Could we have a nice map of what’s actually on the ground

Its kind of mind blowing to me how much gatekeeping is going on here.

Like none whatsoever? No-one’s saying that people shouldn’t be allowed to follow maps or demanded their abolition. A few people – me mostly I think – have said that they quite like the uncertainty of not knowing everything about a trail’s nature in advance. Others have queried whether it’s a thing that could be practically done anyway.

I don’t see how any of this is ‘gate-keeping’. That would be more along the lines of ‘Hell no! The trails will be over-run by people following these new-fangled, super-detailed ‘nice maps showing what’s actually on the ground’ and that would be terrible…’ No-one’s said that, have they? Personally I’d like to see lots of people enjoying riding mountain bikes and if some sort of mapping that showed trail types clearly helped do that, then great.

Personally though I’m quite happy with existing Ordnance Survey and other mapping because it helps me to preserve the illusion that I’m some sort of bold adventurer adrift in the wilderness. That doesn’t mean I think everyone else should follow suit. On the contrary in fact. Is that gatekeeping? Maybe I’ve misunderstood the term? Will all the gates be clearly marked on the new mapping?

Taken to the nth degree, what about capturing the best tyre types for each trail with some sort of algorithm to figure optimal tyre pressure based on users metrics (obviously based on weather conditions over the previous two weeks).

Similarly, based on users metrics, recommend fork and shock pressure and rebound/compression setting (with a premium option to fire data from your £££ Garmin head unit to your £££ Flight Attendant) in real-time on the trail based on geo-coordinates.

And a platinum lever subscription for e-bikers which calculates (again based on user metrics) energy likely consumed that can link all the trails in your route and figure out whether your battery will last (or divert you to charging stations). Or recommend a route based on all that data so that you get back to your Audi just as the battery expires!

What a time to be alive that would be!!

😉

Personally though I’m quite happy with existing Ordnance Survey and other mapping because it helps me to preserve the illusion that I’m some sort of bold adventurer adrift in the wilderness.

yep, that’s all part of the fun, well it is for me anyway 🙂

The Harvey’s map of the Cairngorms has a nice feature in that it shows the tracks that are intermittent on the ground.

Vlad – it should be straight forward to get the algorithm to look at recent Strava times from other people along segments to assess if trails are running fast or slow currently

Harvey’s map

I do like Harvey’s maps, I like the cartography, and also like orienteering maps the way they identify different terrains, the maps are made by surveying too, so I guess that accounts for being able to identify ‘intermittant’ tracks and paths, the sheetI have in front of me is the Harvey ‘Dales North’ aimed at MTBs, it’s a shame they discontinued these 1:40k scale sheets for the Dales, they seem hard to come by now.

Having recently planned and completed an offroad (as much as practical) from Plymouth to London using Strava heat msp, os map, komoot in combo I’d be happy just to have had trails on a map that were bridleways that a) existed in reality and b) were passable with needing a rock crawler or crampons!

Some of the “bridleways” in Plymouth / Devon were a joke! i walked / carried 6 miles in my first two days alone.

Let’s not get distracted by what tech / platform before we have some basic, well maintained and evidenced trails. I do a little maintaining of trails here and there but suspect many don’t.

The nirvana of surface and ridability (if such a word exists) today is a wonderful idea but … never going to happen.

I’ve not complained about Hampshire / Sussex trails since I did my ride, in comparison they’re fabulously maintained and signed  (not great but exponentially better than Plymouth / Devon).

James

The easy way to do it would be to use speed of travel which any garmin/strava/etc data set already contains.

Trailforks already calculates average travel time

But if @bikesandboots can mobilize such an army, they are a much better leader than I would ever be

Hey, it’s ok to think big and wishful 😉

Some of the best days out involve carrying your bike across trackless bogs and finishing in the dark.

As I found out! But it was a bit down to luck too, could have ended up with a ruined day, turning back, finishing in a storm at night etc.

Deal with what you find on the ground as you find it, and what you learn will help you more than any amount of digital mapping or surveillance.

Sometimes I’d just prefer not to really. Like 2ft deep water.

Having multiple track classifications is so nuanced and dependent on relative skill levels etc it might end up a dogs breakfast.

It works for climbing.

Yet i can see for some people it might be nice that have to drive for an hour might like some idea whether there guessed route might be a goer before they get there. Sure if things go awry it could still be fun but there are bits where a ride can quickly become extremely  unpleasant if you find out you are going to be pushing or carrying over tussocky boggy slope. And thats your one pass for the month gone.

That’s approximately me.

I tend to find that a mix of OS 1:25k mapping, satellite view and geograph give a pretty reliable view on life. I’ve only really had one bum result on that from Bynack Mor to Fords of Avon and out towards Bob Scotts, it was pretty big and ended up with a monster HAB because it was way rockier than thought.