Just doing some looking & spotted: https://qorf-media.s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/11153757/TrackGradingSystem_UserGuide.pdf
which includes Glossary AS 2156.1-2001 Walking Tracks - Classification and Signage The Australian Walking Track Grading System benchmarks to AS 2156.1-2001. A Grade 1 walk corresponds to AS 2165.1 Class 1 track A Grade 2 walk corresponds to AS 2165.1 Class 2 track A Grade 3 walk corresponds to AS 2165.1 Class 3 track A Grade 4 walk corresponds to AS 2165.1 Class 4 track *A Grade 5 walk corresponds to AS 2165.1 Class 5 and 6 track* So it appears there may only be 5 levels? Would make sense as Grade 5 refers to multi-day, long-distance, remote-area walks! Another slightly different, & possibly a bit clearer version: https://www.trailhiking.com.au/preparing-to-hike/track-grading/ Thanks Graeme On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 at 16:22, Michael Collinson <m...@ayeltd.biz> wrote: > Ian, > > +1. The AWTGS looks excellent as it works from an international > perspective. I've also struggled with the SAC scale in the UK and Sweden, > also both countries where the bulk of rural footpaths are barely "alpine" > and also came to the conclusion that what matters is the type of people > wanting to use the path rather than specific physical attributes of the > path. And particularly at the less hardcore end. If one substitutes > "hiking" for "bushwalking", it works in those countries as well, IMHO. > > The categories I've played with conceptually are: > > - I could take my very elderly mother > > - Suitable for inexperienced walkers in everyday footwear (which could > include high heels). Less charitably: City folks stroll. > > - Could I get a push-chair/stroller down here? (and by extension assisted > wheel-chair) > > - I'm fine with walking but don't want to be using my arms, (balance, > holding-on, hauling myself up). > > - I'm fine with scrambling but don't take me anywhere where I'll be > nervous about falling off. > > - Bring it on > > > I think the system satisfies the above in a nice linear fashion without > too many categories. I'd be interested to know what the mysterious AS > 2156.1-2001 6th one is. Copied from the URL provided: > > - Grade One is suitable for people with a disability with assistance > - Grade Two is suitable for families with young children > - Grade Three is recommended for people with some bushwalking > experience > - Grade Four is recommended for experienced bushwalkers, and > - Grade Five is recommended for very experienced bushwalkers > > Mike > On 2022-01-28 16:41, ianst...@iinet.net.au wrote: > > I think we should be considering the Australian Walking Track Grading > System. It seems to have been defined by the Victorians (Forest Fire > Management - > https://www.ffm.vic.gov.au/recreational-activities/walking-and-camping/australian-walking-track-grading-system). > The AWTGS defines 5 track grades. > > > > It appears to have been adopted by National Parks here in WA, NT, SA, QLD > and NSW, and Bush Walking Australia. > > > > I have tagged a few tracks (where there were officially signed with a > “Class”) as “awtgs=” (however someone in Germany has since deleted those > tags without reference to me!) > > > > Australian Standard AS 2156.1-2001 is titled “Walking Tracks, Part 1: > Classification and signage”. However, I don’t have a subscription to read > the contents of this standard to see how it compares with the AWTGS. Other > documentation I have seen refers to the AS scheme as having 6 levels > > > > Ian > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-au mailing > listTalk-au@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
