Appeal supporting thread with additional pictures - Gipfelbuch Taubenfels

According to the old rules this nomination has to be accepted:

Even from the oldest rules from Operation Portal Recon:

Candidate: Mountain Top Marker

Policy: Accept

Suggested Vote: ★★★★★

ACCEPT permanently attached logbooks, structures, or signs.

In newer rules there is nothing, that contradicts this old rule. So it can still be valued, because mountain top marking objects like enumerated follow exploration and exercising criteria of nowadays criteria.

Source of these very old rules, for example this thread:

Concernung rejection reason "Pedestrian Access":

This sheet of paper was also inside the box. The first few paragraphs tell stuff about the history of that summit register box (state 2015: it was the 6th summit register book, they estimate, that 1100 people wrote something in there, then there is a list of local persons, that are in charge for this summit register box, etc.pp)

The intresting part is the last paragraph, so here the deepl-translation:

Access path to the Pigeon Rock (literally translation of Taubenfels)

From the Zollstraße border crossing in Rittersgrün, leave the Taubenau forester's lodge on the Czech side to the left and walk uphill along the board fence of the cutting.

With up to 35% **** it goes 1km uphill. It is the shortest way to the Taubenfels. Keep right!

Another way leads past the forsthaus, the next way right purely, and always uphill. After about 90min you have reached the ridge. After 100m, take the path to the right and you will find the Taubenfels, which you have to look for downhill. The path is swampy!

You are rewarded with a magnificent panoramic view over the village of Rittersgrün, the Hammerberg and other parts of the Ore Mountains, Bernsbach and the pumped storage plant Markersbach. Fichtelberg and Keilberg are well visible on the opposite rock. Downhill, about 30m and then right.

So on the map:

1 - the starting point of the description: the border crossing near street Zollstraße.

2 - the forest lodge, that one shall pass leaving it on the left side.

3 - the forest aisle (deepl used "cutting" in the translation)

4 - the part of the path with 35% ****, that looks like this:

So there's even a spray-chalk hiking trail marker at the tree ....

So that's the hardest part of the trail, and after that you reach the rock formations on top of the mountain. It's safe accessible as long as you are a bit sure footed.

Then there is the second route, that is described there:

This one is very easy even without any slopes. This route is even rollator accessible...

And the last paragraph, that describes, what you can see from which rock:

1 - village Rittersgrün

2 - mountain Hammerberg

3 - pumped storage plant Markersbach

4 - mountain Fichtelberg (highest one of German side of the mountain range)

5 - mountain Keilberg / Klinovec (highest one of the whole mountain range)

Viewing angles at the two rocks:

So the one in the south is the point with the log book, and the other one is the one, that is described as "30m down the hill on the right side"

And here you can also see, why the 1st path description says "Keep right" at the end - to find the path to the top of the rock formation you have to wald around it and turn right. Didn't make a picture of that, because there was a big poached deer coarpse there right in front of the path ....

Post scriptum:

The rock formation is at Czechia. The sheet of paper still states in its headline, that it's at CSR (which means Czechoslovakia) - this country was split into Czechia and Slovakia in 1992 ...... and the sheet of paper is from 2015 xD


  • WheelTrekker-INGWheelTrekker-ING Posts: 3,275 ✭✭✭✭✭

    To appeal a rejected nomination, click the "Appeal" button that it's at the top right in your first screenshot. They don't review rejected nominations in the forums.

  • BlauerRuepel-PGOBlauerRuepel-PGO Posts: 8 ✭✭

    This thread is created to use its linke in exact this appeal .... to deliver pictures and so on. I don't want to use dubious links to 3rd party websites.

  • BlauerRuepel-PGOBlauerRuepel-PGO Posts: 8 ✭✭

    The appeal was rejected ..... because Niantic couldn't find the rock formation, and that might be something we should discuss.

    Reconstruction of the rough location from supporting picture and similar pictures

    My supporting picture had to include the metal box, so it does only show parts of the nearby village. So let's use another picture from that location from wikipedia:

    (source, picture in detail, under the picture is stated, that it is taken from mount Taubenfels)

    So it's obviously the same village in the background and from both pictures you can say, that it's the same perspective.

