How to prevent A-road avoidance!?

[Euan Uzami]

Right, I've identified the problem with my Garmin eTrex Vista as to why it is 'unreliable' in follow roads mode. It's become quite obvious to me that it hates A-roads, and will do anything to divert me off an A-road.
To such an extent that I am going along a main road, and there is a village adjacent to the road, which I haven't told it I want to go to at all or put a course point in that village, then it will quite happily pick this route:


I've had a look in "Setup -> Routing -> Follow road options" and it is currently set on "Calculate routes for: Bicycle" (there are others, such as 'car/motorcycle', 'truck', 'delivery', 'pedestrian', etc) and there are avoidances, which are 'toll roads', 'unpaved roads', 'u-turns', 'toll roads', 'highways'.
Only u-turns and unpaved roads are checked.
What does 'highways' mean - is that very major A-roads, or is it really minor roads/'green lanes?
I thought if I could set it to calculate routes for "Car", but then avoid motorways, this would solve the problem - but it doesn't seem to have an avoidance for m-ways.

Anyone else found or managed to solve this problem?

[Manotea]

When cycling I have mine set for 'Delivery'.

[frankly frankie]

Even 'Delivery' will take you off decent direct roads when out of town.   But it seems the best choice when in towns.  In open country I think 'car' is better.

Highways [edit: is Motorways] but does seem to include some trunk roads.  I often need to cycle along sections of the A6 (not even dual carriageway) near where I live and 'avoid highways' will try to take me off there, even if the vehicle type is set to car.

I wouldn't have 'avoid U-turns' checked, on a bike.
And I've heard (don't know if this is true) that if you check 'avoid toll roads' you blank out the whole of London ...

[Manotea]

Even 'Delivery' will take you off decent direct roads when out of town.   But it seems the best choice when in towns.  In open country I think 'car' is better.

Highways does seem to include some trunk roads.  I often need to cycle along sections of the A6 near where I live and 'avoid highways' will try to take me off there, even if the vehicle type is set to car.

I wouldn't have 'avoid U-turns' checked, on a bike.
And I've heard (don't know if this is true) that if you check 'avoid toll roads' you blank out the whole of London ...

Remind me to tell you of the occaision when the AA route planner made me drive over the top of a mountain range to avoid paying a 2EUR toll for a tunnel....

[Euan Uzami]

Remind me to tell you of the occaision when the AA route planner made me drive over the top of a mountain range to avoid paying a 2EUR toll for a tunnel....

yes... it would be nice if you could have it set to "avoid toll roads over a quid" ... cos whenever i drive to anywhere in mid wales or birminghamshire I want to avoid the m6 toll but i don't want avoid the local toll bridge that is only 30p...

[Euan Uzami]

Thanks guys, i'll try it with it set on car or delivery.

Even 'Delivery' will take you off decent direct roads when out of town.   But it seems the best choice when in towns.  In open country I think 'car' is better.

Highways [edit: is Motorways] but does seem to include some trunk roads.  I often need to cycle along sections of the A6 (not even dual carriageway) near where I live and 'avoid highways' will try to take me off there, even if the vehicle type is set to car.

I wouldn't have 'avoid U-turns' checked, on a bike.
And I've heard (don't know if this is true) that if you check 'avoid toll roads' you blank out the whole of London ...

yep, I'm thinking that for audaxing, if I plot the all the instructions on the route sheet as my route points, the shortest point (or 'best route for a car') between those points will rarely be down a motorway anyway.
If the only routepoints i plotted were the controls, then it may well use a motorway - but if I use sufficient points then a motorway will hardly ever be the quickest way from one audax instruction to the next.

In other words, "car with avoid highways" might be best for a one-shot point to point navigation, but just "car" with no avoidance might be best for an audax with many route points?

getting from the train station to the travelodge in reading for the thames 200 it went completely berzerk in the centre of reading. Led me a right merry dance round all the back streets, and even then only when i had ignored it for long enough to get well outside of the ring road. And coming back from the audax to the travelodge, it led me inside the ring road from where it seemed unable to get me back out of it, but by then i was aware that it was completely confused and just made my way west, until it had regained its senses.
But going from the travelodge back to the station , perfect. I presume that's because there is a one way system that is aligned with the direct route in, but has to be circumnavigated coming out...
And also going from paddington station in london to kings cross, i was already heading east on euston road, k.x. is on euston road, but it told me to turn off left...  

[nuttycyclist]

This is why I use a GPS on an Audax, but follow the organiser's route card at the same time.  If they don't match then I zoom out, look at the map, and decide the way to go. 

If I'm just going from A-B and it asks me to turn off, again I zoom out, look at the map and try to work out why.



A GPS is a backup navigational aid, not something to follow blindly.

[Euan Uzami]

This is why I use a GPS on an Audax, but follow the organiser's route card at the same time.  If they don't match then I zoom out, look at the map, and decide the way to go.  

