Hi! We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
But as we’re losing ad-revenue from this then why not make a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Posted: Thu Feb 15, 2007 12:56 am Post subject: Mio TMC reports borked
There's a major problem with the latest (Jan 2007) release of Miomap 3.2 regarding (certain) traffic incident reports.
The problem impacts certain incident reports where the following conditions seem to be met:
1) Highway incident report. For example: M3.
2) Direction of travel of jam on Highway is reported. For example "Basingstoke to London M3".
3) A subheading report is reported. For example "Lightwater AXXX to Camberley AYYY".
The problem is significant. The direction of the travel report in the main heading (2) does not correspond with the direction of travel on the subheading (3). You can have a main heading travel report describing a south to north heading problem (Basingstoke to London) but a subheading report describing a north to south problem.
Even more seriously the mapping software actually reports and reroutes the jam according to the *subheading* direction (often the wrong direction) and only when the GPS device is close to the jam does it correctly report the direction of the jam - causing a last minute reroute around the jam and more worryingly irrelevant and nuisance routing prior to that point.
I have been able to replicate this problem on *every* rush hour occasion I have used the C710 since the Jan 3.2 update around the M3 and M25 area. It is a major problem. I can replicate it on a C710 unit using ITIS (Classic FM) TMC.
Miomap 3.2 is also, since the Jan update, now unable to distinguish between jams on motorways and the lack of jams on feeder roads. It's trying to project jam information on to feeder roads but is *tending* to fail in terms of accuracy. Interestingly howver tonight it did get it right - albeit 15 minutes or so late (after I had entered the A road leading to the motorway).
Joined: Jan 04, 2007 Posts: 2789 Location: Hampshire, UK
Posted: Thu Feb 15, 2007 9:20 am Post subject:
Gareth,
This is how the information in the original (September/October 2006) version of MioMap 3.2 is displayed in exactly the same are as you describe (M3/M25 etc).
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the way I've been interpreting the information is as follows:
HEADING = section of road
SUB-HEADING = direction and more exact location of problem
For example, something like (but I can't remember the exact phrase):
M3 Basingstoke - Twyford
J8 - J9
Slow traffic for xx mi
this would be in the Southampton (southbound/westbound) direction
M3 Basingstoke - Twyford
J9 - J8
Queueing traffic for xx mi
this would be in the London (northbound/eastbound) direction
These traffic incidents are reported in the same way from 2-Ten FM (Reading 102.9), Ocean FM (south coast 96.7) and Power FM (south coast 103.2) to name but 3 radio stations.
The M25 also seems to be split into sections within the heading, but if you look at the junction information in the sub-heading, it also gives the direction of the problem.
If you look further afield, I think you'll also see that M27, A34, M1 (to name but a few other roads with regular problems), you'll find this to be the case.
I travel the M3 corridor every day and seemingly see the same information as yourself, but maybe my interpretation is different.
In my experience, the direction & location of the sub-heading agrees with the information given in radio traffic bulletins.
I haven't updated my unit since the first release of v3.2, so what you're seeing appears to be consistent through later releases of v3.2. I have no experience of TMC on TomTom or other devices, but I would guess that the heading is to give a rough location at a quick glance whilst the sub-heading is more detailed at a closer look.
Perhaps when your car is stationary, you could have a closer look at the information and see if there's any sense in my interpretation of what's shown.
Personally, with the M3, I find the northbound/eastbound and southbound/westbound thing more confusing.
This is how the information in the original (September/October 2006) version of MioMap 3.2 is displayed in exactly the same are as you describe (M3/M25 etc).
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the way I've been interpreting the information is as follows:
HEADING = section of road
SUB-HEADING = direction and more exact location of problem
For example, something like (but I can't remember the exact phrase):
M3 Basingstoke - Twyford
J8 - J9
Slow traffic for xx mi
this would be in the Southampton (southbound/westbound) direction
M3 Basingstoke - Twyford
J9 - J8
Queueing traffic for xx mi
this would be in the London (northbound/eastbound) direction
These traffic incidents are reported in the same way from 2-Ten FM (Reading 102.9), Ocean FM (south coast 96.7) and Power FM (south coast 103.2) to name but 3 radio stations.
