Closest entry point... A new function in the XT

Tomcat

Registered user
Joined
Jan 23, 2005
Messages
537
Reaction score
0
Location
Woking way
When you start a saved route on the XT and select 'Go' you then select the next destination from the usual list of waypoints. There's also a new option (at least its not there on the Nav V) to navigate to the 'Closest Entry Point' . So if you have actually stopped the route or wandered off and want to rejoin it then it should be easy to do so. Haven't yet had a chance to try this feature in practice - my XT only arrived yesterday and I'm stuck at home.

========


I have started a new thread topic, just in case it becomes confused with ‘Skipping waypoints’

Richard
 
Good luck rejoining the route using closest entry point if it picks the one behind where you are it will insist you visit it :blast
 
When you start a saved route on the XT and select 'Go' you then select the next destination from the usual list of waypoints. There's also a new option (at least its not there on the Nav V) to navigate to the 'Closest Entry Point' . So if you have actually stopped the route or wandered off and want to rejoin it then it should be easy to do so. Haven't yet had a chance to try this feature in practice - my XT only arrived yesterday and I'm stuck at home.

It is not there on the Nav VI either. Nor can I recall it being mentioned or talked about on other modern generic Garmin devices.


It’s an interesting new option and development. I guess it does though depend on what Garmin means by ‘Closest entry point’? Does it mean:

A. The nearest waypoint? That would be illogical as it is perfectly possible to have a self-created (or Garmin created) route with no waypoints at all and / or the waypoint may be many miles behind (or in front of) of you, so not ‘closest’ at all. Let’s not forget that the start and end points - A and B - are always, by default, waypoints and unchangeable from being so.

B. The nearest shaping point? Again illogical, as routes do not have to contain pre-ordained shaping points at all.

C. A simple point (chosen by the device) along the magenta line that is indeed closest to wherever the owner happens to be at that moment in time. That would be very logical and, as you say, something new. I think it would be quite good as (if it works the way I guess it does) it would replace the “Please drive to highlighted route’ instruction, that confuses so many people who want to be told precisely which roads to ride down.

I assume that the device would create what I’d call a ‘sub-route’, according to the owner’s preference settings, which again would be logical thing for the device to do. For example, if the owner (as so many do) had pre-ordained that motorways should never be taken, and a short section of motorway did allow the shortest sub-route, then the device would not put it forward as a sub-route to use. Instead it might well create the next best sub-route which might well direct the hapless owner all around the houses and countryside (literally) in order to hit the magenta line by avoiding the motorway. If so, I predict lots of angry posts on this forum, as forgotten (or misunderstood) preference settings are a frequent cause of many problems, even for quite simple tasks.

Tomcat, it should be possible to try out the device’s new function near home just by walking or riding a bicycle. It would be useful if you could give it a go, as it may well solve the last mystery in the other thread.
 
Last edited:
Good luck rejoining the route using closest entry point if it picks the one behind where you are it will insist you visit it :blast

Hi Garry,

On my reading, Tomcat’s description of the new function seems to be quite separate from the established choice of navigating to a pre-existing waypoint, “selected from the usual list of waypoints”, to use Tomcat’s words.

That old function is not new and the way it works is well known, I think you’ll agree.

What we seem to be looking at here is something new. A quick play around outside of route simulation should sort out how it functions correctly. In short, can this new function be used to just join an existing route at the nearest (sensible) point, closest to where the owner happens to be standing?
 
I'll give it a try in the next couple of days and see if I can figure out what it is actually doing. As you say Wapping, it would be logical if it calculates a route to the closest point on the magenta line. We shall see.....
BTW, I've placed a post on the Kurviger forum about sharing Kurviger data with Garmin Drive.
 
Hi Rich i think closest entry point is what i had a load of problems with when i first used this feature on a preloaded route
Lets say for example there are 2 waypoints 20 miles apart on thre route you are 8 miles from the one you rode past earlier and 12 from the one you did not reach
The XT using closest entry point will insist on taking you to the one 8 miles away and you will have to visit it to get the rest of the route to work correctly
Even thought the route is only 1 mile infront of you where you and that is the point you want to rejoin it ( not ride miles you have rode shortly before )
You can get around this by finding the waypoint on the route infront of you and select this instead ...But you have to figure out which one it is from the list !
Plus the chances are when the XT runs the route again it will use it's own routing algorithms and it will not be the same as you planned between the waypoints

Believe me been there done that
 
I'll give it a try in the next couple of days and see if I can figure out what it is actually doing. As you say Wapping, it would be logical if it calculates a route to the closest point on the magenta line. We shall see.....

