Fancy a walk?



  • The public transport people here have a utility on their website that lets you enter your start and end points, the time you need to travel, and various other options (such as whether the time is "arrive by" or "leave after" or whatever, and which methods of transport you wish to use), and it tells you what it thinks is the best combination of services you should use. It gives you the top three options, so you can usually get a good idea of what the possibilities are and you can check them in more detail.

    Unfortunately, something seems to have gone wrong with the mapping function today. It crashes IE8 on my Windows 7 box. No problem, I thought, I just recently set up IE7 as an XP Mode virtual app, I'll see if that works. Well... it didn't crash it. But their definition of walking 861 metres seems a little bit off. And yes, all of that blue line is supposed to be a single 861m walk. Note the scale at the bottom.

    [IMG]http://img571.imageshack.us/img571/203/walkv.png[/IMG]

    Explanation of symbols: I'm supposed to start at the S, walk to the T ("transfer") where I get on a bus which takes me to the E. The E is more or less in the right position; at this scale, the S and the T should be pretty much on top of it. All the directions and timings are right (13 minute walk, then 7 minutes on the bus); it's just the map that's completely screwed.



  • "I knew I should have taken a left at Albuquerque!"

    Share and enjoy, do you have a URL for that?


    Also, it looks like the map says "FOCKINGHAM". Tee hee.



  •  Wait, 13 minutes for a 861m walk? Are you a) crippled, b) a newly-born that knows only to crawl, c) so morbidly fat you waggle more than you walk, d) an elderly with a walking rack?



  • @The poop of DOOM said:

     Wait, 13 minutes for a 861m walk? Are you a) crippled, b) a newly-born that knows only to crawl, c) so morbidly fat you waggle more than you walk, d) an elderly with a walking rack?


    If you use the displayed route, you'd have to be speedy gonzales!



  • @The poop of DOOM said:

    Wait, 13 minutes for a 861m walk? Are you a) crippled, b) a newly-born that knows only to crawl, c) so morbidly fat you waggle more than you walk, d) an elderly with a walking rack?
    LOL.  I thought it said 861km walk.  

    That would be hard to do in 13 minutes.

     



  • Uhh, I haven't had my full dose of morning coffee yet, but bus routing issues aside, wouldn't walking from S->E be shorter than the walk to the Transfer?

    There appears to be a body of water between the two, but even allowing for a detour to locate a bridge shouldn't be that bad, right?

    The scale on the lower left hand of the image also appears off of S-T is supposed to be ~800m.

     Maybe the blue line is set to "New York Cabbie mode" == extract as many miles from the customer as possible...



  • This appears to be Western Australia. Or if you prefer, "the left-hand edge of Australia."



  • @The poop of DOOM said:

     Wait, 13 minutes for a 861m walk? Are you a) crippled, b) a newly-born that knows only to crawl, c) so morbidly fat you waggle more than you walk, d) an elderly with a walking rack?

    Conversion error perhaps?  That sounds about right for 0.861 miles.



  • @frits said:

    @The poop of DOOM said:

     Wait, 13 minutes for a 861m walk? Are you a) crippled, b) a newly-born that knows only to crawl, c) so morbidly fat you waggle more than you walk, d) an elderly with a walking rack?

    Conversion error perhaps?  That sounds about right for 0.861 miles.
     

    And not entirely out of line for 0.861 kilometres.  A bit leisurely, but certainly within an order of magnitude of the expected rate, and that's before allowing for things like drawbridges up or slow traffic signals set to red when you reach them.

     



  • @Xyro said:

    "I knew I should have taken a left at Albuquerque!"

    Share and enjoy, do you have a URL for that?


    Also, it looks like the map says "FOCKINGHAM". Tee hee.

    If you think FOCKINGHAM is funny have a look on a map at what lies between FREMANTLE and ROCKINGHAM.

    (I'm from Rockingham and still find it funny.)



  • @Xyro said:

    Share and enjoy, do you have a URL for that?

    They appear to have fixed the map now. Well, it still crashes on IE8 / Win 7, but on IE7 / XP it shows the proper route. I did go to the trouble of submitting feedback on their site about it, so I plan to pretend that they actually fixed it in response to my complaint. I like to have a few comforting illusions.
    @Cad Delworth said:
    This appears to be Western Australia. Or if you prefer, "the left-hand edge of Australia."

    Indeed it is. I'm actually only trying to get from West Perth to North Perth. I didn't really want to visit Rockingham along the way. Or Fockingham either :) (Side note: We lived in Rockingham for five years before we moved to the house we're in now. Our first two kids were born while we were down there.)
    @burbleworst said:
    If you think FOCKINGHAM is funny have a look on a map at what lies between FREMANTLE and ROCKINGHAM.

    True. And no, he doesn't mean KWINANA, though they deserve it.
    @The poop of DOOM said:
    Wait, 13 minutes for a 861m walk? Are you a) crippled, b) a newly-born that knows only to crawl, c) so morbidly fat you waggle more than you walk, d) an elderly with a walking rack?

    Actually, it's most likely "get to the bus stop a few minutes early in case the bus is running ahead of schedule". What it actually says is "leave around 13:40" and "catch the bus at 13:53". It wouldn't surprise me if they built in a few minutes' safety margin.
    @RichP said:
    Uhh, I haven't had my full dose of morning coffee yet, but bus routing issues aside, wouldn't walking from S->E be shorter than the walk to the Transfer?

    There appears to be a body of water between the two, but even allowing for a detour to locate a bridge shouldn't be that bad, right?

    The scale on the lower left hand of the image also appears off of S-T is supposed to be ~800m.

    That's... kind of what my whole post was about. The S and T should both be almost on top of the E on the scale of the diagram. They're very badly misplaced on the map. And of course the suggested route from S to T is broken, maybe because the locations are broken. For reference, here's the current (corrected) map, zoomed out to the same scale:

    [img]http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/9954/walk2m.png[/img]

    And here's what it looks like at the default scale, in case anybody cares:

    [img]http://img805.imageshack.us/img805/4990/walk3.png[/img]



  • @Scarlet Manuka said:

    Actually, it's most likely "get to the bus stop a few minutes early in case the bus is running ahead of schedule". What it actually says is "leave around 13:40" and "catch the bus at 13:53"
     

    In the Queensland version you get to choose your walking speed. 2, 4, 6 or 8 km/hr. But then there's no pretty map to look at.



  • Adelaide wins. Seriously, this has saved my ass the last couple weeks in starting a new job and needing to know when the next bus gets in (on my Android).



  • @hotchips said:

    Adelaide wins.

    What, because Google Maps covers it? You do know that Google Maps covers other places too, right? It integrates the local public transport information here too, incidentally.

    Usually I prefer the Transperth site since it's easier to get to the relevant timetables and so on. I'd probably have checked Google Maps in this case if I didn't already know where to go; since I only needed to know the timings and they were OK I didn't feel the need.

    You used to be able to choose your walking speed on the Transperth site, but they took that out a few years ago. I don't tend to miss it much.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.