Introducing TripManager

[jfheath]

Do not allow the XT2 and Tread app to synch.

Does it matter for the track as it is exported over USB ?
With other words : when not touched in Tread is there any changes it might interfere anyway with track or trip?
Ik like Tread for camera's and traffic info esp. when navigating "regular"

I don't know, but logically, given the way that Tread changes routes - by moving the route points - it is very unlikely that it will alter a track with its hundreds of track points (not route points, or rout point extension 'ghost points').

[timg]

However some day rides which were one route in the 550 got divided into 2 or 3 on the XT2.

This is what very likely happened. The 550 had no notion of Via and Shaping Points. So you never had the problem with the 550. The XT(2) has, but the nr in a route is limited.
In Basecamp a point in a route can be set to 'Alert on arrival = Via', or 'Dont Alert on arrival = Shaping point'

When a XT(2) receives a route above a certain nr. of Via Points (Alert on arrival) it will split it up. Dont know the exact figure, but is something like 30. The resolution is to set the points to 'Dont alert' in BaseCamp and send again.

Via_Shape.jpg

Thanks. That sorted that issue out

[jfheath]

* These routes converted from tracks can still display RUT behaviour.

The trip from route, converted in XT2, is saved in XT2, so RUT is prevented ?

A 'Trip' and a 'Route' are two different names for exactly the same thing. The XT1 and all Zumos before it used to call them 'Trips'. The XT2 uses the term 'Route' to mean exactly the same thing. FrankB uses the term 'Trip Manager' because it started life on the XT1 which uses the term Trip, but it also works on the XT2.

But I am confused - I was talking about converting tracks to trips, or tracks to routes. (XT1 uses the term 'trip', XT2 uses the term Routes).

Any track that has been converted to a Route / Trip can be made to display RUT behaviour.
Any route that is imported into the XT2 and recalculated may display RUT behaviour

Any route that has been created using RoutePlanner on the XT2 cannot be provoked to display RUT behaviour..
Any route that is imported and then copied (using the COPY facility) on the XT2 cannot be provoked to display RUT behaviour.

Any Route that has been imported into the XT2 can be 'nobbled' to prevent RUT behaviour - simply be telling it that it is not Imported.
Trip Manager has the facility to ensure that a point-to-point Route is regarded as ‘Saved’ and therefore not prone to RUT behaviour.

[vigo]

Any track that has been converted to a Route / Trip can be made to display RUT behaviour.

Does that include a track that is converted into a route and saved by the XT2 itself?
....I installed tripmanager and tested and YES it includes those to, so for that reason the program will suit me just fine

[vigo]

Based on the information I gathered here, I submitted my questions to the Perplexity AI (https://www.perplexity.ai) with the following questions:

1) Kurviger, export, what does embedding extra Garmin waypoints mean?
2) Can you also achieve the extra accuracy by adding more shaping points? So what exactly is the difference?
3) in case of recalculation by, for example, a road construction, what difference in export between more via- or shaping points on the one hand and extra Garmin waypoints on the other?

Answer to Question 3:
In the event of a recalculation due to a road construction or closure, Garmin behaves differently depending on the export method from Kurviger.

More via- or shaping points:

Via points act as hard stops that Garmin announces and respects, but when recalculated, the device can skip or redirect them.
Shaping points force the route locally (no announcements), but in the event of a detour, Garmin often ignores them and calculates an alternative path between the remaining points.Result: The new route may deviate greatly from your original Kurviger plan, with less predictable detours.

Additional Garmin Waypoints:

These add Garmin-specific route points (Streckenpunkte) with metadata that the device prioritizes over its own calculations.
When recalculated, Garmin keeps these points tighter, leading to a detour that stays closer to your planned route (less radical changes).Result: Better stability and accuracy, but recalculation takes longer due to the extra data.


I'm definitely going to test this and it could be a gamechanger. Then I will most likely switch to Kurviger in combinations wit TP.

[FrankB]

Let's take a step back.

IMHO I dont think there is one method that suits ALL needs. It all depends if you want to the use the device (XT, or XT2) as being intelligent and to let it recalculate an alternative when you (have to) deviate from the original route. Or just use it as modern version of a paper-map.

Example 1: You have planned a trip to a hotel avoiding highway's. In the event of a road block, or fuel stop, you want it to propose a new route to the next route point. Skipping the part not driveable, and using as much of the original plan. Use a route with route points (via or shaping) and use method 5 of the link below.
Use Auto recalculation, or Prompted on the device.