If I'm just going from A-B and it asks me to turn off, again I zoom out, look at the map and try to work out why.



A GPS is a backup navigational aid, not something to follow blindly.

yeah, i agree. The audax i just did was all the more pleasant for using the routesheet as the primary navigation, rather than what i used to do which was either use the GPS solely in follow roads mode (disastrous) or use the gps in off-road mode but the routesheet if i diverge from the line (ok, but not as good as just routesheet).
I guess the trick is knowing when to trust one, and when to trust the other. A lot of times the GPS was telling me to turn somewhere at odds with the routesheet, so i ignored it and went with teh routesheet. But there was one instance where it said 'turn right by phone box', i spent ages looking for a phone box, but couldn't find it - turns out it was partially hidden and being dark, i justdidn't see it. But the gps probably would have been right all along.

I think what I'll do in future is for actually on an audax, use the routesheet as primary and off-road mode as backup, and then for point to point e.g. getting to a station, hotel etc i'll just use follow roads mode with the "best for car" option.

[rogerzilla]

Follow road is great when you're trying to find the railway station or the nearest Pizza Hut in a strange twon, but it's pretty bad at picking a logical route, even when told to go for the shortest distance.  I've pretty much given up on it; on the Dun Run  I just used it as a live map.

[Euan Uzami]

it seems whatever is a 'green' road on google , it doesn't like in "best for bike" mode.
it considers euston road (which is green) in london as to be avoided: my route from kings cross station to paddington (don't laugh, i dont' know london very well)
but what is also an A-road - but orange on google, is ok: going from the travelodge to the audax

[rogerzilla]

I set mine to "car" and this is the way it took us from Richmond Park to Fulham:

Gmaps Pedometer

Note the weird detour off Sheen Road.  There was actually a dead end in there, albeit negotiable on a bike.

[Greenbank]

Routes made up of routepoints, one per routesheet instruction, each named with the instruction to follow. No routing required. I'd assume that the later eTrexes can still do this.

Luckily my GPS (basic eTrex) doesn't have the distraction of mapping or routing algorithms.

I know this doesn't really help with ad-hoc routes (nearest Pizza Hut or bailing to the nearest train station) but for pre-determined routes it's nigh on perfect. A 1:250,000 map of the area can solve the other problems.

[Euan Uzami]

I set mine to "car" and this is the way it took us from Richmond Park to Fulham:

Gmaps Pedometer

Note the weird detour off Sheen Road.  There was actually a dead end in there, albeit negotiable on a bike.

excellent. that's nothing - check out the way it took me from the audax back to the travelodge: http://trail.motionbased.com/trail/kml/episode.kml?episodePkValues=8728309 - Google Maps

[Euan Uzami]

Routes made up of routepoints, one per routesheet instruction, each named with the instruction to follow. No routing required. I'd assume that the later eTrexes can still do this.

that's an idea i suppose. Yes, I think that would work - could even insert additional points that don't have an isntruction if i wanted to make the line follow the route more closely, as long as i keep note of  how many additional points i've inserted and where, and feed in my own insturction at that point, probably marked with a *. That would form the off-road mode routesheet backup.

[andygates]

Follow road is great when you're trying to find the railway station or the nearest Pizza Hut in a strange twon, but it's pretty bad at picking a logical route, even when told to go for the shortest distance.  I've pretty much given up on it; on the Dun Run  I just used it as a live map.

That's the best summary I've heard to date.

I'll add that to get somewhere, be a car; to pootle nicely, be a bike scared of highways (that way you get bike routes as well as roads, but not footpaths).

The problem is that there's limited user tweakability: no scale of highway odiousness and no way of personally changing the 'scoring' that roads and turns get.  The presets are balanced at best guess, but it's as much art as science, and inveterate tweakers like this forum's GPS mob could effortlessly come up with different cycling profiles (eg Vehicular Cyclist - like a car, only use bike routes where they're a distance saver, avoid dual carraigeway; Pub Pootle - avoid busy roads, prefer scenic routes; Commuter - shortest distance wins over all; and so on.  Look for 3D mapping to allow "avoid steep hills", "flattest route", "most challenging" and more in the next generation of devices!

[frankly frankie]

Unfortunately the trend is towards dumber user interfaces, not more capable ones.
The Dakota has far, far fewer routing options compared with the colour Etrexes (despite costing around £50 more).

[sbseven]

The problem is that there's limited user tweakability: no scale of highway odiousness and no way of personally changing the 'scoring' that roads and turns get.  The presets are balanced at best guess, but it's as much art as science, and inveterate tweakers like this forum's GPS mob could effortlessly come up with different cycling profiles (eg Vehicular Cyclist - like a car, only use bike routes where they're a distance saver, avoid dual carraigeway; Pub Pootle - avoid busy roads, prefer scenic routes; Commuter - shortest distance wins over all; and so on.  Look for 3D mapping to allow "avoid steep hills", "flattest route", "most challenging" and more in the next generation of devices!

