Routes - but better than Sustrans

[Solocle]

Hi all,
An idea I've been toying with for a while.

I'm sure most of us will have encountered nonsense infrastructure from Sustrans at some point. On the flipside, the main road network can equally be inappropriate.

I'd like to see a network of long distance touring routes, which are good for road bikes (unlike Sustrans routes), but, while not necessarily child friendly like Sustrans' current focus seems to be, would be good for the average tourer.

I'd organise these based on the following principles:

• Routes follow the general route of a (major) road - for ease of navigation.
• The route must visit all primary destinations on the route of said road.
• The route must rival the convenience of the matching road - so minimise distance added, and minimise added climbing.
• The route should pass through places of civilisation on a regular basis to offer places to refill water bottles etc.

Spoiler: Worked example

So to use a worked example, I probably know the A30 best, having ridden the whole corridor.
This route has to pass through Land's End - Penzance - Redruth - Bodmin - Launceston - Okehampton - Exeter - Honiton - Yeovil - Salisbury - Basingstoke - Staines - Hounslow.

Land's End - Penzance-Redruth is fairly simple. The A30 can be a little hectic, but is nothing too terrifying, and avoiding it is a substantial trade off. Once you get to Hayle, the old A30 is an absolute winner, unless you're out to set the LEJOG record.

Redruth-Fraddon. I used the A30 route here, for convenience at a quiet time. This was one of the more tricky navigational questions. Thankfully, with the coming of the Chiverton-Carland Cross scheme, in a year or two the existing road will be yet another section of quiet old A30, closing one of the major gaps.

Fraddon - Bodmin - Launceston - Okehampton At Fraddon my long distance route choice skipped a primary destination, Bodmin. Also, the A39 might be knarly itself at a different time of day. Thus I'd say the blue route looks like a good touring route, although I can't be 100% positive.

Okehampton - Exeter - Honiton - trivially use the old A30.

Honiton to Yeovil - less trivial. At this stage, I was in "dear lord please no more hills" mode. But the A303 is not going to be to everybody's cup of tea! The A30 is actually a good route to Chard, nice and quiet, but it's quite gruelling in the Blackdowns. A30 Chard to Crewkerne is rather more busy, too much so to include on the route. Thus this is my suggstion, although I haven't ridden these roads:

Yeovil to Salisbury - a fair bit easier now. My preferred route is A30 from Shaftesbury to Salisbury, it's a quiet road, with some interesting things like the Fovant badges. If you like a slower pace, the dotted route via Gillingham and Tisbury minimises elevation on quiet roads, at the cost of added distance and less ability to hammer descents (also offering train stations!).

Salisbury to Basingstoke. Another potential fun one. My instincts are to avoid the A30 as far as the A343 turning for Andover (which seems to carry the bulk of the traffic, the A30 thereafter is a nice quick run across the downs. This is easier said than done. Thus I've used the A30 both times out that way. Perhaps going via A338/Andover would be better, but I can't speak for that route.

Basingstoke-Staines.
I've only ever done this section on the A30, which has served me well, although it's not really a relaxed touring route. It looks like a nice B road route is possible, but I'd defer to local knowledge for this section.

Staines - Hounslow - Central London.
A fairly straightforward route down the A315. Just a deviate to avoid the A30 London Road,and then it's a straight line down the Roman Road right into the centre.

 

[Brandane]

It has been done, by a member of this very forum.
cycle.travel

Edit, to credit the inventor...
@Richard Fairhurst .

 

[Mike_P]

Would also need to take account of some roads being okay in one direction but not the other due to bends and gradients. There are local A and B roads that I quite happily cycle on one direction but would not think about doing it in the opposite.

 

[Jameshow]

I did bradford to derby earlier in the summer up
Through brighouse up over the a629 summit of penistone hill down through Sheffield, chesterfield, Ripley and into derby. All main roads but not too busy as the m1 is close by.

