Can't always trust Google Maps....
-
I've never trusted google maps because the first time I used it I tried a route that I already knew quite well. In order to get out of Edinburgh it decided that the best route was to head north out of the city centre, then turn west for about 5 miles, then back south again (to get on the same road that the directions started on), then west along a motorway (for 30 miles) and south along another (for 40 miles) before meeting the route I'd have chosen. Google said its route would take about 2 hours. The route I would have chosen went directly south out of Edinburgh City Centre and along a south-west route once out the city for about 50 miles before connecting with the route google suggested. I know that route would take about 2 hours. I've driven google's route (without heading the wrong way in the city itself) and I know it will take about 2.5 hours.
Upcoming Scottish Developers events: * We are starting a series of events in Glasgow in 2007. Are you interested in a particular subject, or as a speaker? * Developer Day Scotland: are you interested in speaking or attending? My: Website | Blog | Photos
Before I moved into my current apartment I entered the address into mapquest (as I wasn't sure where it was). I was reading the directions and something struck me as odd and it didn't really register with me until I got to that point in the directions... It wanted me to go the wrong way down a one-way. I agree it would have been the fastest and shortest route, but certainly the most dangerous.
Matt Newman
Even the very best tools in the hands of an idiot will produce something of little or no value. - Chris Meech on Idiots -
Before I moved into my current apartment I entered the address into mapquest (as I wasn't sure where it was). I was reading the directions and something struck me as odd and it didn't really register with me until I got to that point in the directions... It wanted me to go the wrong way down a one-way. I agree it would have been the fastest and shortest route, but certainly the most dangerous.
Matt Newman
Even the very best tools in the hands of an idiot will produce something of little or no value. - Chris Meech on Idiots -
I don't think you can blame it on the lorry drivers, most of the time it comes down from the haulage firms. Apparently you can buy in-cab GPS systems that are aware of your height and length and can route accordingly, but they are more expensive than the ones you get for cars so many firms don't bother. Personally I use GPS for the map only, so I can see where I am and check I am on the road I am expecting to be on. I find it much easier than constantly tracing a route on a printed map. You would be a fool to ever start driving without knowing the route you were taking, even if it is just writing down a bunch of road names from Autoroute or a book of maps.
Ðavid Wulff What kind of music to programmers listen to?
Join the Code Project Last.fm group | dwulff
I'm so gangsta I eat cereal without the milkDavid Wulff wrote:
I don't think you can blame it on the lorry drivers, most of the time it comes down from the haulage firms.
:confused: It's the haulage firms' fault that their drivers don't (1) know the heights of their vehicles and (2) read road signs? I can't agree. It's like a passenger telling you to go the wrong way down a wrong way street and you doing it regardless of what the signs say. It's the driver's fault for not driving safely and paying attention to the roads.
-
David Wulff wrote:
I don't think you can blame it on the lorry drivers, most of the time it comes down from the haulage firms.
:confused: It's the haulage firms' fault that their drivers don't (1) know the heights of their vehicles and (2) read road signs? I can't agree. It's like a passenger telling you to go the wrong way down a wrong way street and you doing it regardless of what the signs say. It's the driver's fault for not driving safely and paying attention to the roads.
Steve_Harris wrote:
It's the haulage firms' fault that their drivers don't (1) know the heights of their vehicles and (2) read road signs?
No, it is the haulage firms' fault for forcing them to follow their preset routes. Shorter, quicker routes = less fuel costs and faster turnaround. They had a phone in discussion on the radio a few weeks back about this and some drivers called in to say that they were basically told to follow the shortest routes or drop off their keys on their way out of the depot. With firms facing costs that are constantly rising above the prices they can charge, it is no wonder that some are having to take risks to stay in business. We're not talking about drivers breaking the road laws here, we're talking about them legally using marked B and C roads when they would normally use the main routes. As the sat nav data providers start to include more information about height and weight obstacles, the problem should eventually go away, but at present the data is only there with a few providers and it is expensive to upgrade. You need new equipment, and new - more costly - subscriptions.
Ðavid Wulff What kind of music to programmers listen to?
