locked
Routing Problem Microsoft Streets & Trips 2011 RRS feed

  • Question

  • Situation: Create a route from Phoenix, AZ to Albuquerque, NM in S&T 2011, Win7 Home Premium 64-bit.  No stop points.  Set Route Options to quickest.

    Route follows I-17 and I-40 as expected.  However, at I-40 MP300 EB (34-59-26N 109-57-57W) the route leaves I-40 and follows a parallel road (Goodwater Road) to MP303, then re-enters I-40 EB.  There is no apparent reason for this.

    The following steps all fail to place the route on I-40 between MP300 & MP303:

    1) setting road types preferences to "Interstate" and all other types to "dislike"

    2) dragging and dropping the route onto I-40 EB

    3) creating one or more avoidance areas on Goodwater Road between MP300 & MP303

    4) setting a stop point on I-40 EB between MP300 & MP303 and recalculating route

    In short, as reported under the "Broken Routing" Topic for the Toronto area, it's as though this segment of road does not exist in the database.

    Furthermore, I have calculated the same route in S&T 2006 thru 2010 with no such issues.  I have also discovered a similar issue in a location in New York State.  The issue was discovered in S&T 2011 in a file created under the previous versions, but I have also tried to create this route in a "virgin" 2011 file with the same problem resulting.

    Lastly, I have exported the route from S&T 2011 to MapSource (after solving .gpx file issues) and recalculated the route.  MapSource calculates it correctly.

    Does anyone have any insights?

    Monday, May 2, 2011 3:34 AM

All replies

  • Those errors are likely all related to errors in the S&T 2011 map database. I'm afraid we will have to live with that till version 2012 release.
    Laptop GPS World

    Monday, May 2, 2011 10:56 AM
  • Thank you for responding.

    This is a sad testimony for this product.  I-40 was constructed in its present location in the 1960's and has not been relocated.  Previous versions of S&T have handled this segment of highway correctly, and now the 2011 "upgrade", for which I paid good money, does not.  I can understand "new" software having bugs, but when things move backwards like this it is very frustruating.  Even if the map data is at fault, the consumer has the right to expect the product to work as advertised.

    I have a 3200-mile-one-way trip from Phoenix to Rimouski, QC, Canada that has evolved over the years in several variations using previous versions of S&T.  With each new version of S&T, as a final check, I drag the route along the screen in ten-mile-segments looking for possible bugs.  This is the first year I have found such problems.  The other area I have found having a similar problem is along SR7 near Boyntonville, NY.  The program calculates the route off SR7 thru town and no amount of fiddling will keep it on SR7 that bypasses the village.  I wonder how many more of these I'm gonna find along the route.....?

    What's even sadder is my stupidity for trusting Microsoft to do an "upgrade" correctly and discarding the installation DVD's for my previous versions.  At least I could have reverted to the previous version that worked correctly, even if the maps were out of date.

    I once thought S&T was a great product and a good value; now I'm not so sure.....


    joshuals
    Monday, May 2, 2011 1:00 PM
  • I would have to agree with you.  Any other company would release a patch, realizing they have a serious flaw in the primary purpose of their program.

    My Fail of this product is on INTERSTATE 93 north in Manchester New Hampshire.  This section of roadway has 10s of thousands of travelers on it each month.  Imagine my surprise when it wanted me to go through a bunch of suburban roads just to get back on the interstate again.

     

     

     

    Wednesday, July 27, 2011 7:43 PM
  • Joshuals' results with S&T 2011 are strange indeed particularly in view of the fact that S&T 2010 does not deviate from I-40 at the same point, or any other for that matter. In other words, the up-date seems to have made things worse, not better. I think all this proves that whatever route S&T (of any vintage) produces should be taken with a grain of salt and some human intelligence should be applied to any route plan. I have had instances where S&T routed me off a major highway on one exit ramp and right back on the entrance ramp at the same interchange. But rather than freak-out about it, I just ignored the anomoly and carried on the "right" way.

    I think that S&T is a fabulous product and a great value and I am prepared to work around these few and minor irregularities but I am sure someone out there will say that my standards are not high enough and that I should expect nothing short of 100% perfection.

    Wednesday, July 27, 2011 9:36 PM
  • Your point about "using human intelligence" is well taken; however, in the instances we have discussed it may be fairly obvious that there is a "minor irrgularity" in the routing that could be easily detected by "human intelligence" and corrected ("ignored") while you're driving.  But if the program is unreliable on fairly simple routes like I-40 in Arizona or I-93 in New Hampshire, how unreliable is it on other secondary or minor roads where "the anomoly" would not be so obvious?  If I were in unfamiliar territory (which is the reason for using a routing program in the first place) and my "human intelligence" did not pick up on such an "anomoly" until I had gone 20 miles out of my way, I would be less than pleased with my investment and would likely ask myself why I didn't just use a road map in the first place.

    I guess "human intelligence" would tell me that I should examine my 6400-mile route (round trip) on the screen in 5-mile increments before leaving home, which was exactly how I found the "anomolies" in the first place;  it takes quite a while to do that, though.

    As a update to my original post, when I used S&T to plan the return route (westerly along I-40) the route proceeded along the Interstate normally, without a hitch.  So I have no idea why it did what it did on the route going easterly; I was never able to fix the easterly route.


    joshuals
    Wednesday, July 27, 2011 10:33 PM
  • I have a similar problem in that when I route from Jackson, MS to San Diego, CA Streets and trips routes me North on MS25 to Starkville, MS then West to Winona, MS then South on I-55 back to I-20 in Jackson and the route is then correct from there on.  I know that the simple thing is to create a waypoint that forces S&T to route correctly, but I have never had to do this in any previous versions.  It also goes bezerk where I-20 merges with I-10 in west TX when I force it to use I-10/20 instead of going across on US-62/180 north of Pecos where it merges back into I-10 north of El Paso.  I have found several other anomalies on other routes that I did not have problems with in prior versions.

    George

    Tuesday, August 2, 2011 8:16 PM