It won't calculate a route to the closest point on the magenta line
It will calculates a route to the closest way point or ( shaping point sometimes ! )
 
It won't calculate a route to the closest point on the magenta line
It will calculates a route to the closest way point or ( shaping point sometimes ! )

Garry are you saying that the way point would overide a shaping point if it was closer, or that it will overide the shaping point even if it was not closer.
In otherwords if your route was made up of 2 waypoints, 1 being the start and the other the finish/end of route, and inbetween these you had 100 miles of route with say 20 shaping points, and you were 20 miles off route from the nearest shaping point, 50 miles from the start and 40 miles from the end would it choose the end instead of the shaping point.?
 
Way points will take priority if closer as expected
As you know from the other thread about routing the XT can just have a mind of it's own

I have created and tried routes with only way points and the XT insists you visit each one in order to progress to the next ( ie you can not skip one on a route without a major recalculate )
I have created routes with waypoint at each end and shaping points for the rest to get the route i want...Using this methord when you ask the XT to join the route at the closest entry point
it will take you to the waypoint at the end of the route ...But not always
I have found a workaround to get the XT to do what i want it to do for now and it's listed in the other thread

Tomcat when you get your XT out and start to use it you will see just how poor it handles preloaded routes ( loads of complaints about the routing on the XT on other forums too )

I have spent hours out playing with the XT trying suggestions from others and my own ideas and now have it pretty well sused ( i think )
It's hard to explain somethings in words because people interpret things differently
 
I'll give it a try in the next couple of days and see if I can figure out what it is actually doing. As you say Wapping, it would be logical if it calculates a route to the closest point on the magenta line. We shall see.....
BTW, I've placed a post on the Kurviger forum about sharing Kurviger data with Garmin Drive.

Good stuff.

I found the Kurviger owner really helpful when I had a problem.

Look forward to your news on how you find the new 'Closest entry point' function on the XT
 
Closest Entry Point experiments

OK, I've done a few experiments with a routes made between the same start and finish points, all of which pass within a few hundred yards of my location. I've then used the closest entry point to get to the magenta line. Some of the routes were planned in Basecamp and exported and others were modified by adding and removing shaping points in the XT Trip Planner.

1. Fastest route between start and end points only, which uses the M25 and creates a route that is furthest from me relative to my location. In this case the closest entry point takes me location on the route that is closest to me, and uses the remainder of the original route to get to the destination. Exactly what you'd hope for :)

2. Same start and end points but now there are two shaping points, one in front and one behind, that make the route completely different to version 1. The closest point of entry is now nearer to my location than 1. This time closest entry point takes me to the nearest point on the route (which is behind the final shaping point), on to the final shaping point and then on to the destination using the original route. So basically, you get taken towards the nearest shaping point which in my test route was closer to my entry point than the destination.

2a. In this route there are again two shaping points, both behind the closest point of entry. The route to the closest point goes directly there, and on to the destination. It ignores the shaping behinds that are behind. This is exactly what I want.

3. The route is now shaped by a flagged waypoint which is behind the closest point of entry In this case it takes me to the closest entry point, back to the waypoint and then on to the destination. You'd need to look at the route display in 2D map form (this is my default in any case) and use the 'Skip Waypoint' icon to avoid being taken back.

4. This is route 1, fastest, turned into a track in Basecamp, imported as a track to the XT and turned into a trip on the XT. Closest entry here does exactly the same as condition 1.


So it seems to me to work in a very logical way. If there are no added shaping points or waypoints it will take you to the closest entry point on the route. I'm not sure if this is calculated using the XT's route preferences as my route segments were quite short, but it probably is. If there are shaping points present you're taken to the next one in front, along the route. If all the shaping points are behind the closest entry point they are ignored. If there's a waypoint behind the closest entry point it takes you there first, then on to the destination.

Top marks to Garmin :thumb
 
OK, I've done a few experiments with a routes made between the same start and finish points, all of which pass within a few hundred yards of my location. I've then used the closest entry point to get to the magenta line. Some of the routes were planned in Basecamp and exported and others were modified by adding and removing shaping points in the XT Trip Planner.

1. Fastest route between start and end points only, which uses the M25 and creates a route that is furthest from me relative to my location. In this case the closest entry point takes me location on the route that is closest to me, and uses the remainder of the original route to get to the destination. Exactly what you'd hope for :)

2. Same start and end points but now there are two shaping points, one in front and one behind, that make the route completely different to version 1. The closest point of entry is now nearer to my location than 1. This time closest entry point takes me to the nearest point on the route (which is behind the final shaping point), on to the final shaping point and then on to the destination using the original route. So basically, you get taken towards the nearest shaping point which in my test route was closer to my entry point than the destination.

2a. In this route there are again two shaping points, both behind the closest point of entry. The route to the closest point goes directly there, and on to the destination. It ignores the shaping behinds that are behind. This is exactly what I want.

3. The route is now shaped by a flagged waypoint which is behind the closest point of entry In this case it takes me to the closest entry point, back to the waypoint and then on to the destination. You'd need to look at the route display in 2D map form (this is my default in any case) and use the 'Skip Waypoint' icon to avoid being taken back.

