GAIA Routes are wildly inaccurate regarding ascent and descent

looking at the elevation profile on your first picture, I can see you start at 4200 or so, and goes up to about 8300 – 4100 feet elevation gain

I can see lots of little ups and downs.  I wonder if that adds up to the extra 5000 feet?

Not that that helps you.  If those little ups and downs are just measurement error, the software should average it out, but not if there were real ups and downs.

I don’t look at that elevation gain number because of that, but it’s usually just a small error.  I just look at the max and min elevation and subtract.  Add in other major, real ups and downs.

Maybe there was more elevation measurement error in your data for some reason.

Caltopo has always served me much better than Gaia.  Here is a track created by Caltopo of your route with its profile.  Its quality speaks for itself.

+1 for Caltopo as well, I think they are best in the business.

Does elevation gain/loss show in GAIA when .gpx file is imported from Caltopo.

Surprised the master class makes no mention of this bug. It’s a 100% variance, makes calculations for energy miles impossible.

Interesting….my route is over 12 miles, the caltopo shows six if I am reading it correctly.

Looks like your Gaia is round trip. The CalTopo that Authur posted is one way, so double it and it matches.

Like Jerry pointed out, you can see the problem with the Gaia elevation profile. Instead of being a smooth line, like that trail would be for the most part, it shows a sawtooth pattern with a bunch of small ups and downs all the way through. This is probably what’s causing the problem. My guess would be that it has something to do with how it snaps to the trail. In that terrain, if it’s off just a little bit, it will cause a pretty big difference.

I’ve tried to like Gaia but always go back to CalTopo.

Yeah I can believe what you’re saying. I just am shocked that these up and downs lead to 100% more elevation gain or loss.

I’m also really surprised that I don’t see a lot of posts about it and Ryan is including it in the master class as a tool for trek planning. I’ll start playing around with Cal topo tomorrow and see if I can get the elevation to pass from caltopo over to Gaia. I’m a heavy user of Gaia based on national park layers from NatGeo

I have the exact same problem. Mileage in GAIA is spot-on but it grossly overstates elevation gain. I cannot figure out why.

lol…. I still count the contour lines  :)))

Mileage in GAIA is spot-on but it grossly overstates elevation gain. I cannot figure out why.

Solution offered from someone who uses neither – but who has spent a lifetime writing software.
Simply: software bug.

Cheers

I think this is a variation on the coastline problem: the higher the resolution you measure, the longer the length. Gaia is trying to measure too fine of detail. It is odd that they don’t appear to have that problem when measuring distance travelled. Their smoothing function must not be implemented properly for net elevation.

Sounds right, I am surprised that it is this egregious (100% more than actual) and that it is not widely discussed. GAIA support doesn’t acknowledge the issue is this severe.

I figured its a bug or something wrong with the algorithm. If I use the GAIA app on my phone to record a track, it’s pretty accurate. But if I use the computer to plan a route, elevation is wildly off…often by 1000+ feet for every 4000-5000 actual.

That’s the impression I am getting as well. My only use for GAIA is as a planning tool for multi-day backcountry trips. Elevation information directly informs my planning of route and camping spots.

GAIA is even included as the preferred planning tool in the route planning master class. Anyone know how to @RyanJordan to see if he is aware?

I’m fairly proficient with it…Searched high and low to see if it was something I’m doing wrong in my settings, but I can’t get beyond it. Maybe I’m still missing something quite simple?

Not great given I’m paying for this app. Everything else about it I like. But if this can’t get resolved I’ll likely move to another platform. Would also love to hear if Ryan is aware of this given he’s teaching it.

Maybe it’s a bug inherent in certain versions so not everyone sees it?

Take a look at the thread Elevation Profile Sampling Intervals and the notes on gpsvisualizer.com that explain how sampling intervals and signal wandering affect the reported elevation gain of a track. Your issue is with a route, rather than a track, so it’s not signal wandering. But the way that your route waypoints hit the DEM may be giving you spurious ups and downs that increase the calculated net elevation gain. BTW, contour counting will usually underestimate the real net elevation gain, because it misses ups and downs that are smaller than the contour interval.

Does the DEM info show up in a route file exported from Caltopo to Gaia GPS? I use Caltopo for route planning, Gaia for real time trail tracking.

As far as I can tell DEM data is not included in gpx files exported from Caltopo. 

In the last module of the Gaia GPS Master Class, Module 19: Live Q&A with Gaia GPS, I think they talk about how elevation data can be buggy with the Gaia dev. The example they show might even be from the Grand Canyon.

I added a feature request to get elevation data included in the gpx export in Caltopo. I imagine the more people upvote it, the better the chance it will get implemented.

Add your vote: https://help.caltopo.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/12231482991771-Include-Elevation-Data-When-Exporting-a-GPX-File

Thanks Breau. I will vote that link! We might need a separate post for it.

SDVanman, you may want to specifically ask Gaia support to forward/escalate your issue to the devs as a bug/something that needs to be addressed. Asking for that probably won’t get things sorted out quickly, but it could help for future trips. Support may also decline to escalate, but it can’t hurt.

Typically, the more people make a fuss and ask to get it escalated, the higher the odds something gets fixed.

“I added a feature request to get elevation data included in the gpx export in Caltopo. I imagine the more people upvote it, the better the chance it will get implemented.”

Why should a company who does is right, Caltopo, support a company that doesn’t do it right?

Elevation data isn’t just to import in Gaia. Lots of devices and software use gpx files.

I have contacted GAIA support twice in an attempt to escalate with no response.

Appreciate the Caltopo suggestion as it seems to be MUCH more accurate regarding elevation change in plotting routes. I love the GAIA NatGeo map layers but this is a deal breaker for me, I will not be renewing my subscription.

I am really surprised that this elevation gain/loss data is functionally useless and that GAIA continues to be included in the master class series without a follow-up/update post from someone at BPL warning users of potential 100% inaccuracies.