Join the Code Project Last.fm group | dwulff
I'm so gangsta I eat cereal without the milk -
I was reading about James Kim on wikipedia, and came across this: Wow! I wonder if the GPS system in the cars would show a better route than Google maps does. ============================================== Some observers believe that the Kim tragedy highlights the limitations of Google Maps, Yahoo! Maps, MapQuest, and other online mapping applications. Because the Kims, who did not know the area, had telephoned from Roseburg, Oregon to a motel in Gold Beach, to say that they would be arriving late, it was speculated that James Kim, a technology expert, used online mapping to find the “fastest” route between Roseburg and Gold Beach. During the hunt for the Kims, a number of computer users tested programs such as Google Maps and MapQuest to map the shortest route between the two towns. The programs reportedly listed Bear Camp Road, where the Kims got stuck, as the most efficient shortcut. However, it is rarely used even by local residents due to its difficult terrain and inclement weather.[11] The online mapping programs have apparently changed and as of December 7, 2006, show the drive along Highways 5 and 42 to Coast Highway 101 as the preferred route between Roseburg and Gold Beach. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Kim[^]
- mapping systems have no knowledge of elevation deltas (or elevation in general) 2) even google earth, where you "see" elevation data, don't assume it actually examines it 3) nothing has ever come close to human parallel thought, don't knock the mind, its smarter than a computer 4) There is no correlation between street addresses and geographical location (lat/long) 5) There is very limited geographical information on roads, absolute minimal point to point mapping 6) Read the directions, look at the roads in hybrid on imagery, ask locals (yes I advocate talking to people) When I travel I do use mapping programs, GPS's and other devices, but I know they have the reroute for gps devices and use it. If it looks like too difficult to travel, I pass it, force the system to reroute. I ask at hotels to verify directions, rental car places. Or drive with someone else the first time when possible. Technology is "an assistant" not a replacement for thought.
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
I was reading about James Kim on wikipedia, and came across this: Wow! I wonder if the GPS system in the cars would show a better route than Google maps does. ============================================== Some observers believe that the Kim tragedy highlights the limitations of Google Maps, Yahoo! Maps, MapQuest, and other online mapping applications. Because the Kims, who did not know the area, had telephoned from Roseburg, Oregon to a motel in Gold Beach, to say that they would be arriving late, it was speculated that James Kim, a technology expert, used online mapping to find the “fastest” route between Roseburg and Gold Beach. During the hunt for the Kims, a number of computer users tested programs such as Google Maps and MapQuest to map the shortest route between the two towns. The programs reportedly listed Bear Camp Road, where the Kims got stuck, as the most efficient shortcut. However, it is rarely used even by local residents due to its difficult terrain and inclement weather.[11] The online mapping programs have apparently changed and as of December 7, 2006, show the drive along Highways 5 and 42 to Coast Highway 101 as the preferred route between Roseburg and Gold Beach. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Kim[^]
Yeah and after geocaching for many years I've come to realize that using a gps is an art and if you buy one throw it in the glove box then need to rely on it you may be screwed. Geocaching is a great way to learn the limitations and techniques to really use one.
-
Steve_Harris wrote:
It's the haulage firms' fault that their drivers don't (1) know the heights of their vehicles and (2) read road signs?
No, it is the haulage firms' fault for forcing them to follow their preset routes. Shorter, quicker routes = less fuel costs and faster turnaround. They had a phone in discussion on the radio a few weeks back about this and some drivers called in to say that they were basically told to follow the shortest routes or drop off their keys on their way out of the depot. With firms facing costs that are constantly rising above the prices they can charge, it is no wonder that some are having to take risks to stay in business. We're not talking about drivers breaking the road laws here, we're talking about them legally using marked B and C roads when they would normally use the main routes. As the sat nav data providers start to include more information about height and weight obstacles, the problem should eventually go away, but at present the data is only there with a few providers and it is expensive to upgrade. You need new equipment, and new - more costly - subscriptions.
Ðavid Wulff What kind of music to programmers listen to?
Join the Code Project Last.fm group | dwulff
I'm so gangsta I eat cereal without the milkWhat's the shortest route: the one that gets the lorry stuck under a bridge for a day, and damages it into the bargain, or the route that is a few hundred yards longer but is bridge-free and actually allows the lorry to arrive? Forcing drivers to use a road doesn't mean that a driver has to disengage his brain and try to drive under a bridge that's 12" lower than the top of his lorry.
-
Mike Dimmick wrote:
and not pay enough attention to the signage on the ground
We have that problem locally, where lorries follow the GPS and ignore the road sign that say no HGVs and promptly get stuck on the bends because an HGV can't get round them!
"Normal is getting dressed in clothes that you buy for work and driving through traffic in a car that you are still paying for - in order to get to the job you need to pay for the clothes and the car, and the house you leave vacant all day so you can afford to live in it." - Ellen Goodman
Ted Ferenc wrote:
We have that problem locally, where lorries follow the GPS and ignore the road sign that say no HGVs and promptly get stuck on the bends because an HGV can't get round them!
The driver should be prosecuted for dangerous driving because he ignored the "No HGV" sign. Owning a satnav is no excuse to stop reading road signs.
-
Ted Ferenc wrote:
We have that problem locally, where lorries follow the GPS and ignore the road sign that say no HGVs and promptly get stuck on the bends because an HGV can't get round them!
The driver should be prosecuted for dangerous driving because he ignored the "No HGV" sign. Owning a satnav is no excuse to stop reading road signs.
