<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <p>There's a lot of debate in one of my clubs about what the
      Sustrans routes are actually for, as many aren't suitable for
      practical active travel (preferring a long muddy off-road route to
      a short one on reasonable roads) while others are of limited use
      to serious road cyclists (too rough) or leisure/family cycling
      (too far from anywhere much). Of course they shouldn't get all the
      blame; they're often at the mercy of local authorities <br>
    </p>
    <p><br>
    </p>
    <p>That doesn't help much with mapping of course.  Unfortunately
      neither does the rate of degradation of many unpaved routes,
      whether seasonal or permanent.  I see a middle ground between your
      two, or perhaps a split of the "off-road route": somewhere you
      could happily take the kids on hybrids in summer (when most casual
      riding takes place), but that turns into a mudbath for an MTB in
      the winter (when only hardy riders are out).  Mapping that to
      serve both user groups may actually be impossible, or require more
      detail than can reasonably be recorded and presented <br>
    </p>
    <p><br>
    </p>
    <p>As far as some bikes having difficulty, it's also the rider.  I
      have friends who are willing to ride stretches of pretty rough
      tracks on 25mm tyres and fixed gears (e.g. the byways around
      Stonehenge last weekend), while others complain about much easier
      gravel on slightly bigger tyres;  my own ability to deal with
      rough stuff on the tourer improves the more mountain biking I do.<br>
    </p>
    <p><br>
    </p>
    <p><br>
    </p>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 16/06/2021 15:43, Simon Still wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
      cite="mid:BB3E7D3F-7B1E-4909-85A6-D353C87FFDE9@gmail.com">
      <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      I think this is a big issue with fairly large sections of Sustrans
      ’National Cycle Network’ - I ride a few sections around Guildford
      throughout the year on my mountain bike and there are a few that
      have roots / root steps, that are muddy and slippery in winter and
      others that are soft sand in summer.  
      <div class=""><br class="">
      </div>
      <div class="">Personally the really useful distinctions are </div>
      <div class="">- suitable for all bikes in all weathers (which is
        the target that National cycle network *should* require for
        Sustrans classification).  </div>
      <div class=""><br class="">
      </div>
      <div class="">That includes a Brompton, a thin tyres ‘road’ bike,
        or a dutch style city bike. </div>
      <div class=""><br class="">
      </div>
      <div class="">- ‘off road route’ where some bikes will have
        difficulty.  </div>
      <div class=""><br class="">
      </div>
      <div class=""><br class="">
      </div>
      <div class=""><br class="">
      </div>
      <div class=""><br class="">
      </div>
      <div class=""><br class="">
      </div>
      <div class=""><br class="">
      </div>
      <div class="">
        <div><br class="">
          <blockquote type="cite" class="">
            <div class="">On 15 Jun 2021, at 13:11, Chris Hodges <<a
                href="mailto:chris@c-hodges.co.uk" class=""
                moz-do-not-send="true">chris@c-hodges.co.uk</a>>
              wrote:</div>
            <br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
            <div class="">
              <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
                charset=UTF-8" class="">
              <div class="">
                <p class="">This is really tricky TBH; there's a big
                  grey area.  My road bike is a fairly rugged tourer,
                  and I'd take it on KAW, in summer at least.  Some of
                  my friends have done it on similar machines. It would
                  be heavy going but that's acceptable.  Cycling UK have
                  a helpful page on bike suitability at
                  <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.cyclinguk.org/article/what-bike-best-king-alfreds-way-and-other-questions"
                    moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.cyclinguk.org/article/what-bike-best-king-alfreds-way-and-other-questions</a>
                  but that's helpful for the rider, not the mapper<br
                    class="">
                </p>
                <p class=""><br class="">
                </p>
                <p class="">Some of the other stretches of NCN are
                  pretty rough for a (skinny-tyred) road bike, like 45
                  from Ironbridge to Bridgnorth (flat but boneshaking,
                  and with a hilly road alternative) and some towpath
                  routes with steep gravel descents near bridges where
                  grip becomes a limiting factor.<br class="">
                </p>
                <p class=""><br class="">
                </p>
                <p class="">In an ideal world the tracktype and surface
                  tags would help end users, but they're rarely picked
                  up.</p>
                <p class=""><br class="">
                </p>
                <p class="">I pretty much agree with your opinion.  I'd
                  say most but not "almost all" bikes could do KAW; but
                  that would include a lot of rugged hybrids that never
                  leave the city. I suspect you and I could ride it
                  within a few days and come up with a different answer
                  - or possibly even ride it together and not agree!</p>
                <p class=""><br class="">
                </p>
                <p class="">Chris<br class="">
                </p>
                <p class=""><br class="">
                </p>
                <p class=""><br class="">
                </p>
                <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 15/06/2021 12:38, Jon
                  Pennycook wrote:<br class="">
                </div>
                <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAO56uo=KueLd4XbwoqV_uJhusKqE9JeWz22EcKg5-LuoYs0n4w@mail.gmail.com"
                  class="">
                  <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
                    charset=UTF-8" class="">
                  <div dir="ltr" class="">Hello.<br class="">
                    <div class=""><br class="">
                    </div>
                    <div class="">Is there a clear differentiator
                      between what should be tagged as
                      route=bicycle/network=rcn and
                      route=mtb/network=rcn?  In particular: <a
                        href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12665990"
                        moz-do-not-send="true" class="">https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12665990</a>
                      (King Alfred's Way), currently tagged as
                      route=bicycle/network=rcn.  From the description,
                      it's intended for "gravel or cross-country bikes."</div>
                    <div class="">That particular relation is also
                      tagged ref=NB, implying it's part of the National
                      Byway (<a
                        href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/National_Byway"
                        moz-do-not-send="true" class="">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/National_Byway</a>),
                      but the Wikipedia page for the National Byway (<a
href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_National_Byway"
                        moz-do-not-send="true" class="">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_National_Byway</a>)
                      has "It runs along quiet roads, rather than a
                      mixture of roads and tracks like the National
                      Cycle Network, making it more appropriate for road
                      bikes." which doesn't fit with the route of the
                      King Alfred's Way.<br class="">
                    </div>
                    <div class=""><br class="">
                    </div>
                    <div class="">In my opinion, unless there's a clear
                      definition of the difference, a route=bicycle
                      relation should be suitable for almost all
                      bikes, leaving MTB for routes requiring off-road
                      bikes.  I certainly wouldn't take a road bike on a
                      "gravel or cross-country" route!</div>
                    <div class=""><br class="">
                    </div>
                    <div class="">Jon<br class="">
                    </div>
                  </div>
                  <br class="">
                  <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
                  <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org" moz-do-not-send="true">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a>
</pre>
                </blockquote>
              </div>
              _______________________________________________<br
                class="">
              Talk-GB mailing list<br class="">
              <a href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org" class=""
                moz-do-not-send="true">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a><br
                class="">
              <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a><br
                class="">
            </div>
          </blockquote>
        </div>
        <br class="">
      </div>
    </blockquote>
  </body>
</html>