Same from derby to Salisbury all main roads not a problem.

If your fairly confident on the road then I don't see what the problem with A roads is.

In fact I find I have more trouble with entitled motorists in the lanes of Yorkshire and Devon!

 

[Solocle]

It has been done, by a member of this very forum.
cycle.travel

Thing is I'm sort of thinking in terms of something that could be signed in a fixed manner like the Sustrans routes are.

This is something I mocked up:

I did bradford to derby earlier in the summer up
Through brighouse up over the a629 summit of penistone hill down through Sheffield, chesterfield, Ripley and into derby. All main roads but not too busy as the m1 is close by.

Same from derby to Salisbury all main roads not a problem.

If your fairly confident on the road then I don't see what the problem with A roads is.

In fact I find I have more trouble with entitled motorists in the lanes of Yorkshire and Devon!

I'm certainly not saying "no A roads". I don't mind making progress even on trunk dual carriageways in the middle of the night.

This was from my LEJOG. Obviously not an ideal road to be riding on, although I was firmly in "minimise effort" mode, which is why I even contemplated it.

And it was mostly downhill, a factor Mike mentions.

Would also need to take account of some roads being okay in one direction but not the other due to bends and gradients. There are local A and B roads that I quite happily cycle on one direction but would not think about doing it in the opposite.

Obviously it's impossible to sign an ideal route for everybody at any time of day. But I feel like having a route network that is guaranteed to be easily passable (unlike Sustrans routes), and guaranteed not to be pseudo-motorway (and generally a pleasant route, even if busy bits are necessary)... I feel that would be a game changer. Even if following road signs is a backup, it would be nice to have that workable backup.

 

[Brandane]

If your fairly confident on the road then I don't see what the problem with A roads is

I have this conversation with a cycle buddy regularly, as he can't get his head round why I head for the hills on B roads rather than cycle on our much flatter local A78 trunk road. I think twice about DRIVING on it!! As I say to him, I am perfectly confident of MY abilities on any road; it's all those other phone using, drink/drug taking, distracted by 100 other things car drivers that I have very little confidence in!

 

[HobbesOnTour]

would be good for the average tourer.

I've been dwelling recently on the propensity of cyclists to follow official routes.

My main question is why?

Why do cyclists often think of following a route rather than visiting A, B & C?

I've gone places in my car and never followed a route. I went where I wanted to go or my Satnav told me.
Ditto if visiting a city. I didn't look for a route to walk - I walked to where I wanted to go.

Why is it different on a bike?

I appreciate that cycling is different to being in a car because my relative comfort is far more important on a bike than a car but after that I'd rather be cycling where I wanted to go rather than simply following a route because it was an "official" route.

I can understand the satisfaction of a coast to coast or a LeJog but (and this is what interests me) I'd rather choose my own route based on the places I wanted to go along the way. If it's not an "official" route I couldn't give a damn.

I can also appreciate a themed route. Riding a river, canal or coast makes sense to me. A tour of Capital cities (or Cathedrals or war memorials etc.) less so - unless I can choose my own way between them.

I was bemused on here a couple of years ago when a new (and former) member created gps files for a route through France based on a book. They hadn't ridden the route, had used Google and were now selling those files despite there being dozens of versions available for free. I can't understand paying for that nor the need to "follow" a route (many years old at that stage) to the nearest meter. Perhaps I'm just odd.

You've clearly put a lot of thought and effort into this but (and I really don't mean to be negative) if you take 10 cyclists there will probably be at least 8 (and maybe 12) definitions of a bike tour. And as many varied opinions again on a route. Any route.

Of far more use, I think, would be the ability to share routes across platforms.
I know RWGPS offers the facility to search for other people's routes and Komoot has leapt in that direction recently. Of course, other than the raw data there is little else to go on. CrazyGuyOnABike can have routes and detailed journals to accompany them. And I can have a fair idea of the person posting them. I may even be able to talk to them.
BikepackingDOTcom does similar with bikepacking routes.

