Point taken about it similarly occurring on OSM maps.
Whilst I do use the OSM maps on the device, I haven't had the need to use them for routeing purposes.
Shaping Points Advice
- Thread starter Becksy
- Start date
Point taken about it similarly occurring on OSM maps.
Whilst I do use the OSM maps on the device, I haven't had the need to use them for routeing purposes.
John it maybe an idea for you to send me a route that you have created the way you would normally do it. you could trace this route from this morning that i have done or make it bigger or smaller, suit yourself where to and from as long as it has places i can deviate from and back to the route use my home as a start point., try not to make it a million miles out of my way.
This would then eliviate any discrepencies with mapsource or indeed the way i created it, as i would just load the route on the nav, .
Link to the route https://www.dropbox.com/s/zhgsnb0gv7zbfez/John.gdb?dl=0
This would then eliviate any discrepencies with mapsource or indeed the way i created it, as i would just load the route on the nav, .
Link to the route https://www.dropbox.com/s/zhgsnb0gv7zbfez/John.gdb?dl=0
The Grey One
Registered user
Good idea, I am going out now for the rest of the day, I will try to do it later but it might have to wait until Sunday
John
No problem John i will wait for a link. By the way thats not my real home destination but its close enough.
Not that I didn't believe youI had in my mind a view of how I thought it works whereas reality of how it actually works is slightly different but good to know/understand how it handles shaping points.
As for skip function yes could have tried it (I may do a re run and try it) thought it was only for Waypoints
from another source
Skipping a point in your route
If you pass a waypoint and the device did not announce it (no route directions given until you either go back to it or skip it), you can skip it by (in the map view) tap 3 bars in the lower RH corner select skip, it will then direct you to the next waypoint/shaping point. This prevents the device attempting to route you back to the missed point.
The Grey One
Registered user
Recieved route, thanks John, droped it into the nav with no recalculation i did not load it via mapsource just incase it might have interfered with the route, drove to the start and set off, at my first deviation from route a waypoint i presume, it recalculated then tried to send me back to it but i carried on, it picked the route back up within about 5 seconds after ignoring it, the second deviation off route i took it recalculated and tried to send me left to the missed point this was ignored and i carried on about 10 seconds later it picked the route back up and carried on to the final destination.
I can not for the life of me as yet fathom what is going on, I have no doubts that what you are saying happens when you build a route with your software and use your unit and dont get this anomaly, is indeed true, the fact that i do not get the same results with my equiptment begs the question of what is going on.
Having spent a great deal of time reading about this anomaly, it does seem that some people encounter it and others dont, I can not find any cast iron reason as to why people are getting the different routing results, I could probably post dozens of peoples posts from various forums who have this same issue and a dozens who dont, and it does not appear to be unit or software or even map specific, people with 590's, nav5's, 390's 660's and other units say they have this anomaly and others with the same do not, and the same goes for mapsource and basecamp.
Back to the drawing board.
John if you take a look at the route you sent, the first point it tried to send me back to was the Butterley lane one , the second was the main road 1 . after that i followed the route to the diagonal at the green and carried straight on, and the nav recalculated a left at the cross roads to the next point as i would have expected and then on to home.
Perhaps you can send me a route that you do on a regular basis and i will plot it and send it to yo to try.
I can not for the life of me as yet fathom what is going on, I have no doubts that what you are saying happens when you build a route with your software and use your unit and dont get this anomaly, is indeed true, the fact that i do not get the same results with my equiptment begs the question of what is going on.
Having spent a great deal of time reading about this anomaly, it does seem that some people encounter it and others dont, I can not find any cast iron reason as to why people are getting the different routing results, I could probably post dozens of peoples posts from various forums who have this same issue and a dozens who dont, and it does not appear to be unit or software or even map specific, people with 590's, nav5's, 390's 660's and other units say they have this anomaly and others with the same do not, and the same goes for mapsource and basecamp.
Back to the drawing board.
John if you take a look at the route you sent, the first point it tried to send me back to was the Butterley lane one , the second was the main road 1 . after that i followed the route to the diagonal at the green and carried straight on, and the nav recalculated a left at the cross roads to the next point as i would have expected and then on to home.
Perhaps you can send me a route that you do on a regular basis and i will plot it and send it to yo to try.
The Grey One
Registered user
It would be useful if you could let me know what the route looked like when you had it on your Nav V. When you start the route you should be able to see the list of points. There should have been start and finish waypoints with only one other waypoint (Butterly Lane) with all the other 4 points showing as blue dots. On my route there is no "main road 1" only a "main road" Is it possible that your device has added this in? I would expect any device to try and route you back to a waypoint as my understanding is that a waypoint is an instruction to the device that you must go there.
Maybe you could try opening my route in Mapsource, check it is as described and then recalculate it to see if it changes. I do this with routes people send me, I make a copy of the route and recalculate that, it often shows where extra points might be needed to ensure the route works as intended. You could then download the route from mapsource and check again that it is exactly as planned.
I think the reason some have this problem and some not could be down to what software versions are being used. I had a brief period a while ago when my device appeared to treat via points as waypoints and continually try to route me back as you have described. After another software update the problem went away. My fear is it might come back with a future update.