Example 2: If you are joining fellow riders and you just want to drive the proposed route, that someone else made. You are better of using a track and convert that to a trip. Method 2.
Consider set Auto recalc to Off, or use Prompted
That method works well, until for some reason you have to deviate from the route. If you have recalc to Auto it will very likely get you in a RUT, if you have recalc Off, you get no directions until you rejoin the route.
It is the responsibilty of the one that created the route to check there are NO deviations.

https://frankbijnen.github.io/TripManag ... evice.html

Also worth noting is that you can try to stop the route and restart it with 'Closest Entry Point' (NL: Dichtsbijzijnde invoerpunt) I have written down some experiences here (at the bottom): https://frankbijnen.github.io/TripManag ... tions.html

Remember there is no right or wrong, but you have to understand the differences, and what works best for you in which situation
Frank

[vigo]

When I encounter a blockage, I stop the navigation (route from track), look on the map for a point where I can likely rejoin, and navigate using the "where to" method specified by the XT2. Which is fine, because I have to go around it.
The route from track method is a fairly simple one, and I completely understand what's happening, or at least I think I do.

Now, I understand that I'm missing options compared to a route/trip with waypoints, but with the latter, there's much more to understand, especially what can go wrong.
Trip Manager is a great program. What I consider a drawback is that for me, there's likely more that can go wrong than I'll benefit from.
The manual is structured in such a way that you have to understand and master every rule to make it predictable. At least, that's how I see it. I'm dyslexic and struggle with that, and age probably plays a role as well. I'm looking for a shortcut... what do I need to do to import a GPX track or trip to the XT2 so that nothing can be changed? This route or trip will retain its original route from the point of rejoining when recalculated. If that's possible, this method is interesting for me.

I prefer to watch a YouTube video with an example as a guide; then I know what to do and don't have to understand it all.

In my previous post, I thought I'd found the trick, but after the first transfer of a route with Garmin waypoints, the XT2 recalculated my route and it was already wrong.

[FrankB]

You can expect ANY route not created by Basecamp to recalculate on import. It will use all shape & via points but still use different roads. Adding more points will create something that looks more like the original.

[smfollen]

Vigo wrote:
...
The route from track method is a fairly simple one, and I completely understand what's happening, or at least I think I do.

Now, I understand that I'm missing options compared to a route/trip with waypoints, but with the latter, there's much more to understand, especially what can go wrong.
Trip Manager is a great program. What I consider a drawback is that for me, there's likely more that can go wrong than I'll benefit from.
The manual is structured in such a way that you have to understand and master every rule to make it predictable. At least, that's how I see it. I'm dyslexic and struggle with that, and age probably plays a role as well. I'm looking for a shortcut... what do I need to do to import a GPX track or trip to the XT2 so that nothing can be changed? This route or trip will retain its original route from the point of rejoining when recalculated. If that's possible, this method is interesting for me.

I prefer to watch a YouTube video with an example as a guide; then I know what to do and don't have to understand it all.
...

I can appreciate most of that. I struggled with similar challenges when I first jumped into the deep end of the route planning and navigation pool. I think I can offer a bit of help, or at least some explanation.

Much of the variation is the nature of routing and navigation.

If you were to ask 3 friends how to get from point A to point Z, you might get 2 or 3 different sets of directions because there is more than one way to get from A to Z. If you added stops at F and R, the directions might get somewhat more consistent. If you added points B,C,D ... W,X, and Y your friends might stop talking to you! If they did answer, you would get very consistent directions for each of them.

In the digital world, a route with only points A and Z would be the most flexible and easiest to adjust as needed, but also the most variable when recalculated. A track would include A,B,C,D, ... W,X,Y and Z. It would be entirely in-flexible, but very stable.

What can go wrong is largely due to the nature of routes and track, not any particular software or device -- although there are certainly some broken features on some devices and apps.

Since you prefer videos: about a year ago, I put together a series of YouTube videos that try to explain some of the challenges. You can find a playlist here https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLCsg2tRkBfc-TQJa4vIIitXHHTDunTpn-. I will warn you that I and really bad in front of a camera!

Those videos lead up to free software called track to route. I will soon release a much improved version that will work with Trip Manager and provides improved methods to convert tracks to routes and routes to tracks. It can also generate routes with a user configurable number of points anywhere along the spectrum from the 2 point flexible, variable route to the in-flexible thousands of points track.
I should probably do another video explaining that too. I might be getting less bad in front of the camera, or at least I can tell myself that.

[jfheath]

Based on the information I gathered here, I submitted my questions to the Perplexity AI (https://www.perplexity.ai) with the following questions:

1) Kurviger, export, what does embedding extra Garmin waypoints mean?
2) Can you also achieve the extra accuracy by adding more shaping points? So what exactly is the difference?
3) in case of recalculation by, for example, a road construction, what difference in export between more via- or shaping points on the one hand and extra Garmin waypoints on the other?