    So now let's look at recognizable details from the pictures and compare them to the satelite map:

    and now let's confirm this by looking at a topographic height map: (source)

    And well, there is a high spot with steep mountainsides to allow a good view. And under the height-map-colofs you can see the details of Openstreetmap, and you can read there "Taubenfels".

    But nethertheless .... where is the rock formation?

    The problems, why you can't see the rock formation in the satellite view

    Here a sketch how that location looks like:

    The rock formation is the end of a high plateau. From south side not very high. A visitor only has to take 3 big steps (each above 50cm) and one can access the lookout point. So from one side it's only a few metres high, and the other side it's roughly as high as a full grown spruce tree, so let's say 30m ....

    But south of the rocks location are also full grown spruce trees, so there are two big problems:

    • the rock formation is in the shadow of trees, since Germany is at ~50° lattitude the trees always throw a shadow towards the rock
    • satelite images have a perspective error

    Last point can easily be proven by looking at how houses are displayed in satellite maps: you don't see only the roof. you see also the walls of the south side of the house.

    Reasons for this: satellite views are created from pictures of different satellites with different orbital radii. In a fast google search I found, that there are satellites from 700km above earths surface are involved, but also satellites with 28000km. Those with 700km can orbit the earth in any angle. But those with 28000km orbits (nearly geostationary orbits, similar to weather satellites) can't use all angels. They have to stay closer to the plane defined by earth and moon.

    So if we assume, that the perspective error angle towards our region is 20°, with a bit of trigonometry you can calculate, that a 30m high tree can hide 10m behind it. And that is, what is happening here.

    Nethertheless the map gives us a big hint, that there is a rock formation. On the rock and around it is less water, wo the trees there look more dry. In my sketch it's greyish, like in the satelite view:

    And if you still don't believe me ..... the next section will show some other Nia-verified rocks and compare satellite view and in-person-pictures.

    Other examples from the same mountain range and how they look like in the satellite view

    Albernauer Kanzel,12.65621

    What you should see here:

    • also a rock, that has is from one side normally accessible, and then steep downwards, so that you can see above the tree crowns. so comparable to Taubenfels
    • you should also see, that the portal picture looks way more spectatular than the map view
    • but: here the perspetive error of the satellites works for us, because north of the rock is higher than south of the rock
    • the trees around the rock also look more dry and greyish than the others

    Kleiner Hirschenstein

    (next to,12.570139 )

    This is an example of a mountain top rock formation with nearly no trees ...

    (source of pictures)

    In the satellite view it looks like this:

    Very boring .... and no hint of the rock formation.

    The first picture from above is taken from the location of the google marker, the second one is the view, when you walk on top of the rocks of the 1st picture ...



    Looks way more spectacular. But the satellite view is dissappointing, too. Even these high rise rocks, that are higher than the surrounding trees look way smaller on the satellite images ....

    And those also don't have the perspective error problem ....

  • BlauerRuepel-PGOBlauerRuepel-PGO Posts: 8 ✭✭

    @NianticAaron Since this became an Appeal-Appeal, please move it to the fitting section, I guess "Invalid wayspot appeals"

  • 29andCounting-PGO29andCounting-PGO Posts: 1,823 ✭✭✭✭✭

    There is no section of the forum to appeal rejected wayspots. That is what the appeal button is for.

  • BlauerRuepel-PGOBlauerRuepel-PGO Posts: 8 ✭✭

    Such things were already done in this forum, in rare cases, but it happened.

    And without the possibility to deliver additional pictures it's hopeless 🤷‍♂️

    Resubmission is also hopeless, because it ends always with "Pedestrian Access", "Natural Feature". "Temporary or seasonal display" and other bullsh1t reasons .... although that kind of wayspot should be an easy 5* no-brainer ....

  • BlauerRuepel-PGOBlauerRuepel-PGO Posts: 8 ✭✭

    One of my folks re-submitted this candidate with their ING account, and also appealed it, with links to this thread.


    What is going on there?

    I showed here, that this thing exists.

    • there was a triangulation, that showed this location.
    • there were different public accessible maps, that proof its existence
    • and I explained, why you can't see it directly on the satelite map (shadow of trees and problem with the perspective of the satellite, but nethertheless there are hints in the map: the dry trees)

    So I'm shocked, that they still reject a 6* no-brainer ....

Sign In or Register to comment.