search

abrensch / brouter

configurable OSM offline router with elevation awareness, Java + Android
MIT License
494 stars 117 forks source link

SAC scale cost #204

Open hungerburg opened 4 years ago

hungerburg commented 4 years ago

Here in the Alps, there are lots of paths, that are not suitable for ordinary biking. Luckily, many are tagged with proper SAC scale. I suggest to take this tag into account when looking for routes.

Proposal: Anything T2 (mountain_hiking) or higher equals dismount for ordinary use or gets 10 times the cost or so for diehard MTB cracks.

E.g. to ride from Enzianhütte to Rumer Alm - https://brouter.de/brouter-web/#map=16/47.2994/11.4195/osm-mapnik-german_style&lonlats=11.417684,47.297857;11.421318,47.302807 - segment 5 has sac_scale=mountain_hiking. Indeed, one can go there with the bike: on her shoulders, that is.

Reversing direction, the ride goes down a path with sac_scale=hiking; it is just as unrideable, but tagging seems inconsistent to me.

poutnikl commented 4 years ago

Zossebart's MTB profile does consider SAC scale.

My bike profiles (poutnikl/Brouter-profiles) consider only smoothness and MTB scale for now.

SAC scale is considered just in my hiking profiles.

hungerburg commented 4 years ago

Likely due to official mountain bike routes, the fastbike profile finds a very plausible way, even from much farther below - https://brouter.de/brouter-web/#map=14/47.2892/11.4238/osm-mapnik-german_style&lonlats=11.405481,47.281106;11.421318,47.302807&profile=fastbike - The alternatives are plausible too (one has a large detour though). Trekking (steep) finds one more plausible route and some not so plausible ones.

Looking at the mixed results, considering SAC scale seems not a sure guide after all; though making everything T2 and above prohibitively expensive might weed out some junk.