What follows is quite a detailed answer to your question - and it starts off with a statement - something that you will probably believe to be complete rubbish - because of what you have learned maybe from other users, friends, and even route planning software. But it is 100% correct (or it will be when I have finally finished proof reading it and correcting the typos !)

The problem with using an AI based source is that it gleans information from all kinds of locations, and it comes up with a concensus drawn from both accurate and inaccurate sources. The information that you get out is only as good as the information that you put in - and if the source of that information is mixed or wrong you get a very skewed view of whatever it is that you are looking for.

Take Waypoint as an example.

This is one of the few terms which garmin uses with which they have been consistent over the years:

• Waypoints are locations or landmarks that are recorded and stored in your Garmin outdoor device.
  These are locations that you may later want to return to, such as your vehicle or a waterfall. They may also be significant points or features you found during your activity, such as a camp, a fork in a trail, or a favorite fishing spot.

Many people use the dictionary definition of a waypoint - ie any Point on a Route. MyRouteApp uses this definition. So does Kurviger.

But Garmin uses the GPX file definitions for its use of such terms - So a Waypoint is --- <wpt>
And a route point is --- <rtept>
And those two are VERY different things.

Garmin has its own words for different type of route points - ie Via Point and Shaping Point. Both of these terms have been adopted by MyRouteApp and Kurviger. ie They talk about Via Points and Shaping Points in exactly the same way that Garmin uses the terms.

The big distinction is that a Waypoint is a stored location. It may be used in a route if you wish - in which case it will be as either a via point or a shaping point in that route. But it also exists without it forming any part of a route - just stored there for future use. Genuine Waypoints will appear in the list of 'Waypoints' on the XT2 - other route points do not. For the XT1, they appear in 'Favourites' or 'Saved' depending on whether you have USA or UK as the 'locale'.

Some people use the term Waypoint to mean 'Via Point' - as far as Garmin is concerend (and me) they are wrong. That is just confusing
I have seen one person use the term waypoint to mean 'Shaping Point'. I haven't got a clue why they think that.

Of course - you use what you want, as long as you understand it - but if you use your own definitions, then you will have trouble understanding the help that you get on this forum - because we use the term 'Waypoint' in the way that Garmin intended.

So you may use a Waypoint in a route - selected from locations that you have created and saved. If you do, then it has to be set as either a Via Point, or as a Shaping Point. When talking about a route, there is nothing to be gained by referring to it as a Waypoint - all that matters for the behaviour of the route is whether it is a Via or a Shaping Point.

I will make an amendment to that statement later - because the XT2 does treat Waypoints ever so slightly differently from other Zumos.

To answer your questions, one by one.

1) Kurviger, export, what does embedding extra Garmin waypoints mean?

• Kurviger hasn't quite grasped the Garmin Friendly use of the term 'Waypoint', - it refers to all route points as 'waypoints'. However Kurviger has a couple of extra features:
• "Embed Extra Garmin Waypoints". What this does indicates that at least some of the developers know exactly what a Waypoint is. What it is asking is - "Do you want me to create a waypoint from every single route point -ie look at your route find all of the route points and create waypoints as if you had created them and stored them first". If you say yes, then a proper, correct, Garmin style Waypoint will be created for every one of your route points - via or shaping . These are declared at the very start of the GPX file and they are given a name 'Additional Waypoint' - if you didn't already give the route point a name. As a result of that, those new Waypoints are added to you store of 'Waypoints' / 'Saved' / 'Favourites' on your Zumo.

*) What does "Add Additional Waypoints", mean ?

• Yes - I know that you didn't ask, but it is related to the above. If you select this, you can ask Kurviger to plot extra route points along your route at fixed intervals. The purpose of this is to make sure that your route stays on the roads that you have selected. Specify How frequently you want them, it creates a waypoint, plots it on the route as a shaping points, calles it 'Additional Waypoint' and saves it in you list of waypoints on the Zumo.
  
  So Kurviger has added extra waypoints which when imported will show up in the zumo’s in Waypoints screen. Those same points will become part of the route - added as shaping points.

2) Can you also achieve the extra accuracy by adding more shaping points? So what exactly is the difference?

• That was the original purpose of shaping points. Before the XT2, shaping point were points on a route that were part of a route 'segment', guiding the plotted magenta line along roads that you wanted to ride between two via points. If you deviated from the route, the Zumo would find a way to get you to the next shaping point or via point in its list. But if you ignored a shaping point, and went your own way and you re-joined the magenta line later on having missed say 3 shaping points, the Zumo would navigate you ahead - it didn't mind. As long as you hadn't passed any Via Points. Via Points are less forgiving and insist that you visit them.
• On my routes for a long day riding, I'd have maybe 5 Via Points. A Start, an End and three stopping places for coffee. All of the rest of the route is made up of shaping points. If I am following a road that is next to a motorway, then I need plenty of shaping points, because the satnav will prefer the faster road. But usually with careful placement, I can get away with just a few. 2-3 is typical.
• Generally speaking I do not like a lot of shaping points - because it makes it harder to work out where the Zumo is trying to take me when I have to wander away from the route. "Is it taking me back to a missed shaping point, or is it navigating ahead ?".
  
