Author Topic: GPX OR NOT GPX?  (Read 24332 times)

Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #50 on: May 10, 2019, 08:08:24 pm »
Beyond the older devices with an artificial 500 point limit, I don’t there’s such a thing as too big for anything you might export from a route planning site, at least for brevet length rides
It's 10,000 on my Garmin. So very few are over this that I don't bother to check and get caught out when one actually is, such as the last audax I did. (Didn't matter, managed to find the way ok though)
It is what it is. It's not what it's not, so it must be what it is.

Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #51 on: May 10, 2019, 09:13:17 pm »
Revellinho, if you have never navigated a ride by GPS then you are missing out.  It is a lot easier.  Setting up the damn thing in the first place is the nuisance but once you are riding, it's great.  When I started riding er 2003 I used route sheets and everyone did.  Rode LEL 2005 with routesheets only for example.  Can't remember when I got my GPS.  My blog seems to think 2012

I've run an event for about 10 years (it's being retired this year) and now I think everyone follows the gps track
I supply a 10000 point gpx which works with my eTrex20 and it's up to everyone to make it work with their crazy WooHey devices or 30 year old ex-military geo caching gps or whatever.  I work in IT support for a living I am not interested in fixing problems on an unknown set of GPS devices.   

I agree that it should be easier to get the track from an event onto your device but the problem lies with the devices and how they are non standard

Having a club RWGPS subscription sounds like an excellent idea

I tried it once on a ride round the Lakes.  I just could not get on with it - it was just a line on an otherwise blank screen.  Perhaps its because I only have a Garmin 500 and the display is so primitive.  Also I have slipped into the habit of wanting to see numbers all the time on the device, I'm one of those who does endless calculations as I plod along and things would be otherwise glum.

Around the lakes a route sheet is fine, you probably have a turn every half an hour... try using a route sheet around built up areas, where you have a turn every 3-4 minutes...
50 turns (or other direction) in as many Km is not that uncommon.
Horses for courses, and a routesheet has its severe limitations, a GPX works fine in both scenarios

You are spot on there.  One of my events has no turns or instructions between 2 of the controls, you just ride along the road without deviation for 36km.  I thought about making up some things to note for the routesheet, because it looked a bit bare, but did not bother in the end.  When you get to the control it is L @ T then you ride along the next road for 31km before the next turn.
Organising an October running of The Tour of Rheged from Witherslack Village Hall in S Lakes.  May Lakes audaxes should run in 2020.

Karla

  • car(e) free
    • Lost Byway - around the world by bike
Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #52 on: May 10, 2019, 10:20:32 pm »


Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?

« Reply #43 on: Today at 03:28:52 pm »

Quote

I think we need to get over the idea that computer illiteracy is a normal and acceptable state of affairs for people these days. Computers have been around for decades, they've been popular did a couple of decades now; if someone can't cope with converting a gpx file into their own niche format for their own obscure device, that's their own problem.

Seems You missed the first statement.. not everyone is as perfect as you! I used to be able to many things on computers, which is now beyond me, I'm sure I'm not alone !!

You could probably have learned how to program your GPS in the time it took you to write that post. 

If you don't want to have to use basic consumer electronics, you might as well go the whole hog and stop using basic consumer mechanics too: cycling is not the sport for you.

Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #53 on: May 10, 2019, 10:30:06 pm »
And empathy is not something for you, it seems.

Karla

  • car(e) free
    • Lost Byway - around the world by bike
Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #54 on: May 10, 2019, 10:43:34 pm »
Apparently not.

This thread makes a refreshing change from TT land though: there you're lucky if the course description is existent let alone accurate or helpful, and requests for a course map send the old timers into howls of "Why should hard-pressed organisers have to spoon feed the youngsters?!"

Pingu

  • Put away those fiery biscuits!
  • Mrs Pingu's domestique
    • the Igloo
Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #55 on: May 11, 2019, 12:10:49 am »
...One of my events has no turns or instructions between 2 of the controls, you just ride along the road without deviation for 36km...

I love those bits on route sheets  :)

Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #56 on: May 11, 2019, 01:47:45 am »
The problems with routesheets come when the organiser tells you the mistake they've made at the start. It's usually very obvious to them that you turn right rather than left at a junction, but little consolation when you find yourself 20km off route.

