Recalculation of the route does not point to final destination.
-
@ATLast I have expereinced that behavior (and reported it as well) when I used the app for strictly A-B route - the app continually wanted me to make a uturn for over 20mi before it finally accepted that should redraw.
This was in a well known to me area, so not a big deal - had it been in an unkown area, as you mention, it would not have been so good.
@GT-JWR said in Recalculation of the route does not point to final destination.:
I have expereinced that behavior (and reported it as well) when I used the app for strictly A-B route - the app continually wanted me to make a uturn for over 20mi before it finally accepted that should redraw.
This will be taken care of ina next version.
@Herko-ter-Horst said in Recalculation of the route does not point to final destination.:
An even nicer implementation (IMO) would be to automatically recalculate to the nearest location on the track. Initially, this is the point where you deviate from the track, but when driving to avoid road works, following a signposted deviation or just deviating from the track in general for whatever reason, you'll most likely get to a place where a location further along the track is closer to you, and so it would be nice to have your navigation system recognise that and direct you there.
I fully agree!
-
@Con-Hennekens said in Recalculation of the route does not point to final destination.:
Recalculation to the destination is a very frustrating pitfall for many Garmin users, and also for MRA Navigation users in the past. Garmin created a workaround by disbaling recalculation,MRA chose to change the app to reroute back to the point where you left off (in case of a track). There is logic to it too. If you tell the program to navigate a certain track, it is not far fetched to assume you want to drive as much of that track as possible.
An even nicer implementation (IMO) would be to automatically recalculate to the nearest location on the track. Initially, this is the point where you deviate from the track, but when driving to avoid road works, following a signposted deviation or just deviating from the track in general for whatever reason, you'll most likely get to a place where a location further along the track is closer to you, and so it would be nice to have your navigation system recognise that and direct you there.
You'll still have to do a bit of work yourself (sometimes) to go far enough along to avoid whatever you're trying to avoid, but your nav system will eventually get you "back on track".
The same logic would also apply when you want to navigate using a track, but you don't want to start from the starting point of the track, you just want to get to the location on the track closest to you.
@ATLast said in Recalculation of the route does not point to final destination.:
Hi.
I work around the problem as follows:
When you reach a blocked road, you have to stop the navigation, drive about 7-10 km without guidance, then re-initiate a new route request to the final destination.
This avoids being sent back to the old route with the blocked road.This works well when you're just driving and are fine with letting the nav system pick your roads. It wouldn't work when there's actually a prepared route/track that you would like to get back to, if possible.
@Herko-ter-Horst said in Recalculation of the route does not point to final destination.:
An even nicer implementation (IMO) would be to automatically recalculate to the nearest location on the track. Initially, this is the point where you deviate from the track, but when driving to avoid road works, following a signposted deviation or just deviating from the track in general for whatever reason, you'll most likely get to a place where a location further along the track is closer to you, and so it would be nice to have your navigation system recognise that and direct you there.
But... why do you want to complicate things and stick to the "track" stuff?
Initially, you set a destination, and want to go there.
You just follow the instructions and, when there is a roadblock, a nicer landscape, a better place to answer a nature's call, you drive there: the program then simply has to recalculate the route from the actual location to the destination as it did the first time you entered that destination anyway.This is simple and straightforward.
Complicating the process leads to unexpected and unwanted behaviour.
I have no idea why people keep talking about "track": I know some of you carefully set up a route and then follow it, and that's fine.
But my use of the program is always to set a destination and eventually, no, almost all the time, leave the planned route at some point for one reason or another.
And my Garmin Zumo XT works the same way: when I don't follow its advices, it adapts to my will. (unlike my girlfriend...)
But Garmin's adventurous routins is FAR FAR behind what MRA offers in terms of small roads.
So please, keep it simple : it already tops competitors...
-
@Herko-ter-Horst said in Recalculation of the route does not point to final destination.:
An even nicer implementation (IMO) would be to automatically recalculate to the nearest location on the track. Initially, this is the point where you deviate from the track, but when driving to avoid road works, following a signposted deviation or just deviating from the track in general for whatever reason, you'll most likely get to a place where a location further along the track is closer to you, and so it would be nice to have your navigation system recognise that and direct you there.