John
Maybe you could try opening my route in Mapsource, check it is as described and then recalculate it to see if it changes. I do this with routes people send me, I make a copy of the route and recalculate that, it often shows where extra points might be needed to ensure the route works as intended. You could then download the route from mapsource and check again that it is exactly as planned.
I think the reason some have this problem and some not could be down to what software versions are being used. I had a brief period a while ago when my device appeared to treat via points as waypoints and continually try to route me back as you have described. After another software update the problem went away. My fear is it might come back with a future update.
John
Well not being one to give up, i decided to try Johns route again this morning, only this time loaded it via mapsource, let the unit recalculate and load it, i then compared the recalculated route whith the origional and it was exactly the same no changes had been made, at least no visible changes. set of to the start and then did the route, this time at any deviation of the route it did not try to send me back to a missed shaping point but did indeed take me to the next one, at a deviation from a waypoint it did re route to take me there, So go figure, there must be a reason for this, why my and many others routes do the opposite and do try to route back to a missed shaping point and Johns didnt. I need to take a step back and try and study the difference between john's route and the copy of it i am going to do, i will take a look at the data in note pad to see if i can spot whats happening.
Sorry john you must have replied while i was typing
Sorry john you must have replied while i was typing
I am using a zumo 660 John and all points were as you describe in both instances the only difference is that instead of dots it uses flags. the reason for the main road 1 was i had left my origional point in and it renamed yours with the 1 tag.
Interesting. I read a similar article on the BBC here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-37703556
I still believe the root issue has more to do with the mapsets, than anything else. Different "values" are placed on various roads to achieve the USP of these devices.
I can't quite reconcile why we are trying to determine the differences of modern devices, but still using obsolete Mapsource software. I do accept some users prefer MS over BC but the analogy is the same as trying to use a GS911 to find faults with an 1150 machine. Each to their own, of course, and my post here isn't one trying to show the rights of one over the other. My point is that Garmin are -or should be - aligning their latest devices to BC, over MS?
Basecamp certainly has more preference settings, but doesn't have a setting for lorries (or at least, I haven't found it) as already mentioned.
The satnav I have in my car will produce three different route choices, and for me to 'take a pick'. If I decide to drive a different route it remembers it and offers it to me the next time I select the same destination. That calculation can only be made using predetermined values for specific roads. Then, if there is traffic congestion along the route, a recalculation takes place (again) and offers an alternative, which may be accepted or declined by the driver. Again, it's down to the road values of a given mapset.
With the program getting underway in the UK by Ordnance Survey (and not before time) we may end up eventually with a common denominator of roads which match UK drivers and riders, rather than those set by an American based company, or a continental Mapper, and their logic.
Boy, am I glad I always plot my own routes, don't use the recalculate function and have consigned Mapsource (along with my PC) to the bin.
Nothing I have read in this thread gives me any encouragement to start doing otherwise or going back in time to my PC and Mapsource, though full marks to the bods for the experiments.
Nothing I have read in this thread gives me any encouragement to start doing otherwise or going back in time to my PC and Mapsource, though full marks to the bods for the experiments.
The Grey One
Registered user
Basecamp does have a setting for lorries but being American they call them trucks!
As for still using Mapsource, I am happy to continue doing so as , for me, it is both easier to use and produces the results I want. Mapsource is no longer being developed but that does not mean it does not work. Basecamp is being "improved" all the time, sometimes with unwanted results.
I use OSM maps which are now at the point where they look very much like Ordnance Survey ones and have a similar level of detail. I still think routing problems are more down to the software. Changing the maps does not get you away from the options listed in Basecamp ( Interstates, Highways etc) which I suspect are also on the devices. One of the problems appears to be that narrow lanes are classified on the same level as faster B roads. Part of this might be down to the fact of the spread of ridiculous speed limits on the bigger roads that don't apply to narrow lane-most are still national limit at 60 mph whereas other roads may be 50 or even 40 for long stretches. Could the devices simply be using these limits to calculate a theoretical "fastest" time?
John
As for still using Mapsource, I am happy to continue doing so as , for me, it is both easier to use and produces the results I want. Mapsource is no longer being developed but that does not mean it does not work. Basecamp is being "improved" all the time, sometimes with unwanted results.
I use OSM maps which are now at the point where they look very much like Ordnance Survey ones and have a similar level of detail. I still think routing problems are more down to the software. Changing the maps does not get you away from the options listed in Basecamp ( Interstates, Highways etc) which I suspect are also on the devices. One of the problems appears to be that narrow lanes are classified on the same level as faster B roads. Part of this might be down to the fact of the spread of ridiculous speed limits on the bigger roads that don't apply to narrow lane-most are still national limit at 60 mph whereas other roads may be 50 or even 40 for long stretches. Could the devices simply be using these limits to calculate a theoretical "fastest" time?
