Author Topic: Routesheet instruction: opinions please  (Read 6705 times)

Re: Routesheet instruction: opinions please
« Reply #25 on: April 22, 2008, 11:39:35 am »
As long as the routesheet was in miles that would ensure no problems at all.

Still having trouble with your 1.6 times table Nutty?  ;)

Re: Routesheet instruction: opinions please
« Reply #26 on: April 22, 2008, 11:43:37 am »
Why would having the routesheet in kilometres make a difference ?   A route sheet in miles may cause problems to those riders who have their computers set to kms, to those riders who have lost track of the distance travelled since the last instruction. To those who don't use a computer then the unit of measure is not relevant.

Re: Routesheet instruction: opinions please
« Reply #27 on: April 22, 2008, 11:59:20 am »
I went precisely 4 rides before setting my computer to km (as I'd stopped TTing by then)

I also convert the distances on the info controls to km





 ;D

Re: Routesheet instruction: opinions please
« Reply #28 on: April 22, 2008, 12:24:19 pm »
Yup.  Blue touchpaper was nicely lit there ;D

Why would having the routesheet in kilometres make a difference ?   A route sheet in miles may cause problems to those riders who have their computers set to kms, to those riders who have lost track of the distance travelled since the last instruction. To those who don't use a computer then the unit of measure is not relevant.

I navigate mostly by roadsigns.  I look at the routesheet and then follow the signs until in the area where I need to focus on the next instruction, fine tuned by the cycle computer.   Having the routesheet in KMs is a pain as I then need to focus solely on the computer (assuming I converted it to run in KM) as that's the only thing available for distance measuring; and it may not be accurate.

Without a computer the routesheet in miles would still make sense as the mileage is on most roadsigns.

Keeping track of the distance travelled since the last instruction is easier when the mileage is posted at most junctions, it means you don't need to keep looking at the computer.

Pingu

  • Put away those fiery biscuits!
  • Mrs Pingu's domestique
    • the Igloo
Re: Routesheet instruction: opinions please
« Reply #29 on: April 22, 2008, 04:42:58 pm »
Assuming the mileage on the signs is correct - not always the case. And a lot of newer signs seem not to have distances on them at all.

Anyway, all the audaxes I've been on have had distances in both km & miles.

iakobski

Re: Routesheet instruction: opinions please
« Reply #30 on: April 22, 2008, 05:00:09 pm »
And a lot of newer signs seem not to have distances on them at all.


Supposedly that's to make it easier when we all change to km in the next few years.
 :)


(hides)

Re: Routesheet instruction: opinions please
« Reply #31 on: April 22, 2008, 07:25:02 pm »
And a lot of newer signs seem not to have distances on them at all.


Supposedly that's to make it easier when we all change to km in the next few years.
 :)(hides)

is that after we've adopted the euro?  ;D

There seems to have been a policy change with signage recently whereby the junction signs don't have distances but there are distance signs a bit down the road; same as motorways. But as always it's not consistent.

valkyrie

  • Look at the state of your face!
    • West Lothian Clarion
Re: Routesheet instruction: opinions please
« Reply #32 on: April 22, 2008, 10:31:55 pm »
L at car?   ;)

Helpful as ever, eh?  ::-) :P

You're quite right Eck, Noodley is being deliberately unhelpful. You'd need to describe the car in more detail to avoid any possible confusion.
World Class Excuses for Piss-Poor Performances

rower40

  • Not my boat. Mine has SPDs.
Re: Routesheet instruction: opinions please
« Reply #33 on: April 22, 2008, 10:37:51 pm »
Just attach a link to the above photo on the route-sheet. :)
Be Naughty; save Santa a trip

Spikey

Re: Routesheet instruction: opinions please
« Reply #34 on: April 23, 2008, 05:43:10 pm »
... "L on RH bend sp Cortachy (B955)".
I'd prefer "L on RH bend B955 sp Cortachy"

The brackets might confuse me a little as this might imply its not actually the B955, but a road signposted as leeding towards the B955.

By analogy: "L on RH bend sp xxx (M1)" would imply towards the M1 while "L on RH bend M1 sp xxx" would imply joining the M1 which would of course be illegal.

As another example: "SO at X Axxx"  would imply straight on at crossroads, onto the Axxx, while "SO at X (Axxx)" would imply crossing the Axxx, and "SO at X sp (Axxx)" would imply the road is signposted as leeding towards the Axxx.


Re: Routesheet instruction: opinions please
« Reply #35 on: April 23, 2008, 06:01:14 pm »
Jesus H Christ!!! - I'll set of a few hours day early to make sure I'm back first and stand at the bloody junction pointing  ;D

frere yacker

Re: Routesheet instruction: opinions please
« Reply #36 on: April 23, 2008, 07:16:20 pm »
Jesus H Christ!!! - I'll set of a few hours day early to make sure I'm back first and stand at the bloody junction pointing  ;D

In which case the route sheet should say

L by Noodley