a correct summit than most. GLO30 may be better but you still need to identify summits that are low P but could be the real one, otherwise you spend just as long fixing up the association in later years and become unpopular when you remove someone’s favourite summit.

6 Likes
19

Hi Andrew,

Forgive me for going over stuff you know, it might however help others.

All maps are wrong. It’s just a matter of how wrong and is it fit for purpose.

Remote sensing maps are wonderful but have errors due to sensing and interpolation. Any government surveying department worth its salt starts with 1 m contours from satellite mapoing, aircraft surveys and ground surveys with high grade GPS survey stations.

These are used to construct working maps with wider contour line spacings.

The rule of thumb has been that errors of 70% of the contour line spacing apply. That’s not to say that the error will be that great or that it won’t exceed that. It’s a standard error, with the same meaning as in curve fitting etc.

So if using 10 m contour maps the measured prominence can frequently be in error by 10 m. (RMS sum of summit height and saddle height).
If the peak has a “spot height” with less than a metre error then the error reverts to 7 m for our example.

As some stage a decision must be made by the mappers as to how much error is acceptable. This may be to arbitarily accept as correct and error free for SOTA purposes a Government map with no more than 10 m contours.

When I started with SOTA the lat. long. location of the summit was regarded as good it was in error by no more than 100 m.

I have compared the listed heights of over 20 SOTA peaks using half a dozen different maps. Rarely did the freebies agree within a metre. OSM was the least worst for VK.

If management decision were taken to accept a free digital non government map as the basis for SOTA then I would suggest freezing the summit list for no less than 10 years. All the peaks would have the wrong heights and prominences but imo does that matter when compared to not having an association. If the prominences were made a minimum of say 170 m except where spot heights were available for peak and saddle, there would be few rejections of listed peaks in a later survey

Would that be too radical?

Measuring mountains is not an easy or highly precise task. It involves a lot of uncertainties. SOTA is a pastime, a hobby and we need to be clear how much slack we cut associations in their surveys.

73
Ron
VK3AFW
Retired metrologist

14 Likes
20

There is a thin line between being principled and stubborn/uncompromising. But sometimes it is worth putting different arguments on the line and carefully weighing them. In particular, look at the development of SOTA and its popularization.
The adoption of P200 for Turkey will allow the definition of thousands of summits that will be inactive for many years anyway. Adopting P200 will preserve the SOTA rules while at the same time being a compromise to the desire to define all summits. For some summits, in obvious cases, KeyCol should be abandoned. But the adoption of P200 will largely avoid deletion from the list of summits and will avoid the dilemma of +/- X meters. More enthusiasts will be able to combine their hobbies.

8 Likes