Misconceptions about highways/ interstates.

[kenarmy]

- I thought "Bus." was a route for buses..
- (This is so embarrassing) but I thought county routes where country routes (in a rural sense), so I figured that's why there was none around where I lived since it was pretty populated.
- I thought I-220 was supposed to mean "to" 20. And that was the only 3di around so this made perfect sense.
- I thought toll roads were just a thing of the north (IL, IN, MI)
- I thought US 51 and I-55 were siblings and had some kind of correlation.
- I thought I-55 was the road I used all the way to New Orleans. It still kind of hurts that it isn't.
- I thought MS 25 was named "Lakeland Dr." for its whole route.
- I thought US 49 only went south of Jackson.
- I thought I-69 was something brand new that would get finished quickly  .
- I thought higher Interstates were just given those higher numbers because they had tolls. (this is mainly true though-)

[SkyPesos]

I'll add more tomorrow, but here's 6 to start off

- I thought that interstates had to be 6+ lanes because the street right outside my neighborhood is 4 lanes.
- I thought that US 40 (in the St Louis area) was the same as I-40, even though it's clearly marked as I-64.
- I thought that all enhanced mile markers are always colored blue and placed in the median. This was when I moved back to Ohio, as I didn't pay attention to Missouri's enhanced mile markers (green and right side placement) when I lived there.
- I thought that it's required for each lane to get its own overhead traffic signal. This is something that Missouri almost always do, though some states, for example, have two left turn lanes share a single overhead protected left signal.
- I thought I-90 was tolled all the way west to Seattle given how much it's tolled from Illinois eastward.

[hotdogPi]

I thought there was consensus here that bumping a thread with valuable content was better than creating a new duplicate topic. I was surprised at the out of the blue "two presidential administrations" ruling that seemed to be based on one person (not you) bumping threads without new content and shouldn't apply to all posts.

Merge, please.

[sprjus4]

I thought there was consensus here that bumping a thread with valuable content was better than creating a new duplicate topic. I was surprised at the out of the blue "two presidential administrations" ruling that seemed to be based on one person (not you) bumping threads without new content and shouldn't apply to all posts.

Merge, please.

Agreed, and I did not see anything unusual with a thread he bumped that was only 5 years old, as if creating another thread would've been better given the usual consensus to -not- create new threads when they already exist.

[zachary_amaryllis]

i learned, way back, that interstates didn't have to be marked is such (i.e. alaska).

also that they didn't have to all be speed limit 55 or better (i-25 through pueblo, tho i think thats been fixed, and theres other places)

[1995hoo]

I understand the OP doesn't want to resurrect an old thread, but in the interest of completeness and because there is likely to be some level of overlap in responses, here is the old thread: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5700.0

[SkyPesos]

I understand the OP doesn't want to resurrect an old thread, but in the interest of completeness and because there is likely to be some level of overlap in responses, here is the old thread: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5700.0

Most recent reply was in 2020. That's definitely safe to bump provided that new content is provided imo. A mod can correct me otherwise, if we're going with the "one presidential administration ago" thing.

[Max Rockatansky]

I understand the OP doesn't want to resurrect an old thread, but in the interest of completeness and because there is likely to be some level of overlap in responses, here is the old thread: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5700.0

Most recent reply was in 2020. That's definitely safe to bump provided that new content is provided imo. A mod can correct me otherwise, if we're going with the "one presidential administration ago" thing.

There is a big difference from bumping threads of recent years IMO to stuff like bumping a thread that hasn't been replied to in over a decade. 

[vdeane]

I thought there was consensus here that bumping a thread with valuable content was better than creating a new duplicate topic. I was surprised at the out of the blue "two presidential administrations" ruling that seemed to be based on one person (not you) bumping threads without new content and shouldn't apply to all posts.

Merge, please.

Some people seem to have different thresholds for what they consider "valuable content".  The example given in the rules is a project that was talked about now going to construction - news on a specific topic that was discussed and would be of interest to people following it.  A lot of the recent bumps seem to be of the "I missed this discussion when it happened, but I'm bored and I really really wanna participate anyways, so here's my 2 cents" variety.