But back to your idea.....

I honestly think the days of signed on road cycle routes are a thing of the past. It's so difficult to agree a route, so expensive to sign it, and technology has made following a route so easy (and cheap!). To veer into NACA territory for a moment I don't think the political will exists for such a scheme either.

With GPS technology and smartphones it would be possible to create virtual routes - routes without the signage - that users can tweak to their own preferences. That's the kind of thing that could be done at minimal cost with a team of enthusiastic volunteers.

I'm not from the UK but have cycled there. Cycle Travel generated my route and I cycled it (coast to coast incidentally - both ways). The official Sustrans routes had me almost in tears at times with their inconsistent gates and my wide load so I have sympathy with your frustrations.

What is missing is that one-stop-shop for (virtual) routes.

 

[Solocle]

I've been dwelling recently on the propensity of cyclists to follow official routes.

My main question is why?

Why do cyclists often think of following a route rather than visiting A, B & C?

I've gone places in my car and never followed a route. I went where I wanted to go or my Satnav told me.
Ditto if visiting a city. I didn't look for a route to walk - I walked to where I wanted to go.

Why is it different on a bike?

I appreciate that cycling is different to being in a car because my relative comfort is far more important on a bike than a car but after that I'd rather be cycling where I wanted to go rather than simply following a route because it was an "official" route.

I can understand the satisfaction of a coast to coast or a LeJog but (and this is what interests me) I'd rather choose my own route based on the places I wanted to go along the way. If it's not an "official" route I couldn't give a damn.

I can also appreciate a themed route. Riding a river, canal or coast makes sense to me. A tour of Capital cities (or Cathedrals or war memorials etc.) less so - unless I can choose my own way between them.

I was bemused on here a couple of years ago when a new (and former) member created gps files for a route through France based on a book. They hadn't ridden the route, had used Google and were now selling those files despite there being dozens of versions available for free. I can't understand paying for that nor the need to "follow" a route (many years old at that stage) to the nearest meter. Perhaps I'm just odd.

You've clearly put a lot of thought and effort into this but (and I really don't mean to be negative) if you take 10 cyclists there will probably be at least 8 (and maybe 12) definitions of a bike tour. And as many varied opinions again on a route. Any route.

Of far more use, I think, would be the ability to share routes across platforms.
I know RWGPS offers the facility to search for other people's routes and Komoot has leapt in that direction recently. Of course, other than the raw data there is little else to go on. CrazyGuyOnABike can have routes and detailed journals to accompany them. And I can have a fair idea of the person posting them. I may even be able to talk to them.
BikepackingDOTcom does similar with bikepacking routes.

But back to your idea.....

I honestly think the days of signed on road cycle routes are a thing of the past. It's so difficult to agree a route, so expensive to sign it, and technology has made following a route so easy (and cheap!). To veer into NACA territory for a moment I don't think the political will exists for such a scheme either.

With GPS technology and smartphones it would be possible to create virtual routes - routes without the signage - that users can tweak to their own preferences. That's the kind of thing that could be done at minimal cost with a team of enthusiastic volunteers.

I'm not from the UK but have cycled there. Cycle Travel generated my route and I cycled it (coast to coast incidentally - both ways). The official Sustrans routes had me almost in tears at times with their inconsistent gates and my wide load so I have sympathy with your frustrations.

What is missing is that one-stop-shop for (virtual) routes.

I'm a bit leery of virtual routes, in case of technical failure. To use an example, I once missed a train (bike in tow) from London Paddington to Oxford. My phone was low on charge so I tried to conserve that. I made the mistake of following road signs for Oxford... and instantly ended up on the A40 Westway.

Having a network of long distance routes paralleling the route of main roads would offer an alternative route to cyclists potentially using said main road. And of course main roads are naturally major long distance routes.

