So, we have another poll for a picture included on the wiki for Key:sac_scale - OpenStreetMap Wiki.
Is the following:
- Demanding alpine hiking (T5)
- Difficult alpine hiking (T6)
- More difficult than that; is not covered by sac_scale
0
voters
Disclaimer probably needed, here. Through the recent discussions I’ve learned that it is hard to grade the whole path, so we should outline the process for that.
The other grading systems take the most difficult part and assign the grade to the whole route. The detailed topos exist, however, which detail grades by section. So, technically, both options (macro and micro) are available, although separated.
As far as the route above goes, this section is not that hard. Probably a general rule of thumb would be that - if one can spare a moment to take out a phone and make a photo, the section is not that bad. However, there were extremely exposed 2+ sections on that route, worse than this
that were 15m high. Unfortunately, not the best time/place for taking photos. Don’t have GoPro, either.
So, if we take only the photo, and use the approximate rule “T5=1, T6=2”, this would easily be T5. But the whole route is T6.
Also, at this section the exposure is quite high (still not extreme, as in the coming section) but that does not make it technically difficult. I guess, all routes marked with UIAA have relatively high exposure compared to the SAC scale, which focuses on hiking.
Edit: This is the most difficult section (photo from Bergsteigen):
So, maybe it really is the one on the photo above.
1 Like
Thanks for the context. Indeed, the difference between the picture that the poll is about and your last one is length of the climbing. Though from the photo it is difficult to distinguish where climbing starts. But I will trust you on it that it feels like climbing and so it is T6 (I can see that a picture from profil showing how vertical it is can only be taken with a drone).
Here is a photo from below:
The route is going from the left side to the peak. Although it does not follow the ridge the whole way. The upper part goes on the green part, goes behind the peak, and then back up.
1 Like
“clearly not highway=path”
3 Likes
BTW how is it mapped on OSM, if it is mapped?
Yes, it is mapped as a T6 path.
I’ve also sent the topo link earlier:
https://www.bergsteigen.com/touren/klettern/traunstein-ostgrat/
47.87323° N, 13.84695° E
1 Like
No idea if the people back then, when both highway=path and sac_scale=* where created ever dreamt of mapping a path there, but this is where openstreetmapping stands now. Here to where SAC got mentioned for the first time, as far as I can tell, https://www.mail-archive.com/talk-de@openstreetmap.org/msg07107.html The problem that was meant to solve certainly does not substantiate that.
But there were some T6 mappings right from the start, osm tag history
Why I voted as I did vote:
In my opinion, the picture shows Severe exposure. Difficult craggy terrain. Literally taken from the definition in the Wiki table. Anybody sees that different, please quote this paragraph.
Secondly, the person in the picture clearly aims for three points of fixture, which is a classic determinant for UIAA II, and at the time the osm sac_scale was conceived, that was not in grade five.
BTW: The SAC® calls grade 5 difficult-alpine-hiking, whereas in OSM that term references grade 6 of the SAC scale.
Oh, don’t worry. I do that out of habit. 
During RfC for highway=scramble, I was told that in SE-Asia Buddhist monks do UIAA IV hands free on their daily errands, e.g. when walking to school. Perhaps you are just not in enough for spiritual levitation to stop bothering deep falls?
1 Like