A GPS based route is less likely to do that. GPS is never wrong, it's just not always there.

https://youtu.be/7Uwh6Z-v3O8

CrazyEnglishTriathlete

  • Miles eaten don't satisfy hunger
  • 3x Brimstone ancien 3x Pendle/Tan Hill DNF
    • CET Ride Reports and Blogs
Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #57 on: May 11, 2019, 04:36:04 pm »
It would take me quite a long while to put together GPX tracks for all of the Cambrian Series Perms, most of which predate GPS devices.  And an awful lot longer to check them, unless there was a shedload of volunteers willing to test the tracks.
Eddington Numbers 125 (imperial), 168 (metric) 518 (furlongs)  111 (nautical miles)

Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #58 on: May 11, 2019, 05:06:17 pm »
One of my events has no turns or instructions between 2 of the controls

I've got one of those.  The Cragg Challenge Grimpeur on 22 September starts at the bottom of Cragg Vale in Mytholmroyd, and the first control is at the top, just before the turn left at T to Ripponden.  The route sheet looks a bit bare.

There is a minimum speed of 12.5kph, but that first control is an Info so (don't tell anyone) I think we're allowed to turn a blind eye to anyone getting there out of time.

Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #59 on: May 11, 2019, 05:32:40 pm »
It would take me quite a long while to put together GPX tracks for all of the Cambrian Series Perms, most of which predate GPS devices.  And an awful lot longer to check them, unless there was a shedload of volunteers willing to test the tracks.

Might be worth asking those who have recently ridden your perms if they have a GPS tracklog. Will need tidying up to strip out time stamps etc but that is a quick job.  That may be a relatively quick route to getting GPX tracks for your perms.

vorsprung

  • Opposites Attract
    • Audaxing
Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #60 on: May 11, 2019, 07:00:38 pm »


Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?

« Reply #43 on: Today at 03:28:52 pm »

Quote

I think we need to get over the idea that computer illiteracy is a normal and acceptable state of affairs for people these days. Computers have been around for decades, they've been popular did a couple of decades now; if someone can't cope with converting a gpx file into their own niche format for their own obscure device, that's their own problem.

Seems You missed the first statement.. not everyone is as perfect as you! I used to be able to many things on computers, which is now beyond me, I'm sure I'm not alone !!

You could probably have learned how to program your GPS in the time it took you to write that post. 

If you don't want to have to use basic consumer electronics, you might as well go the whole hog and stop using basic consumer mechanics too: cycling is not the sport for you.

well...

GPS is complicated to do correctly because Mr Garmin is an asshat

To do GPS correctly you need to understand every undocumented quirk of your particular device, carry spare batteries/usb charge things and sacrifice a chicken

If AUK put all the routes on RWGPS or some similar service it would help people.  I'd rather spend my time on things other than GPS device fettling

Having said that, I kind of agree in a way.  If people are going to shell out the $$$ on a GPS device then you'd expect them to be able to use it. It's not super difficult, it's just a time sink
Audaxing Blog follow @vorsprungbike on

CrazyEnglishTriathlete

  • Miles eaten don't satisfy hunger
  • 3x Brimstone ancien 3x Pendle/Tan Hill DNF
    • CET Ride Reports and Blogs
Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #61 on: May 11, 2019, 09:49:50 pm »
It would take me quite a long while to put together GPX tracks for all of the Cambrian Series Perms, most of which predate GPS devices.  And an awful lot longer to check them, unless there was a shedload of volunteers willing to test the tracks.

Might be worth asking those who have recently ridden your perms if they have a GPS tracklog. Will need tidying up to strip out time stamps etc but that is a quick job.  That may be a relatively quick route to getting GPX tracks for your perms.

And if they'd followed a sensible route, etc.  Plus editing GPX tracks is just the sort of fiddly computer thing that I find rather grim.  But hopefully by the time GPX tracks are required I'll be retired and have the time and more inclination to do that sort of fiddling. 
Eddington Numbers 125 (imperial), 168 (metric) 518 (furlongs)  111 (nautical miles)

Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #62 on: May 11, 2019, 11:08:25 pm »
Beyond the older devices with an artificial 500 point limit, I don’t there’s such a thing as too big for anything you might export from a route planning site, at least for brevet length rides
It's 10,000 on my Garmin. So very few are over this

Meh. I've only been caught out once, but that was enough.

I reckon an RWGPS download is almost certain to be over 10k points once it's about 250-280km, so I'll check any 200km routes just in case. (The last 400km route I looked at had either 16k or 18k points, so it definitely needed downsampling for my Etrex.)

Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #63 on: May 11, 2019, 11:33:11 pm »
I always aim for 500 trackpoints per 100km.  500 for 200km still works adequately.

Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #64 on: May 11, 2019, 11:34:55 pm »
Aye. I discovered this week that 500 for 400km is a wee bit sparse.

Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #65 on: May 12, 2019, 01:17:38 am »
I guess things vary from country to country, in Oz looking around at the bikes at the start of Audax rides in recent years I would say almost all riders have a GPS device and it is a surprise to see a paper cue sheet attached to a bar bag or otherwise (bags themselves are a bit rare too). Certainly 100% of newer riders would have a GPS device and would expect a GPS route was provided.

If we want a healthy growing club then we have to take account of what the market wants as we are not the only cycling game in town. Personally, having a device greatly enhances my rides but it took a few hours of study and a few rides to master as the functions available and options are far in excess of the smaller number necessary to just follow a route.

CrazyEnglishTriathlete

  • Miles eaten don't satisfy hunger
  • 3x Brimstone ancien 3x Pendle/Tan Hill DNF
    • CET Ride Reports and Blogs
Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #66 on: May 12, 2019, 07:26:12 am »
It would take me quite a long while to put together GPX tracks for all of the Cambrian Series Perms, most of which predate GPS devices.  And an awful lot longer to check them, unless there was a shedload of volunteers willing to test the tracks.

Might be worth asking those who have recently ridden your perms if they have a GPS tracklog. Will need tidying up to strip out time stamps etc but that is a quick job.  That may be a relatively quick route to getting GPX tracks for your perms.

Have decided to stop moping and test the effort involved.  Have created a GPX for the Cambrian 1A on Ride with GPS  - https://ridewithgps.com/routes/29961189 so would be keen to see how that responds as a test piece.  If I get good feedback then I will progressively create routes for all the others.  Although, in the immortal words of Captain Oates "I may be some time"

And if they'd followed a sensible route, etc.  Plus editing GPX tracks is just the sort of fiddly computer thing that I find rather grim.  But hopefully by the time GPX tracks are required I'll be retired and have the time and more inclination to do that sort of fiddling.
Eddington Numbers 125 (imperial), 168 (metric) 518 (furlongs)  111 (nautical miles)

Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #67 on: May 12, 2019, 10:34:41 am »

If we want a healthy growing club then we have to take account of what the market wants as we are not the only cycling game in town.

If ithe market wants randonnées validated internationally, AUK is the only game in town.  If it wants fully-supported sportif events, then there are plenty out there, no need for AUK to get involved.

frankly frankie

  • I kid you not
    • Fuchsiaphile
Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #68 on: May 12, 2019, 10:53:12 am »
I view RWGPS as part of the problem.  They offer a variety of ways to format the downloaded file (good, I hear you cry) but for any user and device only one of these is likely to be optimal and some of the others could simply be broken.  As noted upthread, it is too easy for RWGPS to generate more than 10,000 points and for the user's device to truncate that file in use - too easy for otherwise sensible people to trust in teh magic and set off into the wilds without checking first.  The fault lies with RWGPS for providing potentially incompatible files, with the GPS manufacturer for not providing clear error messages when there is an import problem, with the user for succumbing to a temporary bout of simple-mindedness.

My experience is a bit dated (I still use an old eTrex Vista HCx; it works), but I wonder if there is a standard that would be ok with all devices?

As long as there are old devices like yours still out there in the wild, the 'lowest common denominator' file (including the 500 trackpoint limit) cannot change.  AUK published advice about this in the last hardcopy Handbook (distributed January 2014) and that advice can still be found on Aukweb under 'Hints and Tips'.
https://www.aukweb.net/hints/gps/
Of course things have moved on a lot since 2014 and even back then this advice raised hackles in some quarters.  It could of course be updated but how? - the lowest common denominator hasn't changed.  But 95% of riders now expect (expect, not need) far more than 500 points and increasingly there is an expectation of embedded turn instructions.  Organisers not recognising this would be bound to get some flak.
"This is a complex subject, with a need for more than one highlighter pen."

FifeingEejit

  • Not Small just Far Away at the back
Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #69 on: May 12, 2019, 11:18:03 am »
File format incompatibility is not unique to GPS devices and is something that RWGPS does about all that can be expected to allow users to resolve the problem, the only problem I see is they want you to pay for premium to run the trackpoint reducer.

With modern devices now carrying out the linking to systems such as RWGPS there is no need for a GPX file at all as the system handles that for you and removes much of the faffage (while introducing other risks), failing to adopt that as it becomes the prevalent approach is counter producing, you alienate those who are not tech savvy enough and are used to the amount of effort required being to hit the pin button, and amuse people like me who don't care much for Jurassic methods of work.

