AUK Advice on DIY events

[cyclingnewforest]

Whatever the optimum method of administering DIYs might be, and it is a permanently (pun intended) moving task with many answers, the official AUK revised advice on "How to DIY" has been updated on the AUK website
http://www.aukweb.net/diy/routes/

It covers the basic rules of DIY
Types of DIY - brevet cards and receipts / GPS tracks / Advisory routes / Mandatory routes / DIYs ridden concurrently with other events
and lots more.

Please check it out and the accompanying FAQs for answers to all (well most at least) of your DIY queries.

John Ward
AUK Permanents Secretary

[Sea of vapours]

Is there any intention to add an 'attach file' option on the DIY Entry Form, or is the intention that these be sent to the organiser separately by email?

[tonyh]

Until a revised entry form does appear, you can put a link to a route file in one of the "checkpoint" boxes. (This may not seem a logical place for it, but the link then stays permanently with your entry, whereas if it's in a separate email, or in the "other info" box, it doesn't, and has to be searched for.)

[Sea of vapours]

Thanks - that's a very good method for the interim.

That could perhaps be temporarily added into the FAQs since it's not obvious that the 'other info. box does not stay with the entry?

[Manotea]

The approach of forwarding links to external files may seem very sensible from the viewpoint of the rider, however it tends to generate work for the DIY Org due to the minefield of security issues surrounding accessing route files for download on the various route planning websites in use, and the very act of fetching the files represents additional work/effort. Accordingly...

Notice to DIY South East Riders

Pending further notice regarding update to AUK systems, when submitting Mandatory GPS DIY Perm applications via the AUK DIY Perm entry form:

1) List the controls on the entry form as 'Name, County', where Name is the Village, Cafe, Landmark, etc..  Leave the grid reference fields blank (I don't use them).
2) In the Information box on the entry form enter the words 'Mandatory Route'
3) Forward the 'route' file by email to paudax@gmail.com with the subject set to 'Route GPX for Mandatory DIY Perm'. The route file MUST be a .gpx file, NOT a .fit, .tcx, etc.

On submitting the ride trackfile for validation, forward it as a .gpx file, NOT .fit, .tcx, etc.

Thanks,

Paul Stewart
DIY SE Organiser

p.s., I'm planning to reinstate the DIY Perm pages on my website; I'll advise DIYSE riders directly regarding that in due course.

[Arry-R]

All noted SIR!



 

[Martin]

Here's a question about mandatory routes following on from mine yesterday;

I plotted the route on Ride with GPS and extracted a gpx track to accompany my entry; all fine and dandy

except I didn't scrutinise the RWG before I rode, result was it took me down a FC Bridleway in Alton; round every scenic (and often skoggy) cycle path in Farnham and along the Basingstoke Canal in Woking (in the dark). Needing the ride for my RRTY I diligently followed it, but could I have diverted via the nearest route on road?

as I tend to plot all my DIYs on RWG is there a button I can push which says "tarmacced roads only" when in bicycle mode?

[MikeFromLFE]

If only! I've taken to scrutinising RWGPS routes /very/ carefully

[Aunt Maud]

as I tend to plot all my DIYs on RWG is there a button I can push which says "tarmacced roads only" when in bicycle mode?

No, unfortunately, and I think that's because RWGPS would have to rely on someone having surveyed all the roads everywhere and pointing out tarmac and not tarmac.

[wajcgac]

as I tend to plot all my DIYs on RWG is there a button I can push which says "tarmacced roads only" when in bicycle mode?

I think the best you can do is once you've plotted your route, drag the Streetview figure (located towards the top left of the map) on to somewhere on the map - but don't let go of it. All the roads that the google car has gone down will show up in blue.

Any that don't and appear to be on your route are worth further investigating as they may be rough tracks/bridleways etc. They also may be legitimate and useful bike paths of course but then you can try and get a streetview shot of the beginning and end of such sections and make a decision based on what you find.

[Martin]

Ok thanks; Garmin Basecamp always uses roads (on account of the maps on my device doesn't have anything else) I can use that to create the track as I have to plot the route that way anyway if I want turn guidance (cheapskate non Edge user!; but also one who likes AA batteries)

[Ivo]

Good that there still is a choice. The option for a mandatory route makes a few extra interesting routs possible for me, mainly involving meandering river valleys or former railroads converted to bikepaths.

[bikey-mikey]

The approach of forwarding links to external files may seem very sensible from the viewpoint of the rider, however it tends to generate work for the DIY Org due to the minefield of security issues surrounding accessing route files for download on the various route planning websites in use, and the very act of fetching the files represents additional work/effort. Accordingly...

Notice to DIY South East Riders

Pending further notice regarding update to AUK systems, when submitting Mandatory GPS DIY Perm applications via the AUK DIY Perm entry form:

1) List the controls on the entry form as 'Name, County', where Name is the Village, Cafe, Landmark, etc..  Leave the grid reference fields blank (I don't use them).
2) In the Information box on the entry form enter the words 'Mandatory Route'
3) Forward the 'route' file by email to paudax@gmail.com with the subject set to 'Route GPX for Mandatory DIY Perm'. The route file MUST be a .gpx file, NOT a .fit, .tcx, etc.

On submitting the ride trackfile for validation, forward it as a .gpx file, NOT .fit, .tcx, etc.

Thanks,

Paul Stewart
DIY SE Organiser

p.s., I'm planning to reinstate the DIY Perm pages on my website; I'll advise DIYSE riders directly regarding that in due course.