Steve_Harris wrote:
The driver should be prosecuted
Ahh that needs proof, local residents have tried that. For proof you need evidence, photographs, registration number written down etc, don't seem to count, so you need a police man to spot the infringement, and guess what? As it is a small village there are no policemen to spare! But they are looking in to it!
"Normal is getting dressed in clothes that you buy for work and driving through traffic in a car that you are still paying for - in order to get to the job you need to pay for the clothes and the car, and the house you leave vacant all day so you can afford to live in it." - Ellen Goodman
-
Steve_Harris wrote:
The driver should be prosecuted
Ahh that needs proof, local residents have tried that. For proof you need evidence, photographs, registration number written down etc, don't seem to count, so you need a police man to spot the infringement, and guess what? As it is a small village there are no policemen to spare! But they are looking in to it!
"Normal is getting dressed in clothes that you buy for work and driving through traffic in a car that you are still paying for - in order to get to the job you need to pay for the clothes and the car, and the house you leave vacant all day so you can afford to live in it." - Ellen Goodman
Ted Ferenc wrote:
For proof you need evidence, photographs, registration number written down etc, don't seem to count, so you need a police man to spot the infringement, and guess what? As it is a small village there are no po
Then you need 3 vigilantees and 2 sets of tire shredder strips. a spotter, someone to deploy a plate ahead of the truck, and someone to block the trucks retreat by placing a second behind if it stops before running over the first. ;P;P;P
-- Rules of thumb should not be taken for the whole hand.
-
Ted Ferenc wrote:
For proof you need evidence, photographs, registration number written down etc, don't seem to count, so you need a police man to spot the infringement, and guess what? As it is a small village there are no po
Then you need 3 vigilantees and 2 sets of tire shredder strips. a spotter, someone to deploy a plate ahead of the truck, and someone to block the trucks retreat by placing a second behind if it stops before running over the first. ;P;P;P
-- Rules of thumb should not be taken for the whole hand.
You forgot the baseball bats!
"Normal is getting dressed in clothes that you buy for work and driving through traffic in a car that you are still paying for - in order to get to the job you need to pay for the clothes and the car, and the house you leave vacant all day so you can afford to live in it." - Ellen Goodman
-
What's the shortest route: the one that gets the lorry stuck under a bridge for a day, and damages it into the bargain, or the route that is a few hundred yards longer but is bridge-free and actually allows the lorry to arrive? Forcing drivers to use a road doesn't mean that a driver has to disengage his brain and try to drive under a bridge that's 12" lower than the top of his lorry.
Steve_Harris wrote:
What's the shortest route
The one that comes up when you type in your destination and click on 'find shortest route'. It's really very simple. No driver will deliberately take their vehicle under a bridge that is too low or down a road that is too narrow, but when your route guidance tells you it is a perfectly good route and gives no indication of the road quality how are you to tell? Sat nav systems don't usually tell you the class of a road -- only the name -- and some major A and B roads are given local names not their designation. 99% of the time it will not be a problem, so how can you predict "oh, this route is a bad one" ? Even then, an A designation in itself is no indicator of road suitability. Just look at the A396 - the main route between Exeter and Tiverton in the South West. It goes over a narrow hump bridge at Bickleigh that some cars have problems driving over, let alone the dozen or so artics that have to be rescused after getting stuck there each year. I was stuck in a bus one time for a whole afternoon while a crane was brought forward to lift off a trailer. It's not on the map as a hazard. Let's not forget the A3072 either - the main route to Crediton. It has hills on it I have trouble getting up, let alone a heavily laden truck, but if you want to get from Tiverton to Crediton you have no other choice other than a 40 mile 2 1/2 hour detour through Exeter and back again. That's not hown on the map either. They had people like you on the phone in, tying to place as much blame on truck drivers as possible. Never mind all the family cars that get stuck on dirt tracks for not being able to take their own advice. Sat nav is no different to using a map book - it just gives you directions, it doesn't drive you there. Road maps will rarely show you local restrictions.
Ðavid Wulff What kind of music to programmers listen to?