I often set out with the aim of riding to X place. It's partlythe covering of the distance under my own power.
Although I have done a themed ride before, it was Roman Roads, which very much fits in with my "cover distance" enjoyment

 

[HobbesOnTour]

I'm a bit leery of virtual routes, in case of technical failure

Ever missed a sign?

I appreciate some have an aversion to tech but the fact is that it's a cheap way to do what you want to do.

I admire your optimism but as an outsider looking in there are so many problems with cycling and it's relationship to other forms of transport that I can't see a signed series of long distance routes being achievable without a long, hard slog.
I mean how does the long distance cyclist get home? On the train? It seems I'd need a logistics qualifications to contemplate that.

I really, really hate to be negative when it comes to long distance touring. Sorry.

It may be helpful to contact the ACA (Adventure Cycling Assoc) in the US. They have long distance (trans continental) routes, unsigned but with maps, GPS routes and an app and route information.

Good luck

 

[All uphill]

I've been dwelling recently on the propensity of cyclists to follow official routes.

My main question is why?

Why do cyclists often think of following a route rather than visiting A, B & C?

I've gone places in my car and never followed a route. I went where I wanted to go or my Satnav told me.
Ditto if visiting a city. I didn't look for a route to walk - I walked to where I wanted to go.

Why is it different on a bike?

I appreciate that cycling is different to being in a car because my relative comfort is far more important on a bike than a car but after that I'd rather be cycling where I wanted to go rather than simply following a route because it was an "official" route.

I can understand the satisfaction of a coast to coast or a LeJog but (and this is what interests me) I'd rather choose my own route based on the places I wanted to go along the way. If it's not an "official" route I couldn't give a damn.

I can also appreciate a themed route. Riding a river, canal or coast makes sense to me. A tour of Capital cities (or Cathedrals or war memorials etc.) less so - unless I can choose my own way between them.

I was bemused on here a couple of years ago when a new (and former) member created gps files for a route through France based on a book. They hadn't ridden the route, had used Google and were now selling those files despite there being dozens of versions available for free. I can't understand paying for that nor the need to "follow" a route (many years old at that stage) to the nearest meter. Perhaps I'm just odd.

You've clearly put a lot of thought and effort into this but (and I really don't mean to be negative) if you take 10 cyclists there will probably be at least 8 (and maybe 12) definitions of a bike tour. And as many varied opinions again on a route. Any route.

Of far more use, I think, would be the ability to share routes across platforms.
I know RWGPS offers the facility to search for other people's routes and Komoot has leapt in that direction recently. Of course, other than the raw data there is little else to go on. CrazyGuyOnABike can have routes and detailed journals to accompany them. And I can have a fair idea of the person posting them. I may even be able to talk to them.
BikepackingDOTcom does similar with bikepacking routes.

But back to your idea.....

I honestly think the days of signed on road cycle routes are a thing of the past. It's so difficult to agree a route, so expensive to sign it, and technology has made following a route so easy (and cheap!). To veer into NACA territory for a moment I don't think the political will exists for such a scheme either.

With GPS technology and smartphones it would be possible to create virtual routes - routes without the signage - that users can tweak to their own preferences. That's the kind of thing that could be done at minimal cost with a team of enthusiastic volunteers.

I'm not from the UK but have cycled there. Cycle Travel generated my route and I cycled it (coast to coast incidentally - both ways). The official Sustrans routes had me almost in tears at times with their inconsistent gates and my wide load so I have sympathy with your frustrations.

What is missing is that one-stop-shop for (virtual) routes.

I understand many counties in the UK are no longer maintaining sign posts for motor vehicles because of cost, and because, apparently, almost no one uses them anymore having satnav in their vehicle. Seems unlikely they would create new signs for cyclists.

I do feel the need for a reliable guide when I want to cycle to Salisbury, for example, and don't want to spend ages planning my own route. So far I have tried Google, Sustrans and a couple of apps and found them all wanting in one respect or another. Maybe this is because different cyclists want such different things. I want slow and scenic, you may want direct and fast.