[kphoger]

A lot of the recent bumps seem to be of the "I missed this discussion when it happened, but I'm bored and I really really wanna participate anyways, so here's my 2 cents" variety.

But isn't that the entire point of a thread like this to begin with?  Everyone just adding their two cents?

[vdeane]

A lot of the recent bumps seem to be of the "I missed this discussion when it happened, but I'm bored and I really really wanna participate anyways, so here's my 2 cents" variety.

But isn't that the entire point of a thread like this to begin with?  Everyone just adding their two cents?

To be honest, I find list threads boring in general, and mainly follow them to see if any interesting discussion ends up happening.  I've dropped quite a few when it becomes clear that such isn't going to happen with that particular thread.  This is also why I don't post in them as much as I used to; I don't see a point to shouting something into the void.

I imagine the frequent bumping as of late is also a contributor to why it seems to take twice as long to check the forum than it used to as of late.

[PurdueBill]

Misconception that NCDOT has: odd-numbered 3DIs have to be posted north-south because they are odd-numbered   

https://twitter.com/NCDOT/status/1201971710989414406

[kenarmy]

Misconception that NCDOT has: odd-numbered 3DIs have to be posted north-south because they are odd-numbered   

https://twitter.com/NCDOT/status/1201971710989414406

Gross..

[SSR_317]

Here's a common misconception: Freeways and Expressway are terms that can be used interchangeably.

Some people and entities (DOTs, cities, states, etc.) seem to think they can name Interstate Highways using the term Expressway as a name suffix - when true Interstates must, by definition, be Freeways. Yes, one usage is as a functional classification, and the other is a formal name, but the two should NEVER be mixed.

BTW, the term "tolled freeway" is NOT an oxymoron, especially since modern technology allows for non-stop toll systems (don't get me started on the proliferation of tolls... see my avatar).

[wanderer2575]

The alleged "rule" that at least every fifth mile on an interstate highway had to be a straightaway so an aircraft could land on it.

BTW, the term "tolled freeway" is NOT an oxymoron, especially since modern technology allows for non-stop toll systems (don't get me started on the proliferation of tolls... see my avatar).

The term "freeway" was never intended to imply no tolls.  It implies that traffic flows freely because there are no traffic signals, traffic turning sharply off and on, etc.  (The reality may be another thing.)

[SSR_317]

The alleged "rule" that at least every fifth mile on an interstate highway had to be a straightaway so an aircraft could land on it.

BTW, the term "tolled freeway" is NOT an oxymoron, especially since modern technology allows for non-stop toll systems (don't get me started on the proliferation of tolls... see my avatar).

The term "freeway" was never intended to imply no tolls.  It implies that traffic flows freely because there are no traffic signals, traffic turning sharply off and on, etc.  (The reality may be another thing.)

Correct, in that the "free" in "freeway" is for "free-flowing".

[kphoger]

Here's a common misconception: Freeways and Expressway are terms that can be used interchangeably.

Some people and entities (DOTs, cities, states, etc.) seem to think they can name Interstate Highways using the term Expressway as a name suffix - when true Interstates must, by definition, be Freeways. Yes, one usage is as a functional classification, and the other is a formal name, but the two should NEVER be mixed.

BTW, the term "tolled freeway" is NOT an oxymoron, especially since modern technology allows for non-stop toll systems (don't get me started on the proliferation of tolls... see my avatar).

Regional language variation.

[kenarmy]

*Bear with me*

I used to think US highways and Interstates were "married" and I came up with *crazy* storylines with them for fun.

- For instance, I thought US 40 *divorced* I-70 because it started to parallel US 6  .
- I thought US 30 was jealous that US 6 took I-80 from it, and that's why they just barely have a concurrency.
- I thought US 50 and US 6 were best friends, hence their long overlap.
- I thought US 85 was handicapped.. and that I-25 was cheating on it with US 87.
- I thought US 1 was jealous of US 17, so that's why US 1 swooped back in and made 17 seperate from I-95.
- I thought US 90 and I-10 were "evil" since some of my favorite routes end at it..
- I thought US 36 was US 40's branch route, but 40 disowned it because it was too long and it became jealous.
- Same for US 26 but with US 20. ^
- I thought US 90 was jealous of US 98, like how it no longer terminates at it, parallels I-10,.. so that's why it dipped down to Pensacola to keep up with it.
I have a lot more than this.