The M25 also seems to be split into sections within the heading, but if you look at the junction information in the sub-heading, it also gives the direction of the problem.
If you look further afield, I think you'll also see that M27, A34, M1 (to name but a few other roads with regular problems), you'll find this to be the case.
I travel the M3 corridor every day and seemingly see the same information as yourself, but maybe my interpretation is different.
In my experience, the direction & location of the sub-heading agrees with the information given in radio traffic bulletins.
I haven't updated my unit since the first release of v3.2, so what you're seeing appears to be consistent through later releases of v3.2. I have no experience of TMC on TomTom or other devices, but I would guess that the heading is to give a rough location at a quick glance whilst the sub-heading is more detailed at a closer look.
Perhaps when your car is stationary, you could have a closer look at the information and see if there's any sense in my interpretation of what's shown.
Personally, with the M3, I find the northbound/eastbound and southbound/westbound thing more confusing.
Thanks for the information but the information regarding flow direction has derfinitely been incorrect *since* the January update. The subheading describing the flow often provides the wrong direction when an A road is described in the heading.
A fictional example would be:
M3 Basingstoke to London (North)
A322 (J3) Lightwater to AYYY (J4) Camberley (south flow)
Yet I observed that the flow problem was actually in the north direction - from Camberley to Lightwater. So far I have only spotted the problem when an A road is described in the subheading.
The flow is also incorrectly identified on the map oddly until you approach very close to the incident when it is then reported correctly.
The A road information in the junction information also seems to confuse the software in to re-routing you off the unaffected A road even when you are not going to enter the motorway (the source of the jam).
Joined: Jan 04, 2007 Posts: 2789 Location: Hampshire, UK
Posted: Thu Feb 15, 2007 11:30 am Post subject:
What I might try then is updating my wife's unit to the latest version of 3.2 and compare the two units along the same route, which is also in the same geographical region that you're talking about.
What I might try then is updating my wife's unit to the latest version of 3.2 and compare the two units along the same route, which is also in the same geographical region that you're talking about.
Yes, there's certainly a problem with TMC following the most recent update - I've replicated problems again today.
The most recent update seems to attempt to improve the specificity of TMC information for example in terms of A road and motorway junction information descriptions and placenames - the November version of 3.2 also started to do this.
But problems seem to have been introduced. "Traffic jam ahead" is sometimes reported even when the reported jam (which sometimes doesn't actually exist - a fault of the TMC broadcast I assume) is on the opposite carriageway. Encouragingly despite reporting "Traffic jam ahead" the Mio didn't reroute the journey today (although it did yesterday). But "Traffic Jam ahead" was reported very frequently today, following the January update, even when there was no jam on the relevant carriageway direction.
An intermittent jam direction problem has been introduced with the most recent update - I didn't notice it before if it was there before.
When all is said and done the C710 still performed *very* well today - it alerted me to a problem (correctly) on the M271 and routed me around it (a route I would *never* have found on my own).
My C710 is now stuck on ITIS and Classic FM. Before the 3.2 update it was, I'm sure, using Trafficmaster TMC. Prior to the January update and when travelling in the west country with Miomap 3.2 it also occasionally seemed to be using Trafficmaster. No more though.
I wonder if the ROM versions have any relevance to whether or not ITIS/Classic FM is used?
The January update does introduce improvements to Miomap 3.2 (including more sensibly worded voice directions) and the whole thing seems to be more stable - it hasn't crashed once on me yet despite me disobeying the route directions, altering parameters mid journey, forcing recalculations, using bluetooth, unplugging the power cable, avoiding blocked roads and so on.
I haven't had a chance to check out geographical locations that previously caused replicatable lock ups. I bet that this problem still exists and that it can only be addressed by a firmware update of which there is no sign.
There are niggles about TMC - it's become more bolder and thus more intrusive but not necessarily more accurate.
Still the C710 is an impressive bit of kit and when you consider processing speed, map coverage, phone support and value for money it's almost certainly the best there currently is (although perhaps some of the Medion TMC units can give it a run for its money.)
When used as a tool - rather than a gospel guide - it's actually unbelievably good. I don't know how I managed without it. Having used various TomTom units I would recommend the C710 to anyone without hesitation.
