Rerouting issues

There is no ETA for any feature, when there is free time and will, then could be implemented.

Ok, then I have to further wait… hopefully not too long… (just thinking loud)… at least good to know that the problem is understood and there could be a solution.

Of course for such an option 4 - strictly follow wps in sequence, the manual (in no way automatic) deletion via the context menu should also work, but I think that’s normal… just want to mention it in case if not.

PS: also of course such an option also recognize when I have for example don’t set the wp exactly to the street… this can of course be automatically corrected (meaning if I have set it 10 meters or so besides the street), then it can be treated as passed… but I think this is already handled very well in Kurviger.

1 Like

Sure, but I doubt that this was the reason here.

No, you left the route shortly before WP17, to me it would make that Kurviger would reroute you to WP17. You skipped Waypoints 5-16. If you had done this intentionally you would complain that Kurviger is not rerouting you to WP17.

How would Kurviger know that? It can’t guess your intentions. The default behavior is to allow skipping parts of the route, which is awesome and extremely flexible. That’s the intended behavior, the other option is the strict routing where you have to visit every waypoint or even every part of the route.

Unless you configure Kurviger to that, that usually doesn’t happen. There are very few roundtrip scenarios where this can happen.

That’s what should happen. As noted previously, I can’t reproduce the behavior you describe, so I have no idea why it behaved that way.

probably this happened… probably Kurviger guided to turn left and I took the magenta left instead of the green left

But no, I wouldn’t complain if Kurviger would not route to wp17, not with the “next unvisited waypoint” mode, since I thought this would already be the strictly follow wps in sequence mode… obviously it is not (just learned 15 minutes ago).

by knowing that I have activated option 3 and not 1 and 2

You are talking as if this option already exists. I understand devemux86 that it’s not.

Don’t understand this. How can I already now configure Kurviger to not skip wps?

But it doesn’t, see track picture. According to my planned route Kurviger should have taken the direction of the green arrow

this was the planned route. Kurviger completely skipped wp7,8 and 9 without telling to turn right.

Nevertheless the problem exists. I guess devemux86 has at least understood the problem. Can you please get in touch with him?

Ok, you say you and I understand that you want that flexible mode of skipping wps. Fine, but for me this is an only disappointment if Kurviger automatically skips wps. If this is option 3, I have no other chance than to accept it and ask for an option 4 - strictly follow waypoints in sequence (just including manual skipping of waypoints via context menu - exists already).

1 Like

No, don’t just think about this specific scenario. Think about other scenarios as well. For example you have to go off the route because of a road blockage. You have a waypoint on the road blockage. Now you get back to the route and did not visit this waypoint. Should Kurviger try to route you back to that waypoint? Certainly not.

It’s not implemented yet.

I think that option was removed, you could recalculate the route to the destination.

I understand your problem description. But I can’t reproduce it. So I can only guess why Kurviger didn’t tell you to turn. At that point you already started to change your planned route.

It will with strict route following, there cannot exist and should not wait any flexibility there.

1 Like

Of course if I talk of an option 4 I would like to also have the manual options via the context menu available as told.

I there is a road block, I still can use avoid roadblock and if I need to skip 1, 2 or more wps, I would like do this manually, not automatically.

I was not starting to change the route, I just missed the right left turn from 2 which are close together and this is exactly what I expect a navigation system to correct for me by telling to return and guide me to the path back of the planned route.

I guess you are talking of the change between wp4 and wp5, but what with skipping wp 7,8 and 9? There is no reason for doing this.

Not automatic, but hopefully still manually by using the context menu.

since this is really important for me, can you confirm that even with an option 4 - strict follow route the manual context options will still work?

What I like for example much better as in Navigon is that the wps are numbered. In Navigon Cruiser for example you can also set many wps and they are strictly followed. It always guides me to my planned unvisited waypoint

and if I want to skip a wp I can on the run, not needing to stop, just wipe to the left

and use “Aktuelles Ziel überspringen” (skip next waypoint) and directly get a new calculation. If I want to skip more wps, I just use this quick link again. If I want to check the result I just use “show complete route” and can see that it was correct and follow my way. It’s a matter of seconds, not needing to go into submenus or to stop driving.