[SkyPesos]

*Bear with me*

I used to think US highways and Interstates were "married" and I came up with *crazy* storylines with them for fun.

- For instance, I thought US 40 *divorced* I-70 because it started to parallel US 6  .
- I thought US 30 was jealous that US 6 took I-80 from it, and that's why they just barely have a concurrency.
- I thought US 50 and US 6 were best friends, hence their long overlap.
- I thought US 85 was handicapped.. and that I-25 was cheating on it with US 87.
- I thought US 1 was jealous of US 17, so that's why US 1 swooped back in and made 17 seperate from I-95.
- I thought US 90 and I-10 were "evil" since some of my favorite routes end at it..
- I thought US 36 was US 40's branch route, but 40 disowned it because it was too long and it became jealous.
- Same for US 26 but with US 20. ^
- I thought US 90 was jealous of US 98, like how it no longer terminates at it, parallels I-10,.. so that's why it dipped down to Pensacola to keep up with it.
I have a lot more than this.

I thought US 25 and US 41 are married and gave birth to I-75.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

I used to think "exit only" meant there was no return access to the freeway.

[GenExpwy]

• Texas applied for US 57 and US 96 at the same time, and some doofus file clerk mixed up the paperwork so that they ended up with each other's number.
• Alabama, Georgia and Tennessee duplicated every US route with a state number so that old "Unreconstructed Rebels"  would never have to refer to any road by some accursed Yankee US route number.
• The lack of even Interstate numbers between 44 and 64 (with those two virtually ending at each other) was to allow leeway in case Canada and/or Mexico wanted to establish a coordinated North American freeway numbering system. For example, if Canada wanted a joint numbering system, then the US would subtract 10 from every 2dI from 64 on up, and the Trans-Canada Highway would become Canada 90.

[Ned Weasel]

I used to think "exit only" meant there was no return access to the freeway.

You're not the only one.

Back before lane drop signing was systematized (don't remember offhand whether it was in the 1971 or the 1978 MUTCD), many agencies did use "Must Exit" or similar verbiage in black on white.

Although the existing standard of "Exit Only" in black on yellow is not perfect--for example, foreigners with no experience of driving in the US tend to interpret it as "re-entry is not possible at this interchange"--it works partly because it is uniform in application (exits not involving lane drops generally do not have "Exit Only" while ones that do generally have it).

[TheGrassGuy]

- Trucks were only allowed on Interstates and US roads, unless the destination was off a US road, in which case they had to remain on interstates and US roads for as long as possible
- The Garden State Parkway went all the way to Florida
- I-78 went all the way to California
- I-95 followed the entire NJTP
- The NJTP's express-local lanes lasted all the way to the end, when in reality at the time they only went to between Exit 8 and 8A (now they go between 5 and 6)
- The "New England Thruway" was just another name for the "Connecticut Turnpike," and the Connecticut Turnpike actually began at the Bruckner Interchange in The Bronx.
- I-90 actually followed NY 912M and the Thruway around Albany
- The Poconos were spelled Poconose for the same reason that Anthony's Nose was called Anthony's Nose
- NJ-27 was contiguous with NY-27
- The (now-defunct) retail store Nine West was named after US-9W
- Every state had a county route system like NJ's
- California was the only state that had "freeways," and every other state had "expressways" instead
- I-69 is only 1 mile long

[NWI_Irish96]

All interstates are actually inter-state.

[SkyPesos]

All interstates are actually inter-state.

I had that misconception in my early roadgeek days. Back when I lived in the St Louis area, I lived not that far off MO 364. I thought the reason why 364 and 370 aren't interstate highways is because it's only in Missouri, while 270 is an interstate because it's in Missouri and Illinois. Got confused later after noticing my parents driving on I-170, which is in Missouri only, and thought that it will get extended to Illinois in the future with the interstate designation.

The Tri-State Tollway in Chicago is an example of highways that I thought went through multiple states, but really is only in one state.