Joined: Jan 04, 2007 Posts: 2789 Location: Hampshire, UK
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 9:04 am Post subject:
This is all very confusing.
I had an experience this mornig where my Mio was picking up TMC from 2-Ten FM (103.2) and displayed a road closure on the A303 in the Andover area. However, the traffic bulletin on the same radio station (which covers the Andover area) made no mention of the A303. BBC Radio 2 traffic bulletins have subsequently mentioned a lorry fire on the A303.
2-Ten FM have specifically mention TrafficMaster as their source, but why are their own bulletins not consistent with the TMC data transmitted on their frequency
This also begs the questions:
1) If ITIS are transmitting TMC, rather than TrafficMaster, what is the source of data used by ITIS in their transmissions
2) Do ITIS use TrafficMaster to provide their data?
3) Does Classic FM, which some people receive, use a different data source to the 'local' radio stations which transmit TMC?
I had an experience this mornig where my Mio was picking up TMC from 2-Ten FM (103.2) and displayed a road closure on the A303 in the Andover area. However, the traffic bulletin on the same radio station (which covers the Andover area) made no mention of the A303. BBC Radio 2 traffic bulletins have subsequently mentioned a lorry fire on the A303.
2-Ten FM have specifically mention TrafficMaster as their source, but why are their own bulletins not consistent with the TMC data transmitted on their frequency
This also begs the questions:
1) If ITIS are transmitting TMC, rather than TrafficMaster, what is the source of data used by ITIS in their transmissions
2) Do ITIS use TrafficMaster to provide their data?
3) Does Classic FM, which some people receive, use a different data source to the 'local' radio stations which transmit TMC?
There's a simple way of clarifying the confusing issues but, oddly, nobody seems interesting in clarifying them!
The simple question is: what ROM version is your device using?
If we can identify a connection between ROM version and the radio station received then at least part of the question will be answered.
It's important to say that Classic FM and 2-Ten are owned by the same company - GCAP Media. ITIS uses Classic FM, a GCAP company, to broadcast TMC.
Trafficmaster has also entered in to a recent deal with GCAP to provide *voice* traffic information to GCAP stations.
My C710 has not picked up 2-Ten since the Miomap 3.2 update. I seem to be stuck with Classic FM although a trip to the west country in December did seem to allow the C710 to lock on to frequencies other than Classic FM - I suspect other ITIS broadcasts.
ITIS in no way uses Trafficmaster to provide its data. It is a direct competitor to Trafficmaster. ITIS uses on the road vehicles fitted with data devices to provide its data. It also, like Trafficmaster, uses journalistic information.
It would be interesting to know what ROM version is being used by people who think they are receiving Trafficmaster via their C710. The situation with external receivers, in the case of the C510, may be more complicated so perhaps we should keep it simple for now!
I would bet that TMC source depends on firmware version. Yet that wouldn't explain why the 3.2 update altered the type of stations my C710 is able to receive.
Let's face it - if Mitac doesn't know then we probably have no chance!
Joined: Jan 14, 2005 Posts: 19638 Location: Blackpool , Lancs
Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 3:50 pm Post subject:
If it would be of any use to any of you chaps I have an Excel spreadsheet that details the lat/ long, transmitter name, power and frequency that covers the current situation for iTIS and Traffic Master locations in the UK. I use this to create the POI files for Garmin (TM) or TomTom (iTIS) - I can e-mail it should you want a copy, please e-mail me using the button below - Mike
Joined: Jan 04, 2007 Posts: 2789 Location: Hampshire, UK
Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 8:48 pm Post subject:
Even if Mitac are unable to answer TMC related questions, is it worth asking them IF there were any firmware updates in the recent software updates
Like I said, I'm still using the original v3.2, so i don't know exactly what you might have seen through the different software releases and therefore I'm not in a strong position to ask about the possibility of firmware updates myself.
A dumb question, but have you at any time selected 'Exclude selected station' when Classic FM has been selected in order to see if different stations are then selected?
Joined: Apr 15, 2006 Posts: 64 Location: South Midlands
Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 1:51 am Post subject:
Gps fan,
Yes.
For observational purposes I have my 710 fed with FM from the amplified domestic aerial array that supplies my Hi-Fi.