I have a colleague who having been given the same expensive IDE and Automation tools as the rest of us at work, insists on doing everything the most long winded way possible ideally in Notepad++ if he can get away with it.



Karla

  • car(e) free
    • Lost Byway - around the world by bike
Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #70 on: May 12, 2019, 11:23:13 am »


Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?

« Reply #43 on: Today at 03:28:52 pm »

Quote

I think we need to get over the idea that computer illiteracy is a normal and acceptable state of affairs for people these days. Computers have been around for decades, they've been popular did a couple of decades now; if someone can't cope with converting a gpx file into their own niche format for their own obscure device, that's their own problem.

Seems You missed the first statement.. not everyone is as perfect as you! I used to be able to many things on computers, which is now beyond me, I'm sure I'm not alone !!

You could probably have learned how to program your GPS in the time it took you to write that post. 

If you don't want to have to use basic consumer electronics, you might as well go the whole hog and stop using basic consumer mechanics too: cycling is not the sport for you.

well...

GPS is complicated to do correctly because Mr Garmin is an asshat

To do GPS correctly you need to understand every undocumented quirk of your particular device, carry spare batteries/usb charge things and sacrifice a chicken

If AUK put all the routes on RWGPS or some similar service it would help people.  I'd rather spend my time on things other than GPS device fettling

Having said that, I kind of agree in a way.  If people are going to shell out the $$$ on a GPS device then you'd expect them to be able to use it. It's not super difficult, it's just a time sink

I agree; that's what I was trying to say.  If you've provided an electronic description of the route in gpx, tcx, 500+ points, then it's sufficiently trivial for a user to resample it to whatever format they like that you as the organiser shouldn't be expected to do it for them.  Upthread there were people complaining they didn't know how to use RWGPS - but it's not your job to hold the hand of people who buy a spangly GPS but can't use a free website.  Similarly, the HCx series units that could only take 500 points have been obsolete for about ten years now, so anyone still using one has had ten years to learn now to downsample a track and shouldn't expect organisers to specifically cater for their antediluvian tech.

FifeingEejit

  • Not Small just Far Away at the back
Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #71 on: May 12, 2019, 11:33:59 am »
GPS is complicated to do correctly because Mr Garmin is an asshat
To do GPS correctly you need to understand every undocumented quirk of your particular device, carry spare batteries/usb charge things and sacrifice a chicken

Thanks to Garmin finally having decent competition, GPS devices are rapidly become mainstream consumer electronics rather than enthusiast fiddly devices.
You don't need to understand every undocumented quirk of a Wahoo because they've made it simple to use i.e. once it's set up and synced to your RWGPS account it "just works".

You do need to understand every undocumented quirk of Garmins because they're like my Notepad++ loving colleague.

Kim

  • Timelord
Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #72 on: May 12, 2019, 06:19:15 pm »
You do need to understand every undocumented quirk of Garmins

No you don't, just the ones that are relevant to your workflow and likely to come up.  (For example, if you're navigating using Tracks, all the arcane knowledge about turn-by-turn routing is irrelevant.)  I'd expect a competent Garmin user to have discovered this by real-world testing on bike rides, much in the same way I'd expect a competent saddle user to have determined the optimum model and position for their requirements: Sure, there's always a first time out with a new thing, but you go into that *expecting* to learn from the experience, and if a particular audax is important, that isn't the time for experimentation.

The real edge-cases should be covered by your contingency plan for when your GPS receiver corrupts its storage / shears a battery contact / falls off and gets run over by a taxi / is stolen.  Which is probably similar to an non-GPS-user's contingency plan for when their routesheet blows away or is rendered unreadable in a freak BEER accident.
To ride the Windcheetah, first, you must embrace the cantilever...

mattc

  • n.b. have grown beard since photo taken
    • Didcot Audaxes
Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #73 on: May 12, 2019, 06:37:35 pm »
... RWGPS does about all that can be expected to allow users to resolve the problem, the only problem I see is they want you to pay for premium to run the trackpoint reducer.

The (free) bikehike site does trackpoint reduction pretty elegantly. Sadly the actual mapping features have fallen into ruin recently (last time I checked), but this might be useful to someone. I've used it a lot.

[bikehike was great ...  :'( ]
Has never ridden RAAM
---------
No.11  Because of the great host of those who dislike the least appearance of "swank " when they travel the roads and lanes. - From Kuklos' 39 Articles

Re: GPX OR NOT GPX?
« Reply #74 on: May 12, 2019, 06:57:17 pm »
Bikehike was brilliant. RWGPS is where it is at now. Not found a better one.