  If I want to know where the original planned road is - I'll plot the (black) track as well as the route. That will show up very clearly if my magenta line recalculates away from my original plan. With only a few (or no) shaping points, the satnav will fairly quickly recalculate the route in line with the road I am on, and correct itself. If there are a lot of shaping points, it is forced to go back to the road that I have left. This becomes an issue if there are road closures and I am not able to go on the road that I plotted.

3) in case of recalculation by, for example, a road construction, what difference in export between more via- or shaping points on the one hand and extra Garmin waypoints on the other?

• Via Points - I must pass through - unless I use the Skip button. Shaping points - are the same - but as said above, if I ignore them and rejoin the magenta line, then navigation carries on ahead - providing I have not passed a via point.
• Whether or not a route point is created from a stored location - a waypoint - it makes very little difference to this behaviour. What matters is whether the point is a Via Point or a Shaping Point. It looks like Kurviger exports the additional waypoint as if they are shaping points - but I haven't tested that thoroughly. Just observed it a couple of times..

*) So what is the advantage of using Waypoints

Another question that you didn't ask.

• I do my planning before hand, not while I am away. It's a holiday. There are two of us at least - rider and pillion. Maybe a few bikes. I want to share the evening and days enjoying the places, not planning routes. So my phone is for emergencies. My ipad stays at home. My routes are planned and saved on the Zumo. But just in case, there may be optons to visit certain places, so I create those as Waypoints. No matter which version of Zumo you have, it is so much easier to create a route quickly on the Zumo screen if the key places are saved on the Zumo first. A matter of a couple of minutes. Start, couple of mountain passes. Destination. Done.
• If I transfer a GPX file to the XT1, it will often change some of the route point names - via or shaping - to something which is not what I want. That is not such an issue for a Shaping Point, but for Via Points, the change is often quite significant.
  However - if I create the point as a Waypoint first, and add that to an XT1 route, it will not change the name. So this is a way around the new Zumo XT1 behaviour.
• The XT2 takes this a few steps further. Almost every route point will be changed. They will be moved to a slightly different locations (not necessarily on the same road), and every point will acquire a new name. So my morning coffee stop which I called "06 123 Am Coffee", will now be called "Devient Way, NYK". Whereabouts that is, I haven't got a clue. "06 123 Am Coffee" - tells me exactly where it is - It is a route point on day 6 of my tour, 123 miles from the start, a cafe.
• There is no fix to this. The trick of using a waypoint does not keep the route point names. In fact Garmin make it very clear that a Waypoint is not part of a route. I can use a Waypoint in a route, make it into a Via Point and send it to the Zumo. The XT2 then 'processes' it and 'corrects' the name and the location of my point, and it makes the route pass through that relocated point - leaving the original waypoint all by itself without the route passing through it !!

There are a couple of ways to get round these behaviours. They happen with any imported route - a route that has been created as a GPC files and transferred to the Zumo XT2. So MyRouteApp, Basecamp, Kurviger etc are all victims of this behaviour. It doesn't matter what software you use. Not one of them is any better than the other in this respect. Even using the Tread App to create a route and exporting that as a GPX file - the same happens with that. That includes routes created on the Tread App and transferred to the Zumo by Syncronising via BT and Phone data. Curiously, it doesn't change the route immediately. But if it re-synchs (ie back to the Tread / Explore database management system (and then back to the XT2), the route will likely change.

By far the best way (in my opinion) is to not allow the XT2 to synch with the Explore database. And then do not allow the XT2's import software get to see the route before it saves it into its hidden .System/Trips folder. That is where the damage is done. Instead - Trip Manager creates the .trip file for you. Nothing gets changed becasue the XT2 software never gets to see it. The XT2 still has to calculate the route between the route points but it now stands a much better chance of getting it right, given that it is starting with the original data, and not something that has been modified randomly.

But the advantage of using Waypoints is that if you name them and think about what you are going to want them for, it is relatively easy to build a route using stored Waypoints, just using the XT2s Trip Planner on the screen.

Alternatively - you don't need a route at all. Just select Where To ? Select the saved Waypoint and let the XT2 plot the route and tweak it with adventruous routing settings, or Michelin Scenic routes. Creating a route using anything other than saved waypoints, or the XT2's large collection of databases - can be very frustrating.

I'll take a look at creating a video of foolproof routing. I did start one once upon a time, but things got in the way.