Burgess Hill — Uckfield
Buruck two
Slow Way not verified yet. Verify Buruck here.
Slow Way not verified yet. Verify Buruck here.
By Derick Rethans on 18 Sep 2022
Description
Like Buruck1, but with some small changes, and much more accurate so that it is possible to better follow the route
Like Buruck1, but with some small changes, and much more accurate so that it is possible to better follow the route
Status
This route has been reviewed by 1 person.
There are no issues flagged.
Photos for Buruck two
Photos of this route will appear when they are added to a review. You can review this route here.
Information
Route status - Live
Reviews - 1
Average rating -
Is this route good enough? - Yes (1)
There are currently no problems reported with this route.
Downloads - 3
Surveys
We are working to build-up a picture of what routes look like. To do that we are asking volunteers to survey routes so that we can communicate features, obstacles and challenges that may make a route desirable or not.
Slow Ways surveyors are asked to complete some basic online training, but they are not vetted. If you are dependent on the survey information being correct in order to complete a route, we recommend that you think critically about the information provided. You may also wish to wait until more than one survey has been completed.
Help people know more about this route by volunteering to submit a survey.
- Complete the survey training.
- Submit a survey for this route.
Geography information system (GIS) data
Total length
Maximum elevation
Minimum elevation
Start and end points
Burgess Hill
Grid Ref
TQ3162618821
Lat / Lon
50.95379° / -0.12737°
Easting / Northing
531,626E / 118,821N
What3Words
snowmen.protected.leathers
Uckfield
Grid Ref
TQ4728320885
Lat / Lon
50.96856° / 0.09623°
Easting / Northing
547,283E / 120,885N
What3Words
disarmed.waistcoat.unlocking
| Burgess Hill | |
|---|---|
| Grid Ref | TQ3162618821 |
| Lat / Lon | 50.95379° / -0.12737° |
| Easting / Northing | 531,626E / 118,821N |
| What3Words | snowmen.protected.leathers |
| Uckfield | |
|---|---|
| Grid Ref | TQ4728320885 |
| Lat / Lon | 50.96856° / 0.09623° |
| Easting / Northing | 547,283E / 120,885N |
| What3Words | disarmed.waistcoat.unlocking |
Sorry Land Cover data is not currently available for this route. Please check back later.
review
Derick Rethans
18 Sep 2022I walked this on a chilly but sunny Saturday morning, from Uckfield to Burgess Hill. The previous week had seen some showers.
The walk was generally good, but at one point there were 400 cows in front of the gate that I had to go through, which was IMO not doable, so I took a fairly large detour. I did check whether the mapped route was doable, and it is — I just really don't like all these ffing cows. There is a short section of road walking on a verge near North Chailey, but a fairly longish and annoying bit east of Wivelsfield Green, on the North Common Road. This makes me mark down the route to a four, as I didn't really feel safe for that section. The mapping wasn't always the most accurate.
It started off by coming out of Uckfield along some back paths, and then there was an annoying crossing of a busy road (the A22/bypass). Soon thereafter there were a lovely patsh through fields. Then I came upon the dreaded cows, and I made a massive detour, which was all right. I don't think it warrants a new route though. Then it was back through fields of crops and through a church yard. After another forestry path a few lovely views of the North Downs popped up. The road walking near Wivelsfield was the worst part of this walk. Near Burgess Hill there were a lot of well maintained paths, and after some back alleys, you make it to the finish.
Share your views about this route, give it a star rating, indicate whether it should be verified or not.
Include information that will be useful to others considering to walk or wheel it.
You can add up to 15 photos.
Other Routes for Burgess Hill—Uckfield See all Slow Ways
Review this better route and help establish a trusted network of walking routes.
Suggest a better route if it better meets our methodology.
Share your thoughts