Author Topic: New route-planner! (Read 48688 times)

Richard Fairhurst · « **Reply #150 on:** 12 December, 2015, 12:58:28 pm »

Reverse direction is something I'm slowly working on!

Road-only and less 'around the houses' options are unlikely for now. The route-planner works by pregenerating the ideal routes for lots of A-B combinations (a technique called 'Contraction Hierarchies'), which is why it's so fast when dragging a route around - it's not recalculating every time, it's looking up most of a pregenerated route. This requires a lot of RAM - about 30GB for the full dataset. (The pregeneration process needs 128GB - I have a very noisy server in my office which I fire up once a month to do that!)

Adding a new route option would mean another 30GB dataset, which means renting another heavy-duty server, which ain't cheap. There might be ways round it in the future but they're not realistic at present, I'm afraid. I am doing a bit of work to make the routes less wiggly in towns, though - I'm currently engrossed in the internals of OSRM (the route-planning software) reworking its turn logic...

Little Jim · « **Reply #151 on:** 12 December, 2015, 01:14:00 pm »

Andy - I too had a "problem" with it giving me a circular route in the opposite way that I wanted to go, but I got around this by dragging half of the route out of the way, then dragging the second half to where the first half had been (I hope this makes sense!) and then dragging the first half back to where the second half had been. It doesn't take long and because the route planner has already sorted the best option out for each half of the route when you drag the route across it goes to where the original route was, and it keeps the original direction of each half of the route That sounds very complicated but it really is very quick and easy to do.

Marmitegeoff · « **Reply #152 on:** 19 December, 2015, 01:11:53 pm »

I have just found this tool and love it, so far. But would it be possible to put some "via's" into the circular route option, rather than having to find them on the map and then creat a circular route then drag to the remembered (or not ) points.

Thanks

Cudzoziemiec · « **Reply #153 on:** 22 August, 2016, 07:36:06 pm »

I've just discovered the "suggest a route" function. Wonderful! I hope to use this for ready-made cycle-camping adventures with my son. Somehow having a pre-planned route, and one that's been "officially" planned at that rather than thrown together by me, is much more confidence inspiring!

Little Jim · « **Reply #154 on:** 23 August, 2016, 03:29:31 pm »

Richard: I really like using your site for route planning - the mapping is pretty good, and the route suggestions are great for avoiding busy roads, plus it tells you how much of the route is main road, how much is "off road" etc. so keep up the good work. But as a newly converted Garmin user I have encountered a problem. In their infinite wisdom Garmin have decided that the new 20s and 25s will only take .FIT files, or in other words they really only want you to use Garmin Connect for route planning (which is crap). I only discovered this after buying it of course. One work-around is that I plan the route, send it to my mate who has a Garmin 200, he loads it onto his Garmin then sends the converted file to me. It does work, but means me taking the mickey a bit if he's not riding with me. Is there any way that you can incorporate a .FIT file version in the convert to GPS thingy? (sorry about the highly technical description, I hope it isn't too confusing!

)

Feanor · « **Reply #155 on:** 23 August, 2016, 04:12:43 pm »

All the garmins will accept GPX files.
They will convert them to .FIT internally, as required.

On the Edge devices for example, just drop the GPX in the NewFiles folder.
When you re-start the device it will import the GPX into a FIT file in the Coursed folder, and it will then delete the GPX from NewFiles.

Little Jim · « **Reply #156 on:** 23 August, 2016, 04:40:49 pm »

Quote from: Feanor on 23 August, 2016, 04:12:43 pm

All the garmins will accept GPX files.
They will convert them to .FIT internally, as required.

On the Edge devices for example, just drop the GPX in the NewFiles folder.
When you re-start the device it will import the GPX into a FIT file in the Coursed folder, and it will then delete the GPX from NewFiles.

Not the new 20/25 model. FIT files only apparently, this seems to be a new "feature" of the updated models. Garmin's own forum does have links to a couple of file convertors that can allegedly be used, but there seems to be mixed opinions as to how good they are. I haven't had the time to try them yet so I don't know, but I do know that it would have been a lot easier if they had left well alone, but I guess they want to force people to use Garmin Connect for route planning.

Richard Fairhurst · « **Reply #157 on:** 24 February, 2019, 08:43:58 pm »

Quote from: Richard Fairhurst on 12 December, 2015, 12:58:28 pm

Road-only and less 'around the houses' options are unlikely for now. The route-planner works by pregenerating the ideal routes for lots of A-B combinations (a technique called 'Contraction Hierarchies'), which is why it's so fast when dragging a route around - it's not recalculating every time, it's looking up most of a pregenerated route. This requires a lot of RAM - about 30GB for the full dataset. (The pregeneration process needs 128GB - I have a very noisy server in my office which I fire up once a month to do that!)

A few years on and I've figured out how to do a "roads only" option (with only "a very large amount" of extra RAM and not "an extra metric frickton").

So you can go to https://cycle.travel/map and select the little "Paved only" toggle, and it'll stick to roads and paved cycleways. Otherwise it's exactly as the normal routing - it likes quieter roads, tries to avoid hills, etc. etc. You can actually switch routing modes at each via point if you like - select 'paved' or 'any way' in the bubble that appears when you click on one.

