Cycle Travel Question

Cycle-touring, Expeditions, Adventures, Major cycle routes NOT LeJoG (see other special board)
User avatar
andrew_s
Posts: 5276
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 9:29pm
Location: Gloucestershire

Re: Cycle Travel Question

Postby andrew_s » 30 Oct 2020, 10:52pm

It doesn't allow routing with no access. If you try to force it by putting the start or end on the non-permitted route, the marker just jumps on to the closest permitted route.

This was a problem on estate tracks in Scotland, that are, or were, frequently tagged as footpaths, with no access permission for cycles, but it seems that there's been either a bulk change of the tags, or that cycle.travel is now allowing routing on all Scottish paths.
[edit] It's retagging: c.t still won't use the track down the side of Loch Garry.

Interestingly, the unrideable sections are showing up as cycleways :)
Example: Glen Brown, between Dorback Lodge and Tomintoul, on the cycle.travel recommended route.
Image
You follow the valley bottom, crossing the stream multiple times, then turn right and thrash up the hillside just after the trees end.
It's been used by a land rover occasionally, but not consistently enough that these's much of a defined track.

francovendee
Posts: 1602
Joined: 5 May 2009, 6:32am

Re: Cycle Travel Question

Postby francovendee » 31 Oct 2020, 8:27am

There are a lot of cycle tracks/routes signposted here in the Vendee and are all OK to ride if at times a bit rough.
All routing apps avoid a perfectly good track that crosses a small stream via a wide wooden bridge.
I can see the track as a dashed line but all apps refuse to use it although it is part of the VendeeVelo network and sign posted.
I've tried it on Cycle Travel and it's the same. There must be something in the mapping that prevents apps using this track?

Richard Fairhurst
Posts: 1604
Joined: 2 Mar 2008, 4:57pm
Location: Charlbury, Oxfordshire

Re: Cycle Travel Question

Postby Richard Fairhurst » 31 Oct 2020, 9:52am

Can you give the coordinates (lat/long) for the track?
cycle.travel - maps, journey-planner, route guides and city guides

francovendee
Posts: 1602
Joined: 5 May 2009, 6:32am

Re: Cycle Travel Question

Postby francovendee » 31 Oct 2020, 4:21pm

Richard Fairhurst wrote:Can you give the coordinates (lat/long) for the track?

46.6486,-1.8496
46.664,-1.8454.
You can work it out that there is a more direct route than the apps shows.
It's really odd as it is signposted and quite a number of people use it. The small river the track crosses has a nice bridge spanning it not stepping stones or a ford. It's no problem if you follow the signs but curious why apps don't pick it up.

Angstrom
Posts: 76
Joined: 21 Nov 2018, 6:57am

Re: Cycle Travel Question

Postby Angstrom » 16 Nov 2020, 4:53pm

Hello,

I use BikePGX, as advised by Richard. I don't understand why importing a GPX file in BikeGPX from CT dos not work.

Strangely, BikeGPX only imports from url. It does work from other site that offer sharing a route via url, but it doesn't from CT. I have imported successfully to other sites from CT via the copied URL so this is very odd.

I know this is more a BikeGPX question than CT, but there might be a work-around that I haven't found out which could be shared.

Thank you.

PS: I have found out that downloading the file to my Android phone, I can then open and choose BikeGPX as an app with which to open the file. So it can work, with one extra step.

Richard Fairhurst
Posts: 1604
Joined: 2 Mar 2008, 4:57pm
Location: Charlbury, Oxfordshire

Re: Cycle Travel Question

Postby Richard Fairhurst » 16 Nov 2020, 7:36pm

Angstrom wrote:I know this is more a BikeGPX question than CT, but there might be a work-around that I haven't found out which could be shared.


Curious. I've just emailed the BikeGPX creator to see if he can shed any light.

francovendee wrote:
Richard Fairhurst wrote:Can you give the coordinates (lat/long) for the track?

46.6486,-1.8496
46.664,-1.8454.
You can work it out that there is a more direct route than the apps shows.
It's really odd as it is signposted and quite a number of people use it. The small river the track crosses has a nice bridge spanning it not stepping stones or a ford. It's no problem if you follow the signs but curious why apps don't pick it up.


In cycle.travel's case it's because the surface quality for the track hasn't been marked in OSM, and nor has the signposting. cycle.travel is a bit suspicious of unmarked tracks in France as they can be thoroughly uncyclable (and there's often a quiet lane alternative!).

I've just made the change in OSM based on your information so cycle.travel should be a bit happier to route across it at the next map update. And I now have a quieter and faster server so map updates can be a little more regular! :D
cycle.travel - maps, journey-planner, route guides and city guides

francovendee
Posts: 1602
Joined: 5 May 2009, 6:32am

Re: Cycle Travel Question

Postby francovendee » 17 Nov 2020, 8:22am

Thanks Richard, It may help some souls avoid the road.
You're right about tracks here having mixed surfaces. One time we followed a Google route that took us to a stretch of marshy ground which stretched for at least half a mile. We tried it pushing the bikes but the water kept getting deeper so we turned back and went a different way.
Other times a track turns out to be as smooth as a road, you just can't tell.

Angstrom
Posts: 76
Joined: 21 Nov 2018, 6:57am

Re: Cycle Travel Question

Postby Angstrom » 17 Nov 2020, 8:57am

Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Angstrom wrote:I know this is more a BikeGPX question than CT, but there might be a work-around that I haven't found out which could be shared.


Curious. I've just emailed the BikeGPX creator to see if he can shed any light.


I hope you get an answer. I emailed him twice but never got an answer. I volunteered to help translate in French his very good app.
francovendee wrote:
Richard Fairhurst wrote:Can you give the coordinates (lat/long) for the track?

46.6486,-1.8496
46.664,-1.8454.
You can work it out that there is a more direct route than the apps shows.
It's really odd as it is signposted and quite a number of people use it. The small river the track crosses has a nice bridge spanning it not stepping stones or a ford. It's no problem if you follow the signs but curious why apps don't pick it up.

In cycle.travel's case it's because the surface quality for the track hasn't been marked in OSM, and nor has the signposting. cycle.travel is a bit suspicious of unmarked tracks in France as they can be thoroughly uncyclable (and there's often a quiet lane alternative!).

AS an enhancement to deal with these cases, it might be a good idea to have CT consider the length of a doubtful passage. I find that for those who find CT particularly suited to their style of riding, getting off the bike for a very short passage in case it isn't comfortably ridable isn't so much a problem, if one is being properly warned of it (there are definite cases where this would NOT be doable, such as tandems, tricycles, children, heavy loads, etc.)
It might be possible to add a special icon for such cases with a warning sign and brief words of caution. By definition, it would not be a long stretch of path (I realize how fuzzy this could be, with different meanings for different people).

Just an idea.