Navigon Cruiser has other issues for examples it get stuck sometimes when using overlaying apps. Kurviger is stable and doesn’t get stuck with overlaying apps… big benefit. If this option 4 - strictly follow route (with manual skipping wps option via context menu would come into Kurviger I am the happiest motorcycle driver in the world. :innocent: :wink:

1 Like

Cannot make promises for unimplemented features, we’ll see in the future what is possible.

1 Like

That is obvious to me.
If you re-import the route, the app cannot know that you had already visited some of the WPs.

I had a similar issue, while testing “next unvisited WP” feature.
That’s why I suggested to change the behavior at navigation start.

A post was merged into an existing topic: App: rerouting options at start of navigation

Kurzes Feedback, wie vermutet konnte ich das Problem nicht nachstellen . Punkte 14 - 17 sind aufgrund einer Umleitung dazu gekommen. Die Berechnung dazu hat Problemlos funktioniert.
Short feedback, as expected I could not reproduce the problem . Points 14 - 17 have been added due to a redirection. The calculation worked without problems.


What I do not fully understand is that you say to plan another routing option for strict follow route (no automatic skipping, only allow manual skipping and manual rerouting around stoppages).
If you now made additonally mandatory viaPoints and optional shaping points working in the “next unvisited waypoint” mode, isn’t this already the strictly follow route mode with no skipping and abreviations?

On Sunday I have planned another 420km complex roundtrip but I avoid crossovers and also using the same road twice, because I have again 7 hot headed motorbikers behind me which I don’t want to curse my back :thinking:. Nevertheless the route contains many theoretically possible abreviations. Will it work as expected means NO skippiing and no abreviations of the route… if I suddenly or unwillingly take a detour and am off the route, will it then guide me back to the route or skip waypoints even if I have NO shaping waypoints defined? :wink:
Does this already work like this in 1.13.4?

Rerouting has not changed, continues to be flexible as described here.

Like described also here, is from next waypoint, with all types included.

So this means the mandatory waypoints are not meant in sequence, wp1, wp2, wp3, …? It could happen that if I am getting off the route by accident, that it skips a mandatory wp in sequence to get to another mandatory wp which is maybe not in sequence, for example it guides me from wp10 to wp21 if this is near to the GPS position, right?

This means also, I should better deactivate automatic rerouting if I want to strictly follow the sequence of the wp’s and manage the way back to the route myself, right?

Ich habe die automatische Neuberechnung deaktiviert, Notfalls kann man das Warndreieck nutzen. :wink: Es kommt drauf an ob das Handy Online oder Offline ist, also Internet hat. Mit Internet wäre die Neuberechnung mit dem Profil was in der kurviger-App eingestellt ist. Ohne Internet ist es, soweit ich verstanden habe immer das “schnellste” Profil, egal ob Brouter oder GraphHopper. Ergäbe also verschieden Wege um auf die Strecke zurückzukommen.
I have deactivated the automatic recalculation, if necessary you can use the warning triangle. :wink: It depends if the phone is online or offline, which means it has Internet. With internet the recalculation would be with the profile that is set in the kurviger app. Without internet it is, as far as I understood, always the “fastest” profile, no matter if Brouter or GraphHopper. So there would be different ways to get back on the track.

I think I also have to do this then.

but this has the same effect on a complex round trip. It will skip mandatory waypoints in sequence.

Seems that I have to further yearn for the option strictly follow wps in sequence (allowing just manual skipping wp’s and stoppages).

Ich muss mir zum Testen auch mal eine “extrem” komplexe Route erstellen. Heute bin ich auch wieder Umleitungen ohne Neuberechnungen gefahren bzw. nicht komplett bis zum Zwischenziel sondern die selbe Straße eher zurück und die App ist “normal” weiter gesprungen. :thinking:
I have to create an “extremely” complex route for testing purposes. Today I took a detour without recalculation or I didn’t drive all the way to the interim destination but rather the same road back and the app jumped “normally”. :thinking:

Usually it does follow the WPs in sequence.
The tricky part comes, if you enter (by accident) another part of your route, which can happen if parts of your route overlap or are crossing each other.

Then the (intended) flexibility of the app may trap you. The app sees, that you are on your planned route, and does not route you backwards, to WPs that you might not have visited yet.

1 Like