4. This is route 1, fastest, turned into a track in Basecamp, imported as a track to the XT and turned into a trip on the XT. Closest entry here does exactly the same as condition 1.


So it seems to me to work in a very logical way. If there are no added shaping points or waypoints it will take you to the closest entry point on the route. I'm not sure if this is calculated using the XT's route preferences as my route segments were quite short, but it probably is. If there are shaping points present you're taken to the next one in front, along the route. If all the shaping points are behind the closest entry point they are ignored. If there's a waypoint behind the closest entry point it takes you there first, then on to the destination.

Top marks to Garmin :thumb

Thank you, Topcat.

From your reasonably rigorous test, it does indeed seem that the XT with its new function behaves well and exactly as you might expect it to. Chalk that up as a clear win for Garmin.

I don't think the shape of the XT allows it to fit into the enclosure on my 1600 GT or think I might well be getting one.
 
So it seems as the xt works pretty much as one would expect it to work according to Tomcats testing, with the only new thing we are seeing is enter at the nearest point, apart from that it seems very similar to any other garmin unit that has gone before it, so this begs the question, Garry do you have a faulty unit, maybe different firmware, because it seems as we have conflicting opinions of how the same units work when given similar tasks.
Neither units appear to follow the same script, this i find very odd.
 
Well if you are sat in the house using the simulator you can't be sure it will perform the same way in the field ....I would not consider this a reasonably rigorous test
I have done simular sat in the house plotted a route close to me and found the XT worked fine in this test ( not the same in the field )

As soon as you add or remove a shaping point or waypoint on the XT trip planner it will recalculate it for sure and it will not be the same as you plotted in basecamp
I converted the route to a track and displayed this on the map so you can see the changes going on ( did you do this )

The routes i created had 30 plus shaping points over 150+miles
If you have given the XT hardly any choice it may well work fine ...I have found this to be true
I would be interesting when you get your XT out into the countryside and run a 150 mile route with loads of choices of routing options thats what i did
Then the issues start to show up

I would be surprised if i had a faulty unit ( but you never know )
Mine is running the latest firmware
There are some routes i have created that run fine and others that don't

All i would say it put a decent long route in the XT go and ride it stop the route and see what happens...Thats what i did and it was only then i noticed a issue :thumby:
One thing i have noticed during tests is changing from fastest to shortest can also make a big difference to how the unit behaves

The other thing is maybe i am expecting to much from the XT when comparing it to the 276cx with it's vastly superior routing capabilities and much more developed firmware
I am still waiting for some more firmware updates on the XT to see how it improves like most Garmin units do over time
 
Hey Garry my advice is when building a long route is to rename your waypoints as you create them.
I put a number on each one so this puts them in order (on your GPS) I also add a description that gives a clue to where it is
This really helps when you are trying to figure out if it’s in front of you or behind you while studying your route at the roadside on your XT

So this is probably simplistic but hopefully you will get what I mean.
Say you are on a route from St Malo to Bordeaux here is how I name and place my waypoints.

1 S St Malo
2 E Rennes (ring road)
3 S Nantes
4 SW Niort
5 N Bordeaux
6 Bordeaux Central ibis Hotel

With your route built like this when looking at your list of waypoints it becomes easier to determine which one is the favoured one.
 
Hey Garry my advice is when building a long route is to rename your waypoints as you create them.
I put a number on each one so this puts them in order (on your GPS) I also add a description that gives a clue to where it is
This really helps when you are trying to figure out if it’s in front of you or behind you while studying your route at the roadside on your XT

So this is probably simplistic but hopefully you will get what I mean.
Say you are on a route from St Malo to Bordeaux here is how I name and place my waypoints.

1 S St Malo
2 E Rennes (ring road)
3 S Nantes
4 SW Niort
5 N Bordeaux
6 Bordeaux Central ibis Hotel

With your route built like this when looking at your list of waypoints it becomes easier to determine which one is the favoured one.

That’s a very good idea. :thumb
 
I can see what you mean about numbering them
But when you have a lot of waypoints in open countryside it would still not help that mutch.Plus if you happen to place a waypoint 50 meteres off the road when plotting a route the XT will insist you visit it to let you carry on :blast

To be honest i have sussed out how to make the XT do what i want it to do route wise and until Garmin sort out the routing shortcomings
on the XT ( if ever ) i am going to stick to that method because i have tested it out in the field and it works for me

The routing on the 276cx is how i like it
Plot a route in basecamp or mapsource
Lets say a 200 mile route with start finsh and less than 10 shaping points ( thats all you need with the 276cx )
As long as the mapping on the 276cx is the same as what you used to calculate the route on on the PC
You then just activate the route on the 276cx...there is no importing or recalculating like on the XT when you launch the route
Then you can do what wapping said if you are a couple of miles off the route. Then just ride to it and as soon as you start riding it the 276cx just carries on
along the route as if you had never left it...It also does not insist you visit a waypoint so no problem with a waypoint off the road or if you decide to skip one no recalculation
and that means you get to ride exactly what you have planned without all the hassel
But why did you buy the XT then i hear you say :confused:
The XT also has some plus points ( routing just is not one of them )... Plus i like playing around with stuff and making bits and pieces :D
 
.....Plus if you happen to place a waypoint 50 meteres off the road when plotting a route the XT will insist you visit it to let you carry on.....