But... why do you want to complicate things and stick to the "track" stuff?
Initially, you set a destination, and want to go there.
You just follow the instructions and, when there is a roadblock, a nicer landscape, a better place to answer a nature's call, you drive there: the program then simply has to recalculate the route from the actual location to the destination as it did the first time you entered that destination anyway.This is simple and straightforward.
Complicating the process leads to unexpected and unwanted behaviour.
I have no idea why people keep talking about "track": I know some of you carefully set up a route and then follow it, and that's fine.
But my use of the program is always to set a destination and eventually, no, almost all the time, leave the planned route at some point for one reason or another.
And my Garmin Zumo XT works the same way: when I don't follow its advices, it adapts to my will. (unlike my girlfriend...)
But Garmin's adventurous routins is FAR FAR behind what MRA offers in terms of small roads.
So please, keep it simple : it already tops competitors...
@ATLast said in Recalculation of the route does not point to final destination.:
But... why do you want to complicate things and stick to the "track" stuff?
I have no idea why people keep talking about "track": I know some of you carefully set up a route and then follow it, and that's fine.
You answered your own question: a track is an accurate representation of a planned route, not just a set of waypoints that has to be recalculated by the navigation system. It's also the best way to share a route with users of other systems/apps.
I don't tend to use MRA for A-B routes, I'll just use Apple Maps/Google Maps or the built-in navigation system of my car. If I'm driving for fun, I put in the effort to plan an enjoyable route (using MRA planner) and after that I just want to drive the calculated route (which is represented by the track), meaning I don't want my navigation system to recalculate it based on its own settings. I also don't want to have to skip waypoints if I (have to) deviate from it, I just want to be able to deviate as needed and be directed back to it after.
-
@ATLast said in Recalculation of the route does not point to final destination.:
But... why do you want to complicate things and stick to the "track" stuff?
I have no idea why people keep talking about "track": I know some of you carefully set up a route and then follow it, and that's fine.
You answered your own question: a track is an accurate representation of a planned route, not just a set of waypoints that has to be recalculated by the navigation system. It's also the best way to share a route with users of other systems/apps.
I don't tend to use MRA for A-B routes, I'll just use Apple Maps/Google Maps or the built-in navigation system of my car. If I'm driving for fun, I put in the effort to plan an enjoyable route (using MRA planner) and after that I just want to drive the calculated route (which is represented by the track), meaning I don't want my navigation system to recalculate it based on its own settings. I also don't want to have to skip waypoints if I (have to) deviate from it, I just want to be able to deviate as needed and be directed back to it after.
@Herko-ter-Horst said in Recalculation of the route does not point to final destination.:
I have no idea why people keep talking about "track": I know some of you carefully set up a route and then follow it, and that's fine.
If you read it carefully, you will understand that I'm not asking what a track is - which I know - but why people are talking about it in this post.
-
@ATLast said in Recalculation of the route does not point to final destination.:
But... why do you want to complicate things and stick to the "track" stuff?
I have no idea why people keep talking about "track": I know some of you carefully set up a route and then follow it, and that's fine.
You answered your own question: a track is an accurate representation of a planned route, not just a set of waypoints that has to be recalculated by the navigation system. It's also the best way to share a route with users of other systems/apps.
I don't tend to use MRA for A-B routes, I'll just use Apple Maps/Google Maps or the built-in navigation system of my car. If I'm driving for fun, I put in the effort to plan an enjoyable route (using MRA planner) and after that I just want to drive the calculated route (which is represented by the track), meaning I don't want my navigation system to recalculate it based on its own settings. I also don't want to have to skip waypoints if I (have to) deviate from it, I just want to be able to deviate as needed and be directed back to it after.
@Herko-ter-Horst said in Recalculation of the route does not point to final destination.:
I'll just use Apple Maps/Google Map
Both of these program have a lot of limitations that MRA doesn't have.
