Google maps Sustrans route catastrophe

[albion]

Having come across a few recent route errors it appears to me Google maps has removed much of the National cycle route.
Try getting from Bowes (Barnard Castle) to the Tan Hill Inn and you will see what I mean, the correct cycling route being a near straight line along national route 70, that section being the very popular Sleightholme Moor.

There are other instances, it also screwing up walking routes, not that they were good anyway.
I am not quite sure what is going on but is this a side effect of Google crazy routes or are they mainly still there?

 

[matticus]

Yes, they've made some alterations near me. I'm inclined to say they're not "wrong", as they've downgraded some bits that I KNOW to have crap surfaces which have deteriorated in the last couple of years!

But frankly (and I don't mean to sound unsympathetic, I'm sure this isn't news to you) Google is rubbish for plotting bike/pedestrian routes anyway. It can help with some general ideas and overview of course.

 

[albion]

It is my quick and easy first stage planner. But removing actual walking and cycling routes compounds the madness.
Strangely, I suspect the full on crazy life risking high mountain bridleway routes are still there.
So its route grabber system has likely malfunctioned on some OS or Sustrans change.

 

[albion]

Yes, they've made some alterations near me. I'm inclined to say they're not "wrong", as they've downgraded some bits that I KNOW to have crap surfaces which have deteriorated in the last couple of years!

But frankly (and I don't mean to sound unsympathetic, I'm sure this isn't news to you) Google is rubbish for plotting bike/pedestrian routes anyway. It can help with some general ideas and overview of course.

It is certainly an error or manor downgrade. They even lost the pennine way walking route too there.
I just checked. Normal mad routes elsewhere through bogs etc are still there.

 

[nogoodnamesleft]

It is my quick and easy first stage planner.

I use https://cycle.travel quick and easy and free and designed to give good cycling routes with a range of options as to the nature of the rote (eg paved, allow unpaved, cycle route, etc.).

 

[albion]

I use https://cycle.travel quick and easy and free and designed to give good cycling routes with a range of options as to the nature of the rote (eg paved, allow unpaved, cycle route, etc.).

I use Organic Maps which does great offline planning and gets that route exact for both walking and cycling, the walking route adhering to the pennine way more fully. However,my initial overview plan is always Google maps, probably because I use it to navigate by voice to en-route shops. I rarely bother with a screen map whilst actually cycling.
I suspect Organic Maps and its offshoot CoMaps is much like Komoot but fully offline, both using OSM as the base.

Another thing I noticed is that Google is labelling some cycle routes and not others. So you can get route 7, route 71 but not labelling for route 70.

 

[albion]

Interestingly I also found Organic Maps can do strange about turns, going backwards rather than the logical route.
Komoot though, can do better in some ways. Though it misses confidence inspiring certain routes, instead taking you across fords.

 

[mjr]

But frankly (and I don't mean to sound unsympathetic, I'm sure this isn't news to you) Google is rubbish for plotting bike/pedestrian routes anyway. It can help with some general ideas and overview of course.

There's a Not Just Bikes video that explains how and some of the why Google maps is so terrible for cycling or walking.

 

[albion]

There's a Not Just Bikes video that explains how and some of the why Google maps is so terrible for cycling or walking.

Extremely convenient though. I suspect a bug caused by some change in one of the datasets they access.

 

[mjr]

Extremely convenient though. I suspect a bug caused by some change in one of the datasets they access.

Only convenient to open because it's preinstalled on so many devices. It's not convenient to actually use because the routes it generates are so awful and the map data is so often wrong. It's less likely to send you to completely the wrong place as when it was newer, but the routes are still pretty unsuitable and the driving time estimates for most of rural England are either wildly optimistic or require antisocial speeds through residential areas and "check and proceed" narrow country lanes.

Use co maps or some brouter or graphhopper based tool, I'd say.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Google maps for cycling 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

 

[albion]

Only convenient to open because it's preinstalled on so many devices. It's not convenient to actually use because the routes it generates are so awful and the map data is so often wrong. It's less likely to send you to completely the wrong place as when it was newer, but the routes are still pretty unsuitable and the driving time estimates for most of rural England are either wildly optimistic or require antisocial speeds through residential areas and "check and proceed" narrow country lanes.

Use co maps or some brouter or graphhopper based tool, I'd say.

Route 65 is near enough impossible to follow through Middlesborough without a GPS navigation.
And shopping diversions are a Google asset too, voice guidance a very convenient quick solution.
And for route planning, Google maps Street View usually confirms the quality of cycle paths.

I use OS maps for final confirmation, but that Sleightholme 'about turn' is one of the most bizarre problem seen, ignoring the usual none existant ferries and bridges.

 

[nogoodnamesleft]

There's a Not Just Bikes video that explains how and some of the why Google maps is so terrible for cycling or walking.

Thanks for that. Found & watched and very interesting (assuming it's the one about Amsterdam you are referring to).

In addition to the Google Maps aspects to me it also indirectly highlighted how NL manages to implement cycle/active travel friendly measures where in UK it seems a continual fight and where measures are taken then next council undoes them, then it goes to court ...

 

[nogoodnamesleft]

Only convenient to open because it's preinstalled on so many devices. It's not convenient to actually use because the routes it generates are so awful and the map data is so often wrong. It's less likely to send you to completely the wrong place as when it was newer, but the routes are still pretty unsuitable and the driving time estimates for most of rural England are either wildly optimistic or require antisocial speeds through residential areas and "check and proceed" narrow country lanes.

Use co maps or some brouter or graphhopper based tool, I'd say.

I've not used Google Maps for driving directions but rarely do use Apple Maps (again, as you say, because it's pre-installed plus I won't give Google any info about myself). And I have the impression Apple Maps is a similar disaster. On several occasions it goes disastrouns in last mile to destination taking you round in circles.

One aspect that may have some advantages (as well as some disadvantages) is that the traffic jam and delays avoidance means drivers are not trying to use their phones whilst moving approaching a line of stopped traffic ahead as the app will be doing that allowing them to focus on driving.