Messages

^ Du kannst ja mal meine Beispielstrecke im Schosspark nachzeichnen.
Oder irgendeine andere Strecke mit vielen Richtungswechseln. Z. B. ein Innenstadtrundgang. Bei mir ist das Ergebnis immer unbefriedigend. Es fehlen immer mal wieder an Kreuzungen/Abzweigungen nötige Anweisungen, vereinzelt sind sie auch falsch.

Ich habe ja auch nichts dagegen, dass man Anweisungen mit dem Routenplaner erstellen kann. Wer damit zufrieden ist, soll sie gern erstellen lassen. Ich möchte nur nicht, dass die andere Option wegfällt.

@kodela
"Bieten Sie diese Option nicht an" ... vielleicht eine gar nicht so schlechte Idee. Werde darüber nachdenken, danke.
...

Um Gottes Willen lass diese Möglichkeit bestehen. Ich plane Routen immer ohne Navigationsanweisungen und möchte dies auch weiterhin tun können.

Davon abgesehen sind diese Navigationsanweisungen meist lückenhaft und teilweise sogar falsch, daher nutze ich lieber die Navigation anhand der Track Geometrie, die zwar mehr und teils überflüssige Anweisungen erstellt (z. B. in Kurven), aber dafür zuverlässiger ist.

Ich hatte das vor einiger Zeit mal in diesem Post beschrieben:
https://forum.locusmap.eu/index.php?msg=64899

Vor ein paar Tagen hatte ich das erneut getestet und die Navigationsanweisungen waren immer noch genauso schlecht.

Ich bevorzuge daher das Planen eines puren Tracks ohne Navigationsanweisungen.

Stimmt. Kann ich reprodizieren. POI Anzeiger erscheint so wie von dir beschrieben.
Das Verhalten ist dann genauso, wie bei einem aktiviertem POI, der dich außerhalb der Karte befindet (wie oben im zweiten Beitrag von freischneider beschrieben).

^ Excellent explanation and summary in the linked tutorial, tapio!

Indeed, there is no generally valid calculation that provides absolutely realistic height values.

Many thanks!

All right, thanks for the answer.
It's not that important for me, it was just something I noticed.

Most modern smartphones have a built-in pedometer, including my SG S10. I have numerous apps that can access this and display the steps correctly. In Locus this does not work, the field "Strides" in the track recording always shows only 0 strides. See screenshot.

The app permission "Physical activity" is granted.

The blog https://www.locusmap.app/de/blog/ mentioned the possibility of displaying geotagged photos on the map in Locus. Some time ago I had set several folders with photos and it worked.

Now I have looked at the menu again and I can neither edit/delete the folders nor add new ones. The 3 dots next to the folders are not there and neither is the + icon. See screenshot. (Locus V 4.15.2)

Possibly this is due to Android 12, which I currently have. However, I had Android 11 on my SG S10 from the beginning and was able to select the orders earlier.

If it is due to Android, would it work with the AFA version?

Hello Menion,

once again on this topic. I had some time to look into it over the weekend and found some inconsistencies and, in my opinion, a bug.

First of all, thanks for the update 4.15.2 (impoved computation of uphill/downhill distance) - this is more realistic now.

I am still not completely happy with the new calculation of the elevations. In my opinion, ignoring elevation differences of up to 5 metres is too strict. In relatively flat regions such as Berlin and the surrounding area, too many actually existing inclines and declines are calculated out, and the result is then not very realistic. If I go on a cycling or jogging tour and have several short but distinctive inclines, which clearly require effort when running and can also be seen in the altitude graph, and the result then shows 0 metres of altitude, this is not ideal. 

In addition, there are sometimes strange results that make no sense from a purely mathematical point of view: A recorded track shows "Min altitude" 30 m, "Max. altitude" 66 m (a difference of 36 m), but only 30 m elevation gain is displayed. (Screenshot 1 and 2.) So 6 metres of altitude are "swallowed".

Then I noticed a faulty behaviour in the Track Analyzer, which might be a bug. A track section selected with the analyzer always shows exactly the same value for elevation gain and loss, even if it only goes uphill or downhill (screenshot 3 and 4). This can be reproduced everywhere.

Also mit der gleichen Einstellung und ohne den Haken bei "Suche rund um Cursorposition" kriege ich eine lange Liste mit Einträgen, die Zugspitze enthalten. Nach Entfernung sortiert. Ganz unten auch den gesuchten Gipfel.

Wenn ich "Zugspitze Bayern" eingebe, kriege ich 5 korrekte Treffer.

Sorry Menion, I thought you needed a recorded track. The first one was created with the route planner.

But that shouldn't matter, because I always use the setting "replace GPS values" for "srtm data" in the altitude manager. Nevertheless, here are the gpx data of the first track.

Here the gpx file.

Hello Menion,

thank you for the explanations on 1. Fine.

To 2: this happens both with recorded tracks and with routes created with the route planner. In my opinion, the length of the calculated distance uphill/downhill is always (much) too short. Enclosed is another track that was recorded:

Hello Menion,

since the update to version 4.15, the calculation of the elevation values has been changed. I don't know why this was done at all, for me the calculation was fine before. But maybe I missed something.

Apparently, minor elevation changes up to five or six metres are now ignored, so that in flat regions 0 m elevation gain / loss is always displayed despite slight ups and downs. I am not quite sure if this is what is intended. Since the elevation profile still shows the (small) elevation differences, this is at least inconsistent (see screenshot 1).

Absolutely illogical, however, is the calculation of the distance (uphill/downhill), which is now much too short. Even on routes that go steeply uphill continuously, the distance (uphill) is only displayed for a nonsensically small part of the route. This can be reproduced without any problems. See screenshot 2 and 3, which shows a steep ascent. You can believe me, every single metre of the 1.1 km long route goes steeply uphill, yet only 686 m are displayed as distance (uphill). Is this a bug or how can it be explained?

Hello menion,

thank you for the explanations, they are understandable.

The elevation diagram under the map would be fine for me, even if it leaves less space for the map. But there will be different opinions.

I had completely forgotten that you can set the colour of the diagram. But there is no ideal solution either, as you get different background colours depending on the map section - sometimes light blue for water, sometimes dark green for forest, etc....

Thanks anyway!

The track overview is a practical function.

Unfortunately, the display and position of the evelation profile is not well solved. The profile is often poorly visible above the map background and sometimes overlaps the track.

Suggestion: the evelation profile could be positioned on the right in the white area above the Locus logo.

Alternatively, the display of the evelation profile in the track overview (optional) could be omitted.

Attached is a screenshot as an example of very poor visibility of the evelation profile.