-
@ATLast said in Recalculation of the route does not point to final destination.:
But... why do you want to complicate things and stick to the "track" stuff?
I have no idea why people keep talking about "track": I know some of you carefully set up a route and then follow it, and that's fine.
You answered your own question: a track is an accurate representation of a planned route, not just a set of waypoints that has to be recalculated by the navigation system. It's also the best way to share a route with users of other systems/apps.
I don't tend to use MRA for A-B routes, I'll just use Apple Maps/Google Maps or the built-in navigation system of my car. If I'm driving for fun, I put in the effort to plan an enjoyable route (using MRA planner) and after that I just want to drive the calculated route (which is represented by the track), meaning I don't want my navigation system to recalculate it based on its own settings. I also don't want to have to skip waypoints if I (have to) deviate from it, I just want to be able to deviate as needed and be directed back to it after.
@Herko-ter-Horst said in Recalculation of the route does not point to final destination.:
If I'm driving for fun, I put in the effort to plan an enjoyable route (using MRA planner) and after that I just want to drive the calculated route (which is represented by the track), meaning I don't want my navigation system to recalculate it based on its own settings.
Again, I'm fine whith the fact that people have their own way to use various programs, but again that's not relevant to my original post.
And by the way, MRA's ability to avoid towns, main roads, smaller roads, populated areas, etc... and still keeps me on paved roads is unmatched in any of the other navigation programs I have used and could save a lot of time and planning to those who want just a nice afternoon ride: no need to setup basecamp or Routeplanner: just set a destination 50 kms away and choose curvy roads. Give it a try: you might be surprised to discover roads you maybe didn't know existed in your surroundings!
And for me, in this roads and people tightly packed Belgium, it allowed me to go to places I didn't know I could reach without boring main roads or freeways.
I must admit I haven't tried Calimoto, because it doesn't work on Android Auto.
In the end, I wonder why MRA doesn't put more spotlight on a feature that no competitor offers, even Garmin!
-
@ATLast said in Recalculation of the route does not point to final destination.:
But my use of the program is always to set a destination and eventually, no, almost all the time, leave the planned route at some point for one reason or another.
This is explicitly NOT the objective of navigating pre-planned scenic routes. People usually want to navigating as precisely as possible like they planned it. If you simply set a destination, and use some "allow" parameters the app will do exactly like you say from the next version on, UNLESS you decide to use curvy road options, which generates a track and the track will demand to be followed.
-
@Herko-ter-Horst said in Recalculation of the route does not point to final destination.:
I have no idea why people keep talking about "track": I know some of you carefully set up a route and then follow it, and that's fine.
If you read it carefully, you will understand that I'm not asking what a track is - which I know - but why people are talking about it in this post.
@ATLast since we are talking about A to B routes, what limitations do other apps have that MRA does not have? I think Google Maps and Waze are much better for simple A to B routes and provide better notification and handling of detours, traffic etc.
2010 GL1800 Goldwing using Samsung Galaxy S20 5G Android 13.
-
@Herko-ter-Horst said in Recalculation of the route does not point to final destination.:
If I'm driving for fun, I put in the effort to plan an enjoyable route (using MRA planner) and after that I just want to drive the calculated route (which is represented by the track), meaning I don't want my navigation system to recalculate it based on its own settings.
Again, I'm fine whith the fact that people have their own way to use various programs, but again that's not relevant to my original post.
And by the way, MRA's ability to avoid towns, main roads, smaller roads, populated areas, etc... and still keeps me on paved roads is unmatched in any of the other navigation programs I have used and could save a lot of time and planning to those who want just a nice afternoon ride: no need to setup basecamp or Routeplanner: just set a destination 50 kms away and choose curvy roads. Give it a try: you might be surprised to discover roads you maybe didn't know existed in your surroundings!
And for me, in this roads and people tightly packed Belgium, it allowed me to go to places I didn't know I could reach without boring main roads or freeways.
