New route-planner!

[Richard Fairhurst]

TimC - it works ok on my iPad (albeit an old iPad 1), though the limitations of the touch interface mean that you can't just drag the route as you would with a mouse: you have to click the route to 'Add via point', then drag that. What are you finding doesn't work?

[TimC]

Ah, thanks Richard - yes, that was the issue that I found. I'll have another go and see how I get on. Not that I'd usually plan on an iPad (too difficult to connect to my Garmin), it was just what I happened to be using at the time!

[andyoxon]

Andy - if you register, there's a little miles/km toggle on your user page. Good idea about the National Parks - added to the todo list!
...

Thanks, I had registered - but missed the profile setting.  I see your site made the news on road.cc.   

[T42]

T42 - Leaflet is brilliant; one of those rare bits of JavaScript that it's a joy to work with. It only does the presentation, though, not the actual route-finding... that's a whole bunch of other stuff using a highly customised version of the OSRM routing software, and a big server somewhere in a datacentre in Germany. I'm considering adding France but it may need a server upgrade...

Cloudmade was pretty good to use, too; the API design was almost exactly the way I'd have done it myself, so using it was pretty nearly intuitive.

Just had a look at OSRM. I haven't used C++ for 10 years - things could get a bit grimy.

[teethgrinder]

What I think would be very handy is that once a route has been plotted, the off road sections along cycleways came up in another colour and also the footpaths came up in another. That way I could drag and drop the route to avoid (or include) footpaths and dodgy cycleways.

[Richard Fairhurst]

I've just added a TCX export option - click the usual 'GPS' button, and then select TCX from the popup dialogue.

But... I only have an old Legend HCx and that doesn't speak TCX. I've tested the files with an online TCX viewer and it seems to work fine, but any feedback from people who actually have GPS units that can read a TCX would be very welcome.

@teethgrinder: nice idea, will think about that one!

[Richard Fairhurst]

Bit of an update!

http://cycle.travel/map now does France, by popular demand. Oh, and Ireland. And Spain. And Italy. And, ok, the rest of Western Europe too.

Same recipe - it doesn't like busy roads, it tries to avoid hills, it quite likes waymarked cycle routes, it prefers good surfaces. But all of this in moderation, so it won't send you 20 miles out of the way just to avoid 200m on a busy road. Routes are draggable, saveable, printable and GPX/TCXable as before.

And here's Mont Ventoux:

[Euan Uzami]

You say it prefers good surfaces, is it possible for it to route down a road that is / becomes not so good a surface?

[Richard Fairhurst]

Yep - so if a short length of unsurfaced track will save a long detour on a busy road, it'll prefer the track.

It aims to find a good all-purpose route for the leisure (not sports) cyclist, with the idea that if you don't like the route it chooses, you can drag the line away from it. I figure the tarmac-or-nothing brigade probably use Strava anyway.

[Euan Uzami]

Yep - so if a short length of unsurfaced track will save a long detour on a busy road, it'll prefer the track.

It aims to find a good all-purpose route for the leisure (not sports) cyclist, with the idea that if you don't like the route it chooses, you can drag the line away from it. I figure the tarmac-or-nothing brigade probably use Strava anyway.

O.k., you try going from Hawes to Grassington via the route osm on cycling mode (or Google cycling mode I can't remember but one of the two) and then come back and reconsider your membership of the tarmac brigade

[Euan Uzami]

On a road bike that is.

[Pingu]

General rules can't hope to match local knowledge.

[tom_e]

Or personal preference of the rider(s) in this case.  A family on hybrids may much prefer a route Ben is maligning.  To be fair, when you point it at a route like that (Grassington to Malham tarn*) it does say:

"Total length: 7.3mi (48 minutes). Includes 3mi unsurfaced (estimate)."


* - Not sure if you meant this one, but I tried Grassington to Hawes, and Richard's creation wouldn't suggest an off-road route.  Not even if I gave Bainbridge as the destination.  You pretty much have to stick the destination pointer deliberately at the tip of the off-road route there to get it to take it.

[andrew_s]

When I tried Hawes to Grassington, it came up with the obvious road route over Fleet Moss, and the minor road between Kettlewell and Grassington.

It will suggest poor routes though - for Aviemore to Braemar, it takes you through the Lairig Ghru, which is positively dangerous if you don't know what you are doing.
Interestingly, it also leaves the Aviemore-Glenmore road via a fairly major ford and little used track a mile or so after Coylumbridge, rather than taking the obvious well surfaced track from Coylumbridge via the Cairngorm Club footbridge.

It would be an improvement if the Geograph photos could be sorted to show those closest to the click point first. On the Lairig Ghru route, the Piccadilly signpost appears first even if you click down by Corrour bothy, 8.25 miles away. Many of the more recent photos have quite good locations attached, so it should be possible to put them in some reasonable order.

