Author Topic: Google 'classic' maps discontinued?  (Read 12644 times)

mmmmartin

  • BPB 1/1: PBP 0/1
    • FNRttC
Re: Google 'classic' maps discontinued?
« Reply #50 on: 27 May, 2016, 02:18:35 pm »
helpful posts ^^^
think i might have a look at Strava for planning purposes.
Besides, it wouldn't be audacious if success were guaranteed.

Re: Google 'classic' maps discontinued?
« Reply #51 on: 27 May, 2016, 08:56:12 pm »
The wording of the motion passed at the 11/15 AGM included:

"Under mandatory routing riders follow the route set by the event organiser*, subject only to dealing with any eventualities that might occur such as road closures or other factors which might render sections of the route inappropriate. Riders deviating from the route will be expected to rejoin the route at the earliest available opportunity and/or make general progress in line with the route in accordance with the published guidance for the event. So for example, for a regular Permanent with AAA points riders might be expected to follow the set route exactly, whereas for DIY Permanents some minor variation might be allowed subject to the rider demonstrably progressing in accordance with the registered route."

*for a DIY, that's the route the rider entered for.


Kim

  • Timelord
    • Fediverse
Re: Google 'classic' maps discontinued?
« Reply #52 on: 27 May, 2016, 09:09:27 pm »
helpful posts ^^^
think i might have a look at Strava for planning purposes.

Having played around with it a bit, it seems to be a useful antidote to things like Cyclestreets that know about cycle facilities, but not whether they're any good.  It also makes sensible decisions if I feed it unavoidably horrible journeys across the centre of Birmingham, which most planners struggle with.

Obviously the MAMIL roots of the dataset show up in some places.  It's very much biased towards fast vehicular cyclists.

Re: Google 'classic' maps discontinued?
« Reply #53 on: 27 May, 2016, 09:44:37 pm »
I've taken out a gpxeditor subscription which gives me 'shortest route' routing.   It still does the occasional marginal-short-cut-over-mountainous lane-when-the-main-road-is-easier-and-quicker thing, but it doesn't consider footpaths as within its remit.

Re: Google 'classic' maps discontinued?
« Reply #54 on: 28 May, 2016, 11:11:43 am »
^^^^
I like gpxeditor and I think I'm gonna take the subscription, any idea how the elevation planner compares to when ridden?

Re: Google 'classic' maps discontinued?
« Reply #55 on: 28 May, 2016, 11:47:24 am »
It uses a contour counting method from the Ordnance Survey data.
Seems to (usually) give a significantly higher figure for the ascent than things like BikeHike & RWGPS which use SRTM data.
And, of course doesn't work in parts foreign.

Re: Google 'classic' maps discontinued?
« Reply #56 on: 29 May, 2016, 04:24:12 pm »
OOI, Elevation data from this pm's 28km ride:

Strava default gpx upload = 81m
Strava gpx "with barometer" * = 161m
Strava route plan = 142m

Ridewgps default gpx upload = 161m
Ridewgps gpx "with barometer" = 161m
Ridewgps 'replace elevation data' = 139m
Ridewgps route plan = 143m

Garmin Connect default = 76m
Garmin Connect "with barometer" = 76m

creator="Etrex with barometer", instead of creator="MapSource 6.16.3".  Etrex = Vista HCx
Cycle and recycle.   SS Wilson