The knooppunten in the Netherlands worked for me.

In the UK I seem to end up with a rough map in my head and an OS map in my bag for the frequent times when I lose my sense of place and direction. No wonder I cycle mostly on my own - I'd drive anyone else mad.

 

[HobbesOnTour]

I understand many counties in the UK are no longer maintaining sign posts for motor vehicles

Unfortunately, I think that is the way things are going.
And of course, a long distance route in involves multiple local governments.

The Vennbahn, for example passes through several countries and different municipalities within each country - the signage changes a lot!

So far I have tried Google, Sustrans and a couple of apps and found them all wanting in one respect or another

I recommend cycle Travel for reliable, quick plotting.
And a bit of imagination for when a route turns dull or challenging

I want slow and scenic, you may want direct and fast.

You've clearly never met me!
But the point is valid.
And it may change from day to day.

The knooppunten in the Netherlands worked for me.

They're great. Not very direct and can require a bit of focus and they change from province to province too!

when I lose my sense of place and direction.

You're lucky! Some of us don't have a sense of direction to lose!

 

[Mike_P]

Any updating of an existing signage would be useful if NCNs were identfied as to what bike they were suitable for, Locally to me NCN67 is suitable for road bikes except where it goes under the A658 via a muddy bridleway that is only passible by MTBs so that section should be identified as such and alternatives given for other cyclists

 

[Jameshow]

Thing is I'm sort of thinking in terms of something that could be signed in a fixed manner like the Sustrans routes are.

This is something I mocked up:
View attachment 666464


I'm certainly not saying "no A roads". I don't mind making progress even on trunk dual carriageways in the middle of the night.

This was from my LEJOG. Obviously not an ideal road to be riding on, although I was firmly in "minimise effort" mode, which is why I even contemplated it.
View attachment 666465
And it was mostly downhill, a factor Mike mentions.


Obviously it's impossible to sign an ideal route for everybody at any time of day. But I feel like having a route network that is guaranteed to be easily passable (unlike Sustrans routes), and guaranteed not to be pseudo-motorway (and generally a pleasant route, even if busy bits are necessary)... I feel that would be a game changer. Even if following road signs is a backup, it would be nice to have that workable backup.

You have to if your motive is traveling light and fast!!

 

[Richard Fairhurst]

I think Hobbes has hit the nail on the head - ask 10 different cyclists and you'll get 12 different answers. There's a lot in your example route that I personally wouldn't consider "easily passable" or "a pleasant route". That's not to say I'm right and you're wrong, or vice versa. But it's not the sort of cycling I like to do.

Local authorities are risk-averse, largely because people sue at the drop of a hat these days. I was once involved in a signposted route project where the local authority refused to countenance a cycle route going north-south across this junction - https://goo.gl/maps/aztYr57n4oZDZCDz5 - because they thought the crossing was too dangerous. If they're not happy with that, they are never going to agree to sign the A30 from Shaftesbury to Salisbury as a cycle route.

I like cycle.travel's style of routes which is why I built it like that! I'm sure it'll be too winding and indirect for you. That's fine. There are other route-planners available with different takes, or you can customise your own preferences using something like brouter.de. Just get a battery backup for your phone, or an app that doesn't gobble battery, or a Garmin with good battery life (an Edge 530 will do 20 hours happily) - it's a solved problem.

 

[Dogtrousers]

I'm a bit puzzled by this.

Much of the UK is blessed with a tremendous network of B roads and it's possible to get from any given A to any B via a huge variety of different routes. For instance, I often ride up to see friends near Coventry and I rarely follow the same route twice. So why do we need to define one route?

Just jook at a map, use the route planner of your choice, use a search engine for cafés (or CC's café map) look on the map for other points of interest, and Bob's your uncle.

On the other hand, there are some places where the network is dominated by motorways and dual carriageways and a bit of local knowledge is needed to thread through, but they tend to be exceptions.