I must admit I haven't tried Calimoto, because it doesn't work on Android Auto.
In the end, I wonder why MRA doesn't put more spotlight on a feature that no competitor offers, even Garmin!
@ATLast Hi ATLast, in my opinion calimoto is far behind MRA. I had a calimoto subscription for some years and have canceled it. The options and, above all, the intensive further development based on user feedback at MRA are much better. So my advice - don't waste your time with calimoto - save it for your girlfriend.
Best, Axel
️BMW R 1200 RT
Tourenorientiert
MRA lifetime member -
@ATLast Hi ATLast, in my opinion calimoto is far behind MRA. I had a calimoto subscription for some years and have canceled it. The options and, above all, the intensive further development based on user feedback at MRA are much better. So my advice - don't waste your time with calimoto - save it for your girlfriend.
Best, Axel
️ -
@ATLast since we are talking about A to B routes, what limitations do other apps have that MRA does not have? I think Google Maps and Waze are much better for simple A to B routes and provide better notification and handling of detours, traffic etc.
The difference is in the options: in MRA, you can specify you want to avoid cities, populated areas, dirt roads: such options are not available in Maps or Waze (execpt dirt roads in Waze) and that makes a huge difference when you ask the program for a route.
I suggest you try: set the desired options, and check the difference between Maps/Waze and MRA.
Of course, setting part or all of these options and curvy roads won't give you the fastest route, but that's not the goal at that time.
If I need to go straight to a place, I use Maps which monitors the traffic.
-
Hi.
I use the app to ride through small routes and thus I choose a destination and let the program guide me.
However, sometimes, I choose not the follow the computed route (road closed, better landscape, etc...) : I noticed that, when I choose not to follow the proposed route, MyRoute recalculates a new one but not to the destination: instead, it wants to send me where I left the planned route for the remaining part of the route.
This is incorrect: in this screenshot taken about 750m from my destination and after riding about ten kilometers against the program's will, it wanted me to drive an additional 17 km.
In this case, knowing the area, I could override the displayed route. But it is not the case when I don't know the region...
The expected behaviour would be : recalculation to the final destination.
PS: By the way, you will notice what seems to me a quality problem of the Here maps as buildings are wrongly displayed over the road. I tried selecting OSM map and the display was correct.
There is a solution:
-
Set a goal, like to choose a curve
-
Track is created in the app
-
Track save from V4.3.x possible
-
Open route lab in the app
-
Under Routes, search for the route track
-
Edit route track
-
Then "As route" spokes that generates WP on the route
-
Route corresponds to the track
Choose route now in the Navi App -
Start route
-
and go
Recommendation:
-
WP automatically skips off
-
WP skips at the top right of the display, press longer, then you keep the power and decide for yourself.
-
WP for diversions simply press the next suitable longer and it fits again because until there is recalculated.
VG
Es gibt eine Lösung:
- Ziel festlegen, gerne kurvenreich wählen
- Track wird in der App erstellt
- Track speichern ab V4.3.x möglich
- Routenlabor in der App öffne
- Unter Routen den Routen-Track suchen
- Route-Track bearbeiten
- Dann „Als Route“ Speichen das erzeugt WP auf der Route
- Route entspricht dem Track
Route jetzt in der Navi App wählen
- Route starten
- und los
Empfelung:
- WP automatisch überspringt Aus
- WP überspringt am Display oben rechts länger drücken nutzen dann behält man die Macht und entscheidet selbst.
- WP bei Umleitungen einfach den nächst passenden länger drücken und schon passt es wieder weil bis dort neu berechnet wird.
VG
Info comparison:
-
-
-
- (A to B) choose from left to right
1.) = Route
2.-4.) = Track
You should know that
- (A to B) choose from left to right
-
-
Info Abgleich:
-
-
-
- (A zu B) wähle von links nach rechts
1.) = Route
2.-4.) = Track
Das sollte man wissen
- (A zu B) wähle von links nach rechts
-
-
Beispiel Track aus 4.) Aus Kurvenreich.
Danach das Ergebnis
-