Andy, maybe there is with the OSM maps. I don't know if this will work in practice, but you could maybe 'adjust' routing preferences by changing the road class / road speed for the mkgmap / OSM maps.

In the lines style file:
highway=trunk  [0x02 road_class=3 road_speed=5 resolution 16]
highway=tertiary [0x05 road_class=1 road_speed=3 resolution 20]
highway=cycleway {add access = no; add bicycle = yes; add foot = yes} [0x13 road_class=0 road_speed=1 resolution 21]

Perhaps lowering the road_class, road_speed values for main roads and/or raising for B-roads, lanes etc. will fool the routing algorithm to avoid the main roads because they're now classed 'lower' and 'slower' than lanes? Should certainly work for a 'quickest' routing algorithm. (May need to turn off 'Avoid main roads' because they're now the B-roads and lanes!).

Maybe?

Shaun

[PloddinPedro]

I still don't understand this continuing fascination with Routes. However good the Routing function becomes (and it's got an awfully long way to go to be even half good) the chances that it will come up with the same devious/pleasant/ traffic free/ whatever course the Audax organiser has plotted are zilch. I guess it's because everyone likes the little pop-up turn instructions?

Just put a track in, obtained from the organiser, a previous rider, plotted on a mapping website or whereever and follow the little [green - pick your own colour] line. You don't get any irritating little beeping noises (OK, I know you can turn them off, but who does? Ok I know I don't hear all the ones turned off!) You use less battery power with tracks and it's simple. Just put the infos and controls in as Waypoints and set the Proximity Warning to beep at 1.6k distance and keep awake! And no tedious coding of dozens of waypoints.

[Euan Uzami]

I still don't understand this continuing fascination with Routes. However good the Routing function becomes (and it's got an awfully long way to go to be even half good) the chances that it will come up with the same devious/pleasant/ traffic free/ whatever course the Audax organiser has plotted are zilch.

But it should do if the points are close together enough.

[andygates]

I still don't understand this continuing fascination with Routes.

Many of us don't audax. 

Without a pre-planned route sheet, routes make a lot more sense.

[PloddinPedro]

But it should do if the points are close together enough.

It should do but it's a computer, it won't work properly, they never do. (Moi, cynical?) And anyway if you have to put in so many points, you've basically got a Track!

Many of us don't audax. Without a pre-planned route sheet, routes make a lot more sense.

Granted, fair enough; I was speaking of the Audax experience. But if I'm free-roaming or routing on the fly, I still don't want the Garmin making idiot assumptions about the best way (not) to get from here to there. For that I want a map - which is where units like the Satmap score, giving me rolling 1:1,000,000, 1:250,000 and 1:50,000 OS maps and the ability to manually compose routes on the move, exactly where I want to go. Different units excel or not in different circumstances.

[andygates]

Horses for courses.

[frankly frankie]

But if I'm free-roaming or routing on the fly, I still don't want the Garmin making idiot assumptions about the best way (not) to get from here to there.

On the whole I would heartily agree with that.

However I had an interesting experience on a recent 2-week tour in France.  15 years ago we always did this sort of thing entirely on the fly, but what with getting older and one thing and another, we tend to plan ahead more now, and since getting GPS I've always done fairly meticulous turn-by-turn planning of long trips in advance - part of the fun.  The only reason for carrying a paper map is for something to browse in the evenings.

Well this time we did this, as usual, but had reason to abandon our plans about halfway through. 
So the 2nd week we were touring on the fly in very unfamiliar country and relying on the GPS routing to do its stuff.  (Well it helps slightly that there were 2 of us, so 2 GPS, but they were both set up the same - however it did mean that we could program our 'Go To's differently and make choices when they diverged, quite useful.)
Bottom line was it all went pretty well and by the end of that 2nd week I had far more confidence that the GPS was making good choices, than I would ever have given it credit for up to then.  Wouldn't hesitate to do the same again (though I still enjoy the planning!).

[rogerzilla]

The big problem is that junction layouts aren't evident on maps.  A 90 degree bend might look as if it's a right turn but is actually just a tight bend with a minor road carrying on straight ahead.  Audax organisers usually get these right because they've ridden the course, but you can't just pick up a map and programme in the turns.  Instead you use routing which should, in theory, pick the shortest route between your waypoints but it doesn't always work as it should.

An example is the A1141 in Lavenham.  To stay on the A1141 you must turn off the through road.  Again, you can't tell from the map, although if you go to a satellite photo and zoom right in you can see the Give Way lines.

This junction is why we ended up in Stowmarket on the 2008 Dun Run...thankfully not much off course, and quite a nice route.  We didn't have GPS; we navigated by the moon!

[Manotea]

Audaxing, I don't use routes for 'on the fly' routing, I use routes for nice big light up at night instructions on how to take junctions.