Cycling UK Forum

Forgot to mention that Google Earth, being fully 3D, is excellent for showing the full effect of routes through mountains

Most road maps are copyright, and you can't put copies of the images on your own website.

You can, however, add your own lines on top of other people's maps, using Google Maps/Yahoo Maps and similar systems.

I'd recommend one of:

1. Download Google Earth from http://earth.google.com, turn on the roads layers, and then trace your route. Save as a KMZ file and add that as a download on your website.
2. Use Google Maps at http://maps.google.co.uk, click on the new "My Maps" tab, and trace your route. Save as KML, or publish the link to your map using the options to the top right of the map.
3. Use other mapping software, such as MemoryMap, although this will cost money to buy.

If you're a CTC member you could also use the CTC mapping site at http://www.ctc-maps.org.uk. This has a basic method for tracing your route, but at the moment it doesn't handle routes with many points very well. Instead you can easily upload in KML format from one of the options above. Google Earth is the best for handling very large amounts of route data.

For a really neat solution you could embed a Google Map in your blog, so you have a zoomable interactive map of your route Give me a shout if you need help with this.

I hope this helps!

PeterSeaman wrote:(1) Since CTC-MAPS does not recognise a route it displays the waypoints in no particular order. Although I can re-order the waypoints using CTC-MAPS this would be very time consuming. It would be nice if CTC-MAPS accepted a route and re-ordered the waypoints automatically.

The waypoints are imported into ctc-maps in the same order that they appear in Google Earth (and I've checked: this is the case for your route). The import is flexible, and no folder structure is currently required. I might be able to do this more cleverly if a pre-defined folder structure is found in the file.

On the other hand, there is a similar issue with Tracklogs waypoints, which have no defined order. I may have to locate the nearest tracklog point for each waypoint, and provide an option to use that information to sort the waypoints, which is what Tracklogs seems to do.

PeterSeaman wrote:(2) In the DOWNLOAD section you can download to Google Earth but the waypoint (placemark) names are then shown on the GE map as generated names such as Wpt00129, not the original names in the file I uploaded. Would it be possible to use these names instead of generated names?

Yes, probably. We went through rather a lot of iterations deciding on which fields should be included in the database, ranging from just one ("instruction") to many ("Instruction","placename","gps label","direction","road-name","towards",... etc.) and I think it might be time for another review now that we have a better idea of what's useful.

PeterSeaman wrote:(3) The waypoint names are shown in the INSTRUCTIONS tab but they are not in the correct order and they are not (necessarily) instructions.

The order should be as given in the KML/KMZ file. As to whether they're instructions or not, there isn't an automatic way to discover this. I suppose an option would be to rename the "Instructions" tab "Waypoints"...

PeterSeaman wrote:(4) The MAP tab does not show the waypoints at all, it just shows the tracklog.

There is a soft limit of about 100 waypoint icons for the map to behave well on most computers, so if there are more than this in the view they are suppressed. You can zoom in to see them.

PeterSeaman wrote:(5) When you use a link in the download section it is not clear what you are going to get.

This is a similar problem to the "instruction" vs. "waypoint" issue. At the moment the links are shown whenever the system thinks there is something worth downloading, but this isn't always sensible. I may need to add another manual setting so people can say whether their waypoints can be considered "instructions" or not, but even this is a little vague.

PeterSeaman wrote:My ideal data for navigating by GPS would be a route consisting primarily of village names (but not every turn and not "instructions") and a pre-recorded tracklog. In this way the GPS will show at all times the distance and ETA to the both the ext village and the final destination, and the tracklog will continuously show the precise trail to follow.

That's very useful to know. It's the opposite of other views I've heard, where they want every turn instruction and no tracklogs. It may be that we could have user options to say what should be included in the GPX download. At the moment everything is, with the idea that you can switch off the bits you don't want before transferring it onto your GPS unit.

PeterSeaman wrote:CTC-MAPS is currently oriented to printed instructions and is fine if used in that way but for me it is not yet ideal for storing and using GPS data.

The original spec for the project was just to index the existing CTC paper route sheets better, and make them more easily searchable! Then the GPS and digital mapping thing got a hold... I hope that, given time, the database will prove to be useful to both GPS and non-GPS users.

Please do let me know of other problems with the new CTC routes system - with the experience and knowledge of the CTC membership it should become one of the leading systems on the internet.

vernon wrote:I'd like to use accurate plotted routes from the CTC site but when they consist of a single straight line joining the start and the destination, they make a mockery of the service and undermine the raison d'etre.