At this moment the TMC Control Centre page shows me to be receiving Classic FM; displays the typical full RDS identifier of the station, and states ‘TMC present’(full orange bar).
I have 12 pages of traffic events, the furthest being at St Asaph.
At intervals of a minute or two the Classic FM lock is released and the unit scans through all the other frequencies but finds non it particularly likes.
If I exclude Classic, the unit scans; reads 'testing', but still fails to select any other station despite sometimes stating 'tmc present'. As far as I can tell, no traffic information is received in this state.
The orange bar constantly oscillates between full orange and perhaps 2mm at the left hand edge.
Re-enabling Classic causes an immediate lock; ‘tmc present’ is displayed, and the bar goes to full orange.
I can confirm that the unit has re-routed me on several occasions with considerable elegance.
It has also dropped me into heavy local traffic when avoiding a motorway blockage, but then, local knowledge probably routed the ‘locals’ through that area anyway.
What we need is someone who patrols the motorways to give us some idea of the number of false positives that are generated.
It is always disquieting to wonder if one is being navigated round a non existent obstruction.
Hope this helps.
Rom Version R33F .2. 112.517
Map Version v3.2 Jan 18 2007
United kingdom 2006.01+
Gps fan,
Yes.
For observational purposes I have my 710 fed with FM from the amplified domestic aerial array that supplies my Hi-Fi.
At this moment the TMC Control Centre page shows me to be receiving Classic FM; displays the typical full RDS identifier of the station, and states ‘TMC present’(full orange bar).
I have 12 pages of traffic events, the furthest being at St Asaph.
At intervals of a minute or two the Classic FM lock is released and the unit scans through all the other frequencies but finds non it particularly likes.
If I exclude Classic, the unit scans; reads 'testing', but still fails to select any other station despite sometimes stating 'tmc present'. As far as I can tell, no traffic information is received in this state.
The orange bar constantly oscillates between full orange and perhaps 2mm at the left hand edge.
Re-enabling Classic causes an immediate lock; ‘tmc present’ is displayed, and the bar goes to full orange.
I can confirm that the unit has re-routed me on several occasions with considerable elegance.
It has also dropped me into heavy local traffic when avoiding a motorway blockage, but then, local knowledge probably routed the ‘locals’ through that area anyway.
What we need is someone who patrols the motorways to give us some idea of the number of false positives that are generated.
It is always disquieting to wonder if one is being navigated round a non existent obstruction.
Hope this helps.
Rom Version R33F .2. 112.517
Map Version v3.2 Jan 18 2007
United kingdom 2006.01+
Yes, exactly the same situation as me. It's worth pointing out though that until the 3.2 update this wasn't the situation. My unit would, for example, pick up 2Ten in the Hampshire/Surrey area.
There has been no firmware update since the release of 3.2 although newer units do ship with an updated firmware. No sign of Mitac releasing a firmware update - probably more trouble than it's worth with botched upgrades (after all even PC motherboard manufacturers advise people not to upgrade for the sake of it unless they are actually having a problem with the current BIOS version).
I bought my unit (new) in December and it came with R33F.2.112.517.
The problem is that it isn't always possible to get good Classic FM reception - I think that the old system was better. Having said that I'm not sure what the old system was (a mixtures of Trafficmaster and ITIS? Surely not?)
Other changes have been made to the Traffic Information display. For one: with the recent 3.2 update (and ? the November 3.2 update also) the distance to traffic incident is not updated unless you exit the traffic incident screeen and re-enter it. With 3.1 (and if I remember correctly the initial 3.2 release) the distance to traffic incident was updated as you viewed the screen (the distance would count down or up as you viewed the screen).
Whilst the detail of TMC information has improved I'm not convinced that the accuracy has. I'm not referring to the accuracy of TMC broadcasts (nothing the Mio can do about that). Rather the Mio seems to be dealing less effectively with the information. I'm getting quite a lot of false alarms - "Traffic Jam ahead" - most of which don't however result in route recalculation. It seems to be the case that the alert message is sounded if there's a jam on a road you're crossing under or over (such as an A road or Motorway you're going under or over). The jam alert also seems to be issued if there's a jam on a part of the road you're travelling on even if your route will take you nowhere near the site of the jam. This happened occasionally in Miomap 3.1 but not as much (? maybe the information wasn't detailed enough to trigger an alert - possible cost of progress?)
