AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 1 
 on: Today at 01:34:25 AM 
Started by index - Last post by sparker
They're not road/highway bridges, but many of the shorter bridges on the UP/former SP main line paralleling CA 99 in the San Joaquin & Sacramento valleys are of wood construction (deck on pilings); while likely not the original structures from the 1870's, they have held up quite well considering that line is one of the most heavily trafficked in the western U.S.  Some of the longer river bridges (e.g the Kings and San Joaquin river crossings) were until recently composite wood/steel construction; the outer spans were built on wood pilings sunk into the riverbank, while the spans over the river channels themselves were steel girders atop stone bents; over the last 30 years those bridges have been rebuilt as steel and concrete structures. 

 2 
 on: Today at 01:31:23 AM 
Started by 707 - Last post by 707
Is this even real? I've seen it on OpenStreetMap and Google Maps, but the Wikipedia page and latest released ADOT State Highway Log show no evidence of an SR 95/I-40 concurrency...

 3 
 on: Today at 01:23:36 AM 
Started by Alps - Last post by sparker
https://patch.com/florida/palmettobay-cutler/fiu-bridge-collapse-osha-fines-5-companies-safety-violations


Update 5 companies are fined for safety violations that lead to the bridge collapse.

Great!  $17.33K mean fine per company; essentially a slap on the wrist.  What's that, a whopping 3 months' salary for the person who died in the collapse?  Let's just hope the courts see fit to apportion the fine to the degree of culpability for the firms involved.  I predict a considerably larger amount will cross the table once the lawsuits commence.   Of course, these firms will appeal the fine and stall any civil action as long as possible -- citing the appeal process, of course.  Betcha these firms won't part with a penny for 5 years or more! :banghead:

 4 
 on: Today at 01:22:03 AM 
Started by RobbieL2415 - Last post by freebrickproductions
The Adventures of Skooks
Many of the more popular YouTube Poops
Heck, many other popular videos (outside of the bootleg "toy/animation/kids" channels...)

 5 
 on: Today at 01:13:29 AM 
Started by austrini - Last post by txstateends
Regarding the southeast connector project, it would be cool to see 287 have its own elevated lanes that connect it together without having to use I-20 and I-820.

The way projects have been going in DFW of late, I wouldn't be surprised if this or something similar, would be the case when this is done.

If it's not US-287 own elevated lanes. I guess it could be a C-D setup like the short TX-114/121 multiplex. 

Too bad they didn't acquired ROW back it was available, they could had built a span to cross Lake Arlington to link the freeways gaps of US-287.

I've thought about that over the years, when I'd see a DFW area map or a Fort Worth map, but I figured there was probably too much to overcome if it were to be attempted, either NIMBYs on the west side of Arlington, or environmental concerns, or something else.

 6 
 on: Today at 01:08:32 AM 
Started by rschen7754 - Last post by sparker
They posted the list of applications early this year, so here we go: https://route.transportation.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2018/09/000_USRN-List-of-Applications_-AM-AtlantaGA-2018.pdf

https://route.transportation.org/committee-notices-actions-and-approvals/past-meetings/ for the applications.

This is the most distinct "yawner" of the last several SCOURN meetings; essentially the equivalent of "no shit, Sherlock" to anyone regularly following the forum's topics.  NC's attempt to get the north side of I-295 established by not even mentioning the substandard features is a little humorous; I predict a "fail" on this one.  The rest, including labeling the Monroe toll bypass as "Bypass US 74" (again, N.S., S!) is pretty straightforward; no surprises.  Move along; nothing to see here, folks! :-/

 7 
 on: Today at 01:08:25 AM 
Started by mightyace - Last post by theroadwayone
On a slightly different note, the only parts of the PA Turnpike system that aren't AET (and not on the mainline or NE Extension) are the Mon-Fayette Expressway and PA 66. Do you think that the PTC wants all that done before moving on to the main sections?

 8 
 on: Today at 12:57:13 AM 
Started by TheArkansasRoadgeek - Last post by kendancy66
In 2003 I moved to CA from Annandale VA.  I drove all of I-40 from I-85 interchange to Barstow,CA  in that one trip, except when I was driving through Nashville I took advised detour on freeway (I-440?) that connected on either side of downtown.  Maybe someone here knows about that downtown Nashville I-40 detour.  I  think it is I-440.  But I am certain that I had driven through Nashville on I-40 on a previous trip, as also have driven the I-40 sections from Durham east through Raleigh and on to the eastern terminus in Wilmington.  I also have driven the original I-40 configuration that only connected Durham to Raleigh (now NC-147) to freeway terminus at Wade Avenue

 9 
 on: Today at 12:53:52 AM 
Started by Bruce - Last post by jakeroot
They're loops in that it's a folded diamond, not a parclo.
I was always under the impression that a folded diamond was a type of parclo.

A parclo functions like a cloverleaf with two missing ramps, while this type of interchange has no functional comparison to a cloverleaf. Functionally, it has much more in common with a diamond, just with loop ramps (meaning no getting off and right back on).

It's still a parclo. Any interchange where one or more ramps involves a 180 turn is a parclo. At least for the purposes of this thread, as Bruce's OP (I-182 in WA) has a folded diamond (otherwise his statement that every interchange involves a loop would be false). "Folded diamond" is a type of parclo.

 10 
 on: Today at 12:22:35 AM 
Started by TheArkansasRoadgeek - Last post by TheArkansasRoadgeek
I have virtually clinched all of I-40 in Arkansas.

Virtually, as in, using Street View...?
Well, It was in 2015, but I hadn't developed my interest in the hobby at the time.


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.