Bolt · « **Reply #158 on:** 24 February, 2019, 10:15:41 pm »

Thanks Richard, this sounds like a really useful option. I'm sure I'm not alone in finding cycle.travel to be the best tool for fast and reliable route planning and really appreciate all of your hard work in making it so

andyoxon · « **Reply #159 on:** 04 May, 2019, 09:05:41 am »

Richard, now that I'm doing more tracks, bridleways and byways, I find I often can't use cycle.travel to plan - even with 'Paths and roads' toggled on. It just won't let me select certain routes - which is a shame, even if I try and 'force' a route by adding dense via pins. e.g. https://cycle.travel/map/journey/100997 Rode this section yesterday, except my route was direct on Whiteshards Bottom to Stock Lane, between pins 1 & 2 (which can be selected on it's own: https://cycle.travel/map/journey/100999 ).

andrew_s · « **Reply #160 on:** 08 May, 2019, 01:17:33 am »

Quote from: andyoxon on 04 May, 2019, 09:05:41 am

Richard, now that I'm doing more tracks, bridleways and byways, I find I often can't use cycle.travel to plan - even with 'Paths and roads' toggled on.

it will probably be down to the OSM data.
I've had the same with tracks in Scotland - if the OSM data doesn't say "cycles allowed", it won't route along the track, despite all tracks and paths in Scotland being cycleable, legally speaking. I put it down to tracks being added to OSM by walkers rather than cyclists.
If you go into OSM and add the cycles permitted tags yourself, cycle.travel will pick them up in a couple of weeks (ish, depending on update cycles).

I've just added the "cycles=yes" tag to the track in the gap between via points 4 and 5 in this route (which I missed the first time round). It will be mildly interesting to see whether the saved route fixes itself after the next routing update and gets rid of the loop through Lairg, or whether I have to go in and recreate the route.

P.S.
Richard is more likely to respond promptly if you post here: https://forum.cyclinguk.org/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=128273

andyoxon · « **Reply #161 on:** 09 May, 2019, 01:47:31 pm »

Thanks for that.

edit. update. If one left clicks on the via point, there is a "direct to" (another via point) option. So one can generate a straight line between two via points and then adjust that line. It turns out that the route which wouldn't allow selection is because the tracks aren't linked in OSM (if you zoom right in). This apparently can be edited in OSM itself.

vorsprung · « **Reply #162 on:** 15 May, 2019, 02:12:48 pm »

tried it out for the first time in a few years

It's a really nice site now and will join the list of things to use, great work

There are problems of course. The first thing I tried was looking at routing near Bridgwater. There are some nice lanes and nasty cycle paths around there. I'm pretty sure that the most southern way across the river Parrett is up and down some steps (a footbridge next to a railtrack) but that's the way that the routing goes

Cudzoziemiec · « **Reply #163 on:** 15 May, 2019, 03:29:48 pm »

I'm pretty sure I've used that footbridge! On a DIY some time ago, planned by IanN otp. I don't know how he planned it by I expect he used RWGPS, so it's not only cycle.travel sending unsuspecting cyclists that way.

JonBuoy · « **Reply #164 on:** 15 May, 2019, 05:43:29 pm »

I went over that bridge on a DIY200 at Easter. It is a steep set of steps up and down but there is a little gully on one side that appears to be designed to let you run your bike wheels up and down. I guess the routing uses the bridge as it is tagged as NCN3 and NCN33 in OSM. It is at least a mile along the river to the next bridge.

SoreTween · « **Reply #165 on:** 18 May, 2021, 06:55:27 pm »

Thread bump.

Richard has added a rather significant new feature to cycle.travel for his supporters - OS maps. I've been a supporter a couple of years but only just noticed his post on Patreon

c.t still routes using OSM so you can't route everything you can see on OS but still very handy. Plus there's always the 'direct to waypoint X' option.

I find the aesthetic of c.t far nicer and more intuitive than any of the other online route planners I've tried and thus far easier to use. Being able to switch to OS when you find an unroutable gap where you'd have sworn there should be a r-b/boat/bridleway is rather handy.

There's other supporter bonuses too such as weather forecasts - observed but not investigated.

Sergeant Pluck · « **Reply #166 on:** 27 August, 2022, 05:08:40 pm »

It’s a great site for discovering new routes. Can someone run through a method of adding turn-by-turn directions to the file (which I export to RWGPS)?

Even with routes that have a cue sheet displayed, and giving it a go with both .tcx and .gpx of various flavours, the directions are not exported.

jdsnape · « **Reply #167 on:** 27 August, 2022, 09:34:25 pm »

Quote from: Sergeant Pluck on 27 August, 2022, 05:08:40 pm

It’s a great site for discovering new routes. Can someone run through a method of adding turn-by-turn directions to the file (which I export to RWGPS)?

My experience is that you need a premium RWGPS subscription, then after importing the GPX there is a ‘trace route’ function that will go along the route and generate the cues. It’s not totally reliable, you do have to check what it’s done as it has a habit of jumping you onto side roads from time to time.

If there is a better way then I’m also interested to find out!

Sergeant Pluck · « **Reply #168 on:** 28 August, 2022, 10:53:16 am »

Yes, that’s what I have been doing (I have a subscription) but I was hoping for a short-cut. I have tried all the cycle-travel export options.

Richard Fairhurst · « **Reply #169 on:** 14 November, 2022, 11:49:22 am »

Quote from: Sergeant Pluck on 27 August, 2022, 05:08:40 pm

It’s a great site for discovering new routes. Can someone run through a method of adding turn-by-turn directions to the file (which I export to RWGPS)?
Even with routes that have a cue sheet displayed, and giving it a go with both .tcx and .gpx of various flavours, the directions are not exported.

Sorry, only just spotted this!

In theory if you make sure the turn-by-turn directions are showing, then export a TCX course, that will include the turn-by-turn directions.

I've just tried that and imported it into RWGPS, and it seems to work ok. (But I'm not incredibly familiar with RWGPS.)

If that doesn't work for you, could you let me know what route you're trying it on? It's always possible there's something in the route which is getting lost in translation between the sites.