[Richard Fairhurst]

Rural Scotland is challenging! The issue is that B roads and non-primary A roads in Scotland tend to have (often very) light traffic, whereas in much of the UK they can be roads you'd want to avoid.

So, for example, the A939 via Tomintoul would be a perfectly enjoyable road for cycling, whereas (say) the B4215 out of Gloucester is a horrid rat-run with fast traffic. But the latter's a B road, so should be better. That's the sort of thing that really confuses a router.

The solution is to get traffic data into the router and to override the road classification based on car traffic levels. I know how I want to do it and where I'll get it from, but it's not going to be a quick job. In the meantime I think I have a short-term fix in mind for the Lairig Ghu route... stay tuned.

Geograph location sorting is a good idea - have added to the todo list.

[andyoxon]

I was thinking that a 'reverse route' option for the circular route function may be handy/ save a bit of editing e.g. if planner picked anticlockwise and you prefer clockwise.  How does it choose direction OOI?

[Cudzoziemiec]

I've just found this and I'd like to say I like it (the cycle.travel route planner) a lot.  Although I haven't actually used it on the bike yet.  But the routes it's suggested are pretty sensible IMO, matching pretty well routes I'd take, which gives me confidence it would work in areas I don't know - which is, after all, the real use of it. I especially like the facility to print out a 'route sheet' - it looks clearly written, too.  The city guides are another attractive feature.

My only criticism would be the map itself; it's too grey. More importantly, I can't find a key for it. Against this, it is pretty clear and it does have both contour lines and shading.

[Cudzoziemiec]

Rural Scotland is challenging! The issue is that B roads and non-primary A roads in Scotland tend to have (often very) light traffic, whereas in much of the UK they can be roads you'd want to avoid.

So, for example, the A939 via Tomintoul would be a perfectly enjoyable road for cycling, whereas (say) the B4215 out of Gloucester is a horrid rat-run with fast traffic. But the latter's a B road, so should be better. That's the sort of thing that really confuses a router.

The solution is to get traffic data into the router and to override the road classification based on car traffic levels. I know how I want to do it and where I'll get it from, but it's not going to be a quick job. In the meantime I think I have a short-term fix in mind for the Lairig Ghu route... stay tuned.

Geograph location sorting is a good idea - have added to the todo list.

And to add to the confusion, the A38 out of Gloucester - in both directions - is quieter and more pleasant than many of the area's B roads.

[Pingu]

So, for example, the A939 via Tomintoul would be a perfectly enjoyable road for cycling

Indeed, just ask anyone who's done the Snow Roads 

[Richard Fairhurst]

I've just added andrew_s's idea of ordering the photos so the nearest to the mouse-click shows up first.

Cudzoziemiec - really glad you like it. There's a 'key' link at the top right (although the key is a bit broken in older browsers, which I need to fix).

Andyoxon - reverse route is a good idea and on the list to do! Essentially the circular routes are a bit of a hack: I ask OSRM (the underlying routing engine) for an A-B route and two B-A routes, and then put the first-choice A-B route together with the second-choice B-A route. But it (mostly) works well.

[Cudzoziemiec]

Ah, I'd missed the 'key' link - it's easy to overlook, being in with the copyright info. Perhaps it could be moved to the top bar? Perhaps not a priority though. But having found it, I do like the distinction between 'Gravel or compacted surface' and 'Unpaved or muddy surface' - very useful IMO. 

[Cudzoziemiec]

PS. I do think this is of far wider interest than just to those who use GPS - I see it as a mapping facility which works very well without GPS. A bit like, say, bikehike, but better thanks to the 'route sheet'.

[andrew_s]

In the meantime I think I have a short-term fix in mind for the Lairig Ghu route... stay tuned.

Is there any sort of OSM classification on footpaths like there is on tracks?
There's a big difference between a footpath where you push because cycling's not allowed (3 or 4 mph) and one as rough as the Lairig Ghru, where you'd be doing well to reach 1 mph over the top.

[Richard Fairhurst]

Is there any sort of OSM classification on footpaths like there is on tracks?

You can add a surface= tag - here's the most common values in the UK - or just the same tracktype= tag you'd use for a track. cycle.travel takes both into account.

PS. I do think this is of far wider interest than just to those who use GPS - I see it as a mapping facility which works very well without GPS. A bit like, say, bikehike, but better thanks to the 'route sheet'.

I hope so! I tend to use it without a GPS too - just print out the PDF and stuff it in a pocket. Do tell your friends.

[andrew_s]

Do you think "surface=boulders" would be appropriate?