Garry, it doesn’t matter if your waypoint is on the road or one metre, 50 metres or 100 km off it, the majority of Garmin devices will insist that you pass through the waypoint as a part of the route. That is just the way they work. It is not unique to the XP or a fault with it. If you want to avoid being dragged 50 metres off the road you want to be on, don’t place the waypoint there.

Alternatively and / or in addition:

1. When using the XT (or many other Garmin devices) don’t use a waypoint to shape a route, unless you DO need to pass through that point. Use shaping points instead.

2. If, when using the XT and whilst riding your route, you find that by mistake you have used a waypoint (when you meant to use a shaping point) or that you have plonked it 50 metres off the road you need to be on, or you simply change your mind about the need to pass through it, use the XT’s skip waypoint facility.

3. If, when not riding your route, you realise that you might have used a waypoint when you meant to use a shaping point (or visa-versa) use the XT device’s or BaseCamp’s ability to convert points from one to the other easily.

The routing on the 276cx is how i like it.....

Everyone accepts that. You have now got to accept that either your XT or XT’s in general are not routing and / or behaving as you would like or expect the device to. That is just a fact, like it or not. So far, all of the faults and foibles you have identified as being problems with the XT have (with the possible exception of the joining or rejoining routes) all been found to be either mistakes in the way the device has been operated or a misunderstanding as to how this branch of gps devices functions in comparison with other branches. The function of waypoints, as highlighted above, is a prime example; the XT is functioning and treating waypoints just as it should.

With Tomcat’s help we are getting closer to finding out another version as to how the XT deals with joining / rejoining routes and the function of the device’s unique ‘Closest entry point’ tool. All we have had otherwise is your versions. So far, Tomcat is reporting that his XT is behaving as he expects it should. Yours is not. Whether or not Tomcat’s next experiences with his XT will change his mind or whether you will change your mind, we do not yet know. They may, they may not. People have been patient with you, now be patient with them, please.

Not least, please stop the frequent references to and comparisons with the 276cx. Instead, limit yourself (at least within this section) to just the XT, please. From the device’s first and very recent appearance I have tried to rip-out comments on the XT’s performance from within other unrelated XT posts and threads, in the hope of keeping everything on topic. This thread and the parallel thread entitled, ‘part way along a saved route, stop the route then restart it. A problem....’ are evidence of that, along with the separate stickies on route transfer and hard cases.

If you would like a new thread on your opinions as to qualities, modes of operation, function and performance of the 27cx versus the XT, I will create you one for you willingly, editing other threads in the process. Or by all means start your own. Here’s a good example where someone wants an opinion on whether the Montana is superior to the XT for use far from the comfort of Western Europe https://www.ukgser.com/forums/showthread.php/529805-Montana-or-Zumo-XT. The jury is maybe still out, as the XT is still very new. There again, bods’ opinions may vary, no matter what. We shall see.

Thank you.

Richard
 
If an owner stops a route by touching the ‘X’ button or by physically turning the device fully off, I can understand that all and any waypoints in the route (even those that have already been passed through or skipped, before the route was stopped) will come fully back into life on restart.


3. The route is now shaped by a flagged waypoint which is behind the closest point of entry In this case it takes me to the closest entry point, back to the waypoint and then on to the destination. You'd need to look at the route display in 2D map form (this is my default in any case) and use the 'Skip Waypoint' icon to avoid being taken back.


On point 3, Tomcat, in your ‘Closest entry point’ option experiment, does this understandable demand that the XT directs you from where you are to the closest shaping and then backwards to and through the flagged waypoint before continuing the route forwards, only apply if you have physically stopped and restarted the route? That would be how I would expect the XT and the closest entry point function to work, then used in conjunction with the skip waypoint function to miss the waypoint and continue normally onwards following the route

Or, if you haven’t stopped the route and have already passed through the flagged waypoint (in effect ticking it off as completed) does it instead direct you to the nearest shaping point on the route and then onwards from there, as in your examples 2 and 2a? Again, that is how I’d expect the XT to function, assuming that is that the closest entry point function can even be used in this way, ie by without physically stopping the route.

Thank you for any additional update you might be able to provide.

Richard
 


Back
Top Bottom