Join the Code Project Last.fm group | dwulff
I'm so gangsta I eat cereal without the milk -
Steve_Harris wrote:
What's the shortest route
The one that comes up when you type in your destination and click on 'find shortest route'. It's really very simple. No driver will deliberately take their vehicle under a bridge that is too low or down a road that is too narrow, but when your route guidance tells you it is a perfectly good route and gives no indication of the road quality how are you to tell? Sat nav systems don't usually tell you the class of a road -- only the name -- and some major A and B roads are given local names not their designation. 99% of the time it will not be a problem, so how can you predict "oh, this route is a bad one" ? Even then, an A designation in itself is no indicator of road suitability. Just look at the A396 - the main route between Exeter and Tiverton in the South West. It goes over a narrow hump bridge at Bickleigh that some cars have problems driving over, let alone the dozen or so artics that have to be rescused after getting stuck there each year. I was stuck in a bus one time for a whole afternoon while a crane was brought forward to lift off a trailer. It's not on the map as a hazard. Let's not forget the A3072 either - the main route to Crediton. It has hills on it I have trouble getting up, let alone a heavily laden truck, but if you want to get from Tiverton to Crediton you have no other choice other than a 40 mile 2 1/2 hour detour through Exeter and back again. That's not hown on the map either. They had people like you on the phone in, tying to place as much blame on truck drivers as possible. Never mind all the family cars that get stuck on dirt tracks for not being able to take their own advice. Sat nav is no different to using a map book - it just gives you directions, it doesn't drive you there. Road maps will rarely show you local restrictions.
Ðavid Wulff What kind of music to programmers listen to?
Join the Code Project Last.fm group | dwulff
I'm so gangsta I eat cereal without the milkDavid Wulff wrote:
t goes over a narrow hump bridge at Bickleigh that some cars have problems driving over, let alone the dozen or so artics that have to be rescused after getting stuck there each year.
And I bet there's not a single road sign on the approaches to that bridge warning that it's there and is a grounding risk, is there? Regardless of whether you're being given directions by a passenger, or off a map, or from a satnav, the driver is responsible for their vehicle and for driving safely and responsibly on the roads, and for obeying road signs. If your satnav told you to turn the wrong way into a one-way street, would you ignore the no-entry signs and just go for it, or would you think "Hang on, it got that wrong"? On the Goss Moor in Cornwall there are laser height gauges and massive automatic illuminated signs telling drivers to turn off, and STILL the railway bridge gets hit on a regular basis. The drivers are clearly ignoring the signs and are totally, 100% responsible for their actions. So what if a piece of software tells you that it is a suitable route, it doesn't mean that when you get there you shouldn't use your judgement as a driver to decide if a stretch of road is suitable to travel on. Software is buggy and road data incomplete, so why accept unconditionally what a satnav tells you?
-
David Wulff wrote:
t goes over a narrow hump bridge at Bickleigh that some cars have problems driving over, let alone the dozen or so artics that have to be rescused after getting stuck there each year.
And I bet there's not a single road sign on the approaches to that bridge warning that it's there and is a grounding risk, is there? Regardless of whether you're being given directions by a passenger, or off a map, or from a satnav, the driver is responsible for their vehicle and for driving safely and responsibly on the roads, and for obeying road signs. If your satnav told you to turn the wrong way into a one-way street, would you ignore the no-entry signs and just go for it, or would you think "Hang on, it got that wrong"? On the Goss Moor in Cornwall there are laser height gauges and massive automatic illuminated signs telling drivers to turn off, and STILL the railway bridge gets hit on a regular basis. The drivers are clearly ignoring the signs and are totally, 100% responsible for their actions. So what if a piece of software tells you that it is a suitable route, it doesn't mean that when you get there you shouldn't use your judgement as a driver to decide if a stretch of road is suitable to travel on. Software is buggy and road data incomplete, so why accept unconditionally what a satnav tells you?
Steve_Harris wrote:
And I bet there's not a single road sign on the approaches to that bridge warning that it's there and is a grounding risk, is there?
Actually, no there isn't. Not a single one. There is a sign warning that a sharp left turn is ahead and there is a 10 ton weight limit and that is it - nothing to warn about the width or grounding risks. Nothing to even say there is a bridge, and it is hidden by buildings until you are right up to it. The point here has always very clearly been that the driver is not at fault merely for following directions. I was taught that directions include road orders and warnings when I learnt to drive, YMMV. If the information is not available to drivers then how the hell are they supposed to know what is ahead when planning their journey? By the time a vehicle gets to Bickleigh bridge, if it is any longer than six meters or so then there is no way to turn back - you either go across the bridge or if you are too wide then you block the road and wait to be lifted off. I'm pleased that Goss Moor have invested in fancy laser signs, and I'm sure they help no end, but don't be foolish enough to believe that everywhere has adequate signage. Narrow roads are particularly badly signed -- if you are very lucky you might see a 'bottle neck' sign but you won't find one round here with any actual widths on it. People ignoring road signs is a sign of bad driving, not following bad directions.
Steve_Harris wrote:
Software is buggy and road data incomplete, so why accept unconditionally what a satnav tells you?
Until vehicles can drive themselves, no one unconditionally accepts sat nav instructions any more than you accept instructions from your mother-in-law with a book of maps. They are there to give directions. There is a huge difference.
Ðavid Wulff What kind of music to programmers listen to?
Join the Code Project Last.fm group | dwulff
I'm so gangsta I eat cereal without the milk