GeoWizard (the "inventor" of this sport) goes waterline-to-waterline or border-to-waterline. Of course, it's an entirely arbitrary rule, but so is every other rule in sports.
I feel strongly about this subject as I actually travelled to liechtenstein to do the same , I failed, which I am at peace with.
My problem with is, a margin of error of 25 meters for a run of less than a km isnt what I would call platinum, my gripe here is with geowizard. I feel the error margin should increase for each km, for example by one meter. So a straight line across a continent allows for a larger margin of error, but 1km , well you better stick to the line.
I know noone will read this but I had to let it out.
Its not coming form a bad place I just want better rules!
The OP used GeoWizard's measurements for the points (like less than 25m for Platinum) but GeoWizard usually goes for waaaaay longer than 1km. So the "fault" is on OP, if at all.
As someone else posted, https://www.scoremyline.com/ is another metric that is available. GeoWizard collaborated with its creator, and has said that some of his own lines are better with this metric while also stating that the whole thing is of course arbitrary anyway.
Which doesn't work well for land-locked countries.
I'm sure that some sensible (albeit still arbitrary) geometric rule could be invented, such as requiring that the line bisects the country into two regions which have areas that differ by at most 50%, for example.
Alternatively, or additionally, the length of the line could be required to be greater than some specific fraction of the country's total border/coastline (assuming that has a rigorous definition).
For countries composed of multiple islands (or a mainland with some islands), the rules should probably require that the line pass through the biggest island / mainland, but perhaps multiple islands would need to be crossed (on the same straight line?) in order to meet the "bisecting area" rule above.
Straight line in 3D would usually require digging underground.
Maybe you could do it in an airplane. Compensate for the curvature of the Earth by varying your altitude. This will probably work up to a distance of a few hundred miles.
If this is just about minimizing crossing a country along a straight line then surely you could just pick any 3-country intersection and just cut the corner as closely as possible.
I would be interested to know which is the longest distance straight line crossing of a country I could do, without having to go through a building or having to swim.
Maybe some country in North Africa, that is mainly desert?
If you're willing to be a little more flexible with the definition of a country, many U.S. states and Canadian provinces look fairly easy to cross in a straight line. They contain long, straight stretches of roads, and even their borders are straight lines. You might as well just walk or drive along the fence.
Clearly the longest theoretically possible will be Russia. Start at the border near Pskov and just head eastish until you end up in Laguna Kunergvin. Although that does involve crossing some big rivers, formidable mountain ranges, frozen tundra, and trackless forest.
First one doesn't look any "worse" than Geowizard's crossing of Norway [0]. Second one feels like it's not in the spirit of things, but I have trouble coming up with an adequately rigorous definition.
I was thinking of saying Norway and New Zealand look OK because in both cases you start on the eastern border/coast and finish on the western one, unlike Queensland where you are still in the northeast by any definition. This gets close to my intent, but to make this work we have to accept that NZ has multiple east coasts, or a single discontinuous one. Why is it OK to cross the North Island in NZ, but not OK to cross some tiny island in Australia (e.g. cross King Island [1] from west to east)?
In case you haven't seen the linked videos by GeoWizard about crossing Wales and Norway in a straight line, I would highly recommend watching them. The whole series makes for some very entertaining evenings, you wouldn't believe the kinds of things he comes across on his journeys!
Came here to post a similar comment. Even if he didn't cross the entire country, his "Straight Line" missions require a lot of prep and logistics, especially if a body of water or private land is involved.
Regarding Norway, it being private land wouldn't matter much. It is written in Norwegian law [0] granting the right to travel the land without too many restriction. Private property is not one such restriction. One should avoid farming fields during spring, but in broad strokes that's pretty much it.
This includes the right to forage (berries, mushroom, whatnot). Though hunting and fishing can be quite restricted. Motorized vehicles have their own set of restrictions, but trekking, biking, sailing, etc are fine.