I'm not convinced by the quality of the ITIS data mining method - using in vehicle tracking devices to provide information. I know that ITIS uses sophisticated filtering mechanisms but I'm not sure that data integrity should depend upon Eddie Stobart and white van man. The journalistic information seems to be very good but the raw data (usually described as "congestion" and where average speed of traffic is displayed) is I think possibly less accurate than the Trafficmaster camera produced data. ITIS, depending as it does on unfixed routes, may be more comprehensive in terms of road coverage although Trafficmaster make crazy claims about coverage (sometimes however only covering one side of the road and not the other).
I would feel better if my C710 supported Trafficmaster but I have no evidence that it would be the better service. I'm pretty sure that it used to support Trafficmaster but I can't be sure - it certainly used to pick up all sorts of stations that it doesn't anymore.
This suggests that there's some sort of license system in place. It's just bloody odd that Mitac doesn't seemt to know anything about it!
For what it's worth however there has been mention on GPS Passion that it's possible to pick up ITIS data for free. I don't know if this is the case - and I know I'm just adding to the confusion - but if this is the case then is it the case that the C710 is simply picking up free to air TMC?
Does the official add on for the C510 support Trafficmaster or ITIS?
I'm not sure which service the C510/C250/C210 add-on receiver uses, but I've found a specification for it online:
Type: Digital-Synthesizer tuner, integrated R(B)DS processor
Sensitivity: 3 µV (S+N)/N=26dB
Frequency range: 87,5 .. 108,0 MHz
Tuning speed: 2,3 sec band to band
Antenna connector: 2.5mm connector
87.5-108.0MHz covers pretty much the whole UK FM range, so no clues there.
This information was obtained from the easydevices.co.uk web site (http://www.easydevices.co.uk/products.asp?partno=MIOC510TMC)
Thanks to Mike - who emailed me the file (thanks Mike) - I know that my C710 uses ITIS and not Trafficmaster. It used to use Trafficmaster but not anymore.
Looking at the ITIS transmitter locations I can also see clearly why TMC is difficult to obtain in the area where I live and in other parts of the country I travel to (the transmitter signal is weak) and why it's more difficult to keep a connection than with Trafficmaster.
Oh well. I guess it would be interesting to know why some C710s seem to be able to pick up Trafficmaster.
Joined: Jan 04, 2007 Posts: 2789 Location: Hampshire, UK
Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:52 pm Post subject:
Thanks for the spreadsheet Mike.
It looks like my Mio is picking a TrafficMaster signal.
I haven't got around to updating my wife's unit to the latest version of 3.2 yet, but I'll update you as soon as I do.
...I'm not being cruel to my wife - she doesn't use the TMC facility, so I can update her unit without her being affected by any changes to the signal being received
It looks like my Mio is picking a TrafficMaster signal.
I haven't got around to updating my wife's unit to the latest version of 3.2 yet, but I'll update you as soon as I do.
...I'm not being cruel to my wife - she doesn't use the TMC facility, so I can update her unit without her being affected by any changes to the signal being received
Using Mike's spreadsheet and "testing" 2 C710s with Miomap 3.2 I can confirm that both are now using ITIS - at least 1 (mine) was previously (Miomap 3.1) using Trafficmaster.
The ITIS coverage isn't as good - it depends on Classic FM and reception coverage with the basic platic plug in is not as good as it was for Trafficmaster reception. Even the (modern) car radio (Fiat Panda!) has to tweak the Classic FM reception frequency on a number of occasions during a 3 mile or so journey. The C710 has no chance. The same problem wasn't apparent with the TM broadcast.
I'm not sure what to make of this. Can anyone be tempted to roll back to Miomap 3.1? I'm reluctant to even try given the far superior routing and voice direction features of 3.2 but I'm pretty sure that the rollback process would be hassle free.
Posted: Today Post subject: Pocket GPS Advertising
We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
Have you considered making a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
All times are GMT + 1 Hour Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9Next
Page 1 of 9
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Hi! We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
But as we’re losing ad-revenue from this then why not make a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in for private messages
Log in