Probably best not to use mandatory routes then... If you still have controls why bother with mandatory? Why not have the flexibility to avoid shenanigans as described in other posts...

[Martin]

Probably best not to use mandatory routes then... If you still have controls why bother with mandatory? Why not have the flexibility to avoid shenanigans as described in other posts...

I think the idea is that you still plan a notional start finish and half way point; you just don't need to enter every little lane you are going to use to stretch the route between them, beyond what GM reckons is the shortest route as you won't always be taking it

[Phil W]

Probably best not to use mandatory routes then... If you still have controls why bother with mandatory? Why not have the flexibility to avoid shenanigans as described in other posts...

I think the idea is that you still plan a notional start finish and half way point; you just don't need to enter every little lane you are going to use to stretch the route between them, beyond what GM reckons is the shortest route as you won't always be taking it

Because in areas where there are plenty of Bridleways it becomes a joke trying to meet the minimum distance on Gmaps. Mandatory, just plot a route, then nominate some nominal villages as controls along your route.

[bikey-mikey]

Ah I think I see...

Paraphrasing I am guessing that you do not us gmaps to prove min distance, but rely on the distance supplied by the website that generates your mandatory route?

[Phil W]

Ah I think I see...

Paraphrasing I am guessing that you do not us gmaps to prove min distance, but rely on the distance supplied by the website that generates your mandatory route?

Yes distance comes from the gpx file submitted in advance, not any nominated controls along your route.

[bikey-mikey]

Thanks Phil

[contango]

Probably best not to use mandatory routes then... If you still have controls why bother with mandatory? Why not have the flexibility to avoid shenanigans as described in other posts...

I think the idea is that you still plan a notional start finish and half way point; you just don't need to enter every little lane you are going to use to stretch the route between them, beyond what GM reckons is the shortest route as you won't always be taking it

Because in areas where there are plenty of Bridleways it becomes a joke trying to meet the minimum distance on Gmaps. Mandatory, just plot a route, then nominate some nominal villages as controls along your route.

... and I suppose if you selected a mandatory route and then did deviate from it to cut a chunk of distance off by using one of the bridlepaths (or even a paved cycle lane) the validator would be justified in refusing to validate it.

[Ivo]

The classic methode would be good for riding through unknown territory where you don't know if a road is usable while the mandatory route would be excellent if you know the area and know that the road you wish to use is good for cycling. I think that I'll use the mandatory routes mainly for my old audax routes which often involve river valleys or former railroad tracks.

[marcusjb]

From my understanding of reading the documentation available, the validation is done by running the proposed and the actual gpx files through a piece of software that compares them and highlights where they deviate more than a certain distance.

The org can then either pass/fail or question the rider on why they went down road X instead of road y.

I would have said that if you find it is a bridle way, and you decide to take the road option, you are more likely to add distance than take it away, and it is a choice based on safety considerations (which the mandatory ruling allows for).  So long as you do not end up bypassing one of your nominated controls, I would have thought your ride would be looked at favourably.

The original guineapig (rabbit) had a number of issues with bridle ways etc from memory and made notes on where she deviated from her intended route, and all was well.

But who knows?

[frankly frankie]

From my understanding of reading the documentation available, the validation is done by running the proposed and the actual gpx files through a piece of software that compares them and highlights where they deviate more than a certain distance.

I've seen a prototype which does just that.  The 'acceptable deviation distance' could be altered on a sliding scale (largely because I think it'll take some period of suck-it-and-see before the best setting is found) but something like 200m seemed a workable minimum (ie a distance of 200m between the planned track and the ridden track, before any deviation is highlighted) I imagine after some real-world examples have gone through the default setting might drift a bit higher, to 300 or 400.

[Ivo]

From my understanding of reading the documentation available, the validation is done by running the proposed and the actual gpx files through a piece of software that compares them and highlights where they deviate more than a certain distance.

The org can then either pass/fail or question the rider on why they went down road X instead of road y.

I would have said that if you find it is a bridle way, and you decide to take the road option, you are more likely to add distance than take it away, and it is a choice based on safety considerations (which the mandatory ruling allows for).  So long as you do not end up bypassing one of your nominated controls, I would have thought your ride would be looked at favourably.

The original guineapig (rabbit) had a number of issues with bridle ways etc from memory and made notes on where she deviated from her intended route, and all was well.

But who knows?

A photo of the problematic road could help a lot in the discussion with the org. So an extra thing to doublecheck before the start, is the time on your camera the same as on your GPS .

[jsabine]

I would have said that if you find it is a bridle way, and you decide to take the road option, you are more likely to add distance than take it away, and it is a choice based on safety considerations (which the mandatory ruling allows for).  So long as you do not end up bypassing one of your nominated controls, I would have thought your ride would be looked at favourably.

Don't forget that in principle we¹ will look for reasons to validate, not search for reasons to disqualify.

Providing those reasons to validate, even if there has been a technical breach, makes that decision easier - as ever though, not taking the piss is a very good start.

 


1: First organisers; then the validation team; finally the Board if it ends up being taken to an appeal.

[Martin]

I would have said that if you find it is a bridle way, and you decide to take the road option, you are more likely to add distance than take it away, and it is a choice based on safety considerations (which the mandatory ruling allows for).  So long as you do not end up bypassing one of your nominated controls, I would have thought your ride would be looked at favourably.

that's the issue, I didn't have any nominated controls on that section (although it could be argued that I had thousands, they were all trackpoints) so wasn't sure what to do. I wasn't even plotting the route to take long cuts via bridleways etc, it just seemed a nicer route than the A31 /A3