So, one cannot for instance fence off the access to nature, like a "private" beach etc. And camping is allowed everywhere not within 150m of a house/cabin with residents up to two days, though relocating to somewhere else would be fine. Farmland is again an exception, and you should ask the owner for permission.
PS: There are local exceptions everywhere, so be sure to check that. Some waters are protected, etc. Some regions are considered "protected nature", which doesn't trump "allemannsretten" (the aforementioned rights), but there can be other restrictions. And in all cases, it is expected to not leave behind garbage or cause damage.
Within the UK we have the same law in Scotland, basically pretty similar to what you describe. This is different to England where you definitely cannot do this. Not sure about Wales or Northern Ireland.
If one really wants to stick to a strait line, Monaco is probably not the best. It is certainly small, but it is full of obstacles. For pure straightness, somewhere like Canada, Greenland or the UAE would probably allow you to walk a more-perfect strait line from one coast to another through open territory. Such a trek would be far more difficult but much more strait.
If you are going east-west. The straightest/flattest line is probably north-south, from the USA to hudson bay. Manitoba is pretty flat. Or across the bit between the great lakes.
45 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 102 ms ] threadSpot where the actual map is supposed to be is just empty.
My problem with is, a margin of error of 25 meters for a run of less than a km isnt what I would call platinum, my gripe here is with geowizard. I feel the error margin should increase for each km, for example by one meter. So a straight line across a continent allows for a larger margin of error, but 1km , well you better stick to the line.
I know noone will read this but I had to let it out.
Its not coming form a bad place I just want better rules!
This seems like a good match for what you seek.
I'm sure that some sensible (albeit still arbitrary) geometric rule could be invented, such as requiring that the line bisects the country into two regions which have areas that differ by at most 50%, for example.
Alternatively, or additionally, the length of the line could be required to be greater than some specific fraction of the country's total border/coastline (assuming that has a rigorous definition).
For countries composed of multiple islands (or a mainland with some islands), the rules should probably require that the line pass through the biggest island / mainland, but perhaps multiple islands would need to be crossed (on the same straight line?) in order to meet the "bisecting area" rule above.
Maybe you could do it in an airplane. Compensate for the curvature of the Earth by varying your altitude. This will probably work up to a distance of a few hundred miles.
Maybe some country in North Africa, that is mainly desert?
If you did allow river crossings, maybe Russia or Canada? There's a whole lot of empty space in Siberia and northern Canada.
Australia though? I suppose you could count the northern tip of Queensland, but it doesn't seem very "across".
I was thinking of saying Norway and New Zealand look OK because in both cases you start on the eastern border/coast and finish on the western one, unlike Queensland where you are still in the northeast by any definition. This gets close to my intent, but to make this work we have to accept that NZ has multiple east coasts, or a single discontinuous one. Why is it OK to cross the North Island in NZ, but not OK to cross some tiny island in Australia (e.g. cross King Island [1] from west to east)?
[0] https://imgur.com/gallery/gistDx1 [1] https://goo.gl/maps/Q5JEN1j3U4sBMEvf6
Not sure what's so strange about having two coasts if you've already accepted that New Zealand is composed of at least two important islands.
This includes the right to forage (berries, mushroom, whatnot). Though hunting and fishing can be quite restricted. Motorized vehicles have their own set of restrictions, but trekking, biking, sailing, etc are fine.
So, one cannot for instance fence off the access to nature, like a "private" beach etc. And camping is allowed everywhere not within 150m of a house/cabin with residents up to two days, though relocating to somewhere else would be fine. Farmland is again an exception, and you should ask the owner for permission.
PS: There are local exceptions everywhere, so be sure to check that. Some waters are protected, etc. Some regions are considered "protected nature", which doesn't trump "allemannsretten" (the aforementioned rights), but there can be other restrictions. And in all cases, it is expected to not leave behind garbage or cause damage.
[0]: https://lovdata.no/dokument/NL/lov/1957-06-28-16 (In Norwegian)
It would be cool for the OP to upload his line to this site and see some other metrics: https://www.scoremyline.com/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geodesic