Many of the routes have been added to the site from the 600 or so paper-based routes from the old CTC route sheet list. It will take time to enter all of the waypoints for these, let alone trace the actual tracklines.

Even without the waypoints, we have tried to get each route's starting location correct, so searching for routes based on a location will work reasonably well - a new way to find routes that wasn't possible with just a list of paper documents.

Of course, if anyone would like to help they can download the existing route description and digitise it and upload it again for the benefit of other CTC members

CJ wrote:Can anyone explain to me why one cannot have a mixture of information-rich waypoints (for the junctions) interspersed with lots of simple trackpoints (for accurate indication of direction and distance) in one file? Or is there a format that does allow this mixture of points?

As far as I know all GPS files can contain both waypoints and tracklines, and the open GPX format certainly supports both. In fact GPX has three types of point: waypoints (points of interest/turn locations, no order information), route points (turn locations, with a specified order), and trackpoints (the detailed shape of the actual path taken).

As GPS units get larger memory capacity I'd expect to see more people making use of tracklines (most usefully combined with background mapping), but historically they have only really been used to record routes taken, and not used for guidance.

Or toothpaste? (which is quite abrasive, and is excellent for getting crayon marks off wallpaper )

My thinking is that it's all about smooth pedalling, a bit like a tandem.

On an upright the bike can, and does, move backwards and forwards underneath you when climbing (especially if you're out of the saddle). This helps to even out the pedalling force: you sort-of accelerate the bike up the hill and then your body follows after it. Your body moves up the hill smoothly, but the bike proceeds in a series of jerks to match the jerks of the pedalling forces.

On a recumbent you are much more rigidly attached to the bike, so you feel the whole weight of bike+body as you push on the pedals. This is both demoralising mentally, and also probably less efficient for your muscles. Keeping the pedals rotating as fast as possible, and moving your feet in circles rather than pushing, helps (at least in my experience).

I find the same effect on a tandem (leads to the classic "tandems are slow up hills") but even then you have some movement between the bike and riders fore and aft as you climb.

My guess is the outfit that the poor lower-than-minimum-wage spammers work for has decided this forum isn't worth spending time on. They're busy spamming other ones that don't have such good moderators and spam busters, where their lovely links stay put unmolested for the search engines to find

Recumbents vary a great deal in their handling and comfort, so you really need to try as many out as you can to see which you prefer.

Roughly though, a trike is more like a go-cart than a bicycle. Much easier to ride at slow speed (and starting) up hills, but doesn't "glide" around the corners like a bike (you get thrown from side to side on corners on a trike).

You'll also need to decide between long and short-wheelbase recumbent bikes, and under-seat or over-seat steering (or joystick in the case of the Windcheetah).

Find a dealer that does test rides, and spend at least a day on as many as possible of them to see which you prefer. Or get several...

essexman wrote:Old brownie is an economist at heart. I'm sure he couild be convinced by the overall economic benfits of cycling.

Someone pointed out that he makes more from vehicle excise duty and fuel taxes than taxes on cyclists, so from a short-term revenue-raising point of view he's more likely to favour motor vehicles

OTOH cycling does help the economy on a broader scale, and we're running out of our own home-grown fuel so reducing reliance on oil and gas is a Good Thing for the UK longer-term.

Don't hold your breath, but the cogs are in motion to allow free listings in Cyclists Welcome at some point in the (not too distant) future. Then we should be able to build a pretty comprehensive database of pubs and teashops - cyclists are the ones who know where they all are!

If you click on the "Who is Online" heading you can get a rough idea of who is looking at what.

GeoffL wrote:Unfortunately, I don't think that what you want can be done except at enormous data storage cost and possibly by infringing on your privacy.

Yes, GeoffL is right.

GeoffL wrote:I do wish we could have an option to return all posts in the previous day ordered by submission time descending.

It seems that you can't do this in phpBB at the moment. Shouldn't be too difficult to organise though, and might be useful. I'll add it to the ToDo list.

Mick F wrote:there were 220 on line at 9.40 am today! Perhaps it was genuine.

The forum is getting 22,000+ unique visitors per month, or about 720 visitors per day. There are around 1,700 visits per day.

The most popular visiting times are lunchtime and late evening. The site sends more than 14,000 pages per hour between 8 in the morning and midnight, the other hours are much quieter.

Mick F wrote:I see that there were 185 users online early on Monday morning. Has this anything to do with the large amount spam I removed at that time?

Quite possibly. People in the East will have been up and about then, and I wouldn't be surprised if the spam came from very-low-paid workers in less-wealthy countries.