John
indeed your views may well be correct, and i may never know the reason why we get the differences we do, but me being me would like to try and find out why. This particular anomaly does not affect me, as i have said i do not use the recalculation mode, but when somebody says my unit does this or that and i contradict it, and then i am proved to be wrong i would like to find out the reason why i get one result and another bod gets a different result, this is mainly for my own clarification.
The Grey One
Registered user
And I also plan my own routes, am glad I use auto recalculate and Mapsource. Whenever I look at Basecamp I am reminded of why I do this. I do understand that Basecamp was designed to work on a Mac and is reputedly better on that platform but on my PC it is harder and more long winded to use and offers nothing extra in return.
As many have said each to his own. I echo your comments regarding the effort people are putting in on this.
John
Apologies, I stand corrected; however, what parameters have Garmin set to differentiate an American juggernaut from, say, one of our towering over-height forty-tonners? Or, a European 12-wheel tipper truck, which is far more manoeuvrable than the proverbial artic?!!
That depends on the speed parameters you've set in Basecamp/Mapsource software. Although, naturally, you don't have the facility of changing speed settings for different roads in your device.
I agree, it doesn't, but there has to be a default antecedent cascade logic summation to any calculation (there's a mathematical phrase - remember BODMAS from your school days -for this, but it slips my mind just now...) made by either the device or the software, to produce a desired result.
Top-and-bottom of it all, there are so many variables involved, that you easily lose the will to live trying to deduce the logic of the creators.
Given that there appears to be a problem of some sort with some devices (only when making a recalution for the rider going off route) then taking into account shaping points that have been missed but then, the rider having ridden a bit further, the device recalculating again to ignore the missed points.... maybe there is a case to use the minimum amount of shaping points required when creating a route rather than using more and more?
That way at least there'd less missed out shaping points for the device to erroneously pick up on.
When creating a route, I ask my BaseCamp running Mac to generate A to B. I then drag the magenta line to travel along the roads I want to take, nailing it with shaping points or - to be more exact - software generated waypoints that I then manually convert to unannounced shaping points. If the shaping point I put in fixes the route where I want it to go, I don't add another two or three just for the sake of it. Sometimes I do have to go back and do a little re-fixing as a change lower down the route might alter something I'd already done but that I can live with. John tells us he uses more shaping points, deliberately adding them to fix junctions; maybe it might be an idea to have a go using less, perhaps? It can't hurt and nothing will break.
When I created the Alleenstrasse routes I traced over parts of routes I had already made to create a second version, slightly amended. You can see them in the thread coloured red as opposed to magenta.
http://www.ukgser.com/forums/showthread.php/437281-Deutsche-Alleenstrasse Post #22
I have often noticed how few shaping points are sometimes needed, fewer in fact than when I make the original version of a route, to make an amended copy.
That way at least there'd less missed out shaping points for the device to erroneously pick up on.
When creating a route, I ask my BaseCamp running Mac to generate A to B. I then drag the magenta line to travel along the roads I want to take, nailing it with shaping points or - to be more exact - software generated waypoints that I then manually convert to unannounced shaping points. If the shaping point I put in fixes the route where I want it to go, I don't add another two or three just for the sake of it. Sometimes I do have to go back and do a little re-fixing as a change lower down the route might alter something I'd already done but that I can live with. John tells us he uses more shaping points, deliberately adding them to fix junctions; maybe it might be an idea to have a go using less, perhaps? It can't hurt and nothing will break.
When I created the Alleenstrasse routes I traced over parts of routes I had already made to create a second version, slightly amended. You can see them in the thread coloured red as opposed to magenta.
http://www.ukgser.com/forums/showthread.php/437281-Deutsche-Alleenstrasse Post #22
I have often noticed how few shaping points are sometimes needed, fewer in fact than when I make the original version of a route, to make an amended copy.
Let's direct that question to the UKTRUKer forum or we'll get distracted and even further off-route from the task at hand.
Richard that may be all well and good on a short journey, but imagine being turned back to a missed point many miles away in the oposite direction to what you are traveling, or it throws a benny and comes up with garbage similar to what you had in Germany at your umleitung, i could not say for certain that a big distance between shaping points makes a difference, but what i can say is during 1 test the unit would rather have taken me to a missed shaping point that was at least 700 yards away maybe more, than to take me to the destination that was about 50 yards away.
but like yourself i do not use recalculation, but having run The Grey Ones route and observed how it works, i could see why it would be advantageouse to some.
but like yourself i do not use recalculation, but having run The Grey Ones route and observed how it works, i could see why it would be advantageouse to some.
I agree and can imagine the potential problem encountered. File my suggestion under 'Useless' but somebody might try it.
I shan't be in any hurry to push recalculate again, though I might muck around with the 'deviation' option on my Nav V just for fun when next I come to a German roadworks.
I am now only left wondering how often bods really go so far off-route as to justify having a recalculate function. I can though understand the comfort it (should) bring if they do do it a lot.
but somebody might try it. I shan't be in any hurry to push recalculate again, though I might muck around with the 'deviation' option on my Nav V just for fun when next I come to a German roadworks.
I am now only left wondering how often bods really go so far off-route as to justify having a recalculate function. I can though understand the comfort it (should) bring if they do do it a lot.
Similar threads
