Sources: 

Data Sources:  This page represents years of compilation by the authors from a variety of sources including direct communication with researchers and from published material, principally 1) various mountaineering literature, 2) Soviet topographic mapping at 1:100,000 and 1:200,000,  3) extensive analysis of SRTM (Shuttle Radar Topography Mission) digital elevation data, 4) names and elevations in publications by the China Mountaineering Association and in the geonames database, 5) Chinese Snow Mountain topographic map series, and 6) both commercial and national topographic surveys including the recent Finnish survey of Nepal where applicable.  We have striven to sort through extremely divergent elevation values and toponymy in order to provide a list that best reflects accurate and supportable data.  Notably, we have analyzed all published values against SRTM for reasonableness, and in many cases propose here for the first time, elevation estimates that we believe are more accurate than old survey values.

Names:  We have not been able to determine reliable placenames for a significant number of summits in China.  The tradition in Tibet and China is to give a name to an entire mountain range, and many of the less-famous peaks do not have well-known local names apart from that of their range.  Names in quotation marks are working names for unnamed summits (mostly in the Eastern Karakoram) from an unpublished 1984 study.  Names in capitals are those that we transliterated directly from the cyrillic on the Russian topographic maps, and have not thus far confirm their accuracy or pinyin spelling.  In addition, 28 peaks in China are name unknown, where we feel that the name of the larger range is not descriptive enough.  Submissions of names are welcome.

Saddle and prominence values are derived almost exclusively from SRTM data, with some reliance on Soviet mapping.  It is generally felt that these values are accurate to ±20 meters.

FOOTNOTES

[1]  Everest:  After some debate, we have elected to go with the traditional elevation of 8848 meters for Everest.  In 1999, a survey team backed by National Geographic and the Boston Museum of Science placed advanced GPS-survey equipment on the Everest summit.  Based on a week-long differential GPS reading they announced a new elevation of 8850 meters (29,035').   Reference these articles: SFAR, NGS, MountainZone.  The Bradford Washburn survey established with great accuracy the differential elevation of the rock summit beneath the snow and ice relative to a permanent survey station at South Col.  However the survey did not mention uncertainty about the geoid model in the region.  It appears that the baseline assumptions about the geoid have a deviation of at least two meters, so for the time being we will take these two elevations as equally plausible.  A 1992 survey by Washburn proposed an 8846 meter elevation.  The recent claim by China that Mt. Everest is 8844.43 meters, although sensational, further calls into question meter-level accuracy (much less sub-meter accuracy) of the conflicting geodetic vertical datums in the region.  For those of you still unconvinced, you might admire the uncertainty made explicit in this article.

[3]  Reference a lengthy analysis on the elevations and border position around Kangkar Punsum and Kula Kangri here.

[8]  Makalu is the world's fifth highest mountain and fourth highest ultra.  The 8485 meter elevation comes from the modern Finnmap survey (see note above.)  Most sources still cite the 8463 meter elevation that is found on the Schneider maps as well as the Chinese Snow Map series.  The saddle elevation is also taken from Finnmap.

[10]  Cho Oyu:   The spot elevation provided by Finnmap for Cho Oyu is 8188 meters, thirteen meters lower than the widely used 8201 meter elevation.  Cho Oyu is widely regarded as the sixth highest mountain in the world, and is the fifth highest ultra.

[16]  Chomolhari (Chomo Lhari):  The official elevation is 7314m (23,996')..  This seems very unsupportable, and suspiciously close to the round 24,000' number.  7050m is a better estimate based on SRTM and published contour maps.

[18]  Reo Purgyil:  Coordinates are of the SW peak, which appears to be slightly higher than the N peak, more data is needed.

[44]  Unknown "Kailas" - According to the Soviet maps, this peak is in the Kailash Range, but this is not to be confused with the holy Mt. Kailash (Kangrinpoqe Feng).  The 1989 "Map of Mountain Peaks of the Qinghai-Xizang Plateau" gives the peak an elevation of 6219m.  SRTM indicates that it is about P6300, and higher than a nearby peak incorrectly marked P6295 on the Russian map.

[54] Unnamed point 6,842m has been upgraded to Ultra status from its previous "error range" status based on more detailed analysis of its key saddle.

[56] Elevation of Kotaklik is derived from SRTM, higher than the published 6488. [E2] Elevation uncertain: Soviet 1:200,000 topographic map gives 6240m.  American aeronautical charts give conflicting values of 6480m and 6135m (which is used.)  All of these seem wildly incompatible with the surrounding terrain that suggests it may not even reach 6000m.  We did not see the Chinese maps, thus more information is desired.

[E6] Russian map gives 5980, but entire region seems to be shifted by 200m according to SRTM; so this may be an ultra.

COMMERCIAL MESSAGES