Could the chain of state highways from Minnesota to Montana qualify for an upgrade to a US highway? It would be longer than some existing US highways and you could retain the same number. Why not? If there can be a US 400 you could also have a US 200.
There's no reason why they couldn't do this, but I'll ask what purpose would it serve in terms of aiding motorists? I think it would work better being done in 1947 vs. 2017. The common motorist pretty much knows US routes are basically a secondary system at this point anyway. US 200 wouldn't really improve anything over the current chain of 200s.
In fact, the "chain" wasn't even complete until 1969 at the earliest, so I don't think making this US 200 was ever a consideration.
As noted, it could happen, but I doubt it ever will. And the US highway network has enough terrible numbering violations as it is, the last thing it needs is another one.
A similar situation was the campaign for US-789, which ended with Wyoming just having an oddly-numbered state highway.
If we're going to make 200 a US highway it'd be better as a US-X02 route instead.
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on January 22, 2017, 07:48:54 AM
If we're going to make 200 a US highway it'd be better as a US-X02 route instead.
Or US 2 west into US 0.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 22, 2017, 10:31:48 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on January 22, 2017, 07:48:54 AM
If we're going to make 200 a US highway it'd be better as a US-X02 route instead.
Or US 2 west into US 0.
Make this happen!
Quote from: Quillz on January 22, 2017, 12:13:02 AM
As noted, it could happen, but I doubt it ever will. And the US highway network has enough terrible numbering violations as it is, the last thing it needs is another one.
Who cares about a numbering violation? I just think the number itself is cool. I believe a US 200 shield already exist in Montana or at least one used to.
At the risk of verging on Fictional, I always thought the multi-state 200 would make a fine relocated US 8, with the current 8 being redesignated as either an eastern extension of US 212 or as a x02.
Someone once suggested (fictionally) making the corridor US 402. I think that number would make a lot more sense than US 200. In any event, I doubt the multi-state SR 200 will become part of the US Highway System. If it was, it would have already happened.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 24, 2017, 05:50:05 PM
Someone once suggested (fictionally) making the corridor US 402. I think that number would make a lot more sense than US 200. In any event, I doubt the multi-state SR 200 will become part of the US Highway System. If it was, it would have already happened.
Is there really a big difference between a US highway and a state highway? Aren't they both maintained at the state level?
Quote from: dvferyance on January 25, 2017, 09:24:36 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 24, 2017, 05:50:05 PM
Someone once suggested (fictionally) making the corridor US 402. I think that number would make a lot more sense than US 200. In any event, I doubt the multi-state SR 200 will become part of the US Highway System. If it was, it would have already happened.
Is there really a big difference between a US highway and a state highway? Aren't they both maintained at the state level?
Nowadays, there is no difference.
Quote from: dvferyance on January 25, 2017, 09:24:36 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 24, 2017, 05:50:05 PM
Someone once suggested (fictionally) making the corridor US 402. I think that number would make a lot more sense than US 200. In any event, I doubt the multi-state SR 200 will become part of the US Highway System. If it was, it would have already happened.
Is there really a big difference between a US highway and a state highway? Aren't they both maintained at the state level?
For some states, US routes have much better treatment of design. In Ohio, if you were to cross part of the state without taking an interstate, you'd probably be much more inclined to take US 22 to US 250 to Canton than you are OH43, despite it being shorter. The small town after small town. Several places you have to turn inside those towns. The lights. The steep grades and curves on some of the hills.
There's exceptions, some state routes are monumentally better, and are usually signed in such a way that you know it's an important road. OH 2, 5, 7, 8, 11, etc either have freeway segments or are entirely freeway.
But, a road labeled "OH 214" probably wouldn't instill the confidence that it's a fast way to get from place to place unless it's the only way.
In PA, US 6, 322, 422, 22, 30 119, 219, 220 and to an extent 19 are much better roads than an counterpart. Some don't even have a reliable alternate to them (non-interstate/turnpike). US 6 may have a shortcut on PA 59, but it's useless for commercial traffic due to the low bridge (why they can't cut it out lower, I'm not sure). And again, those roads all have some type of freeway segment (US 19 withstanding which was wholly useless with I-79 paralleling it).
US 22 is freeway from WV, follows I-376, then has an expressway portion to Ebensburg and then Freeway to Altoona. It's 2-lane stretch suffers some, as most would probably take the added mileage of I-99 to US322 to stay mostly on four lanes. Eastern part is basically supplanted by I-78 and still has a freeway segment along what was to be I-78 across the north of Allentown. US 6 has a few freeway segments near Youngsville/Warren, and that weird parkway/partial by Meadville. 322 has the major freeway stretch west and east of State College, the gap, and then a Freeway down to Harrisburg sans the Duncannon fiasco. And the poorman's freeway east of Hershey.
422 has freeway segments around New Castle, Butler, Kittaning, Indiana, and the phantom co-op with US22's Freeway from Ebensburg to Altoona. And some more stretches from Reading to Philadelphia along the Blue Route.
US 30 has segments from York to Lancaster, the 'gap' through Gap, and 202 and 222 both have some freeway segments.
Honestly, I would love to see this multi-state state highway become some sort of US Highway - it seems like it would be deserving of such a designation. I wouldn't get up in arms if this was called US Highway 200, as I have come to accept US Highway 400, despite its strange numbering oddity. If it were to be numbered anything that wasn't conventional, 200 would be the number, since it is the number of the multi-state state highway, and it is similar to 400. However, I would agree with others in this thread that it would probably be good to designate it as something such as a US x02. That would probably be our best option.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on January 21, 2017, 10:30:05 PM
There's no reason why they couldn't do this, but I'll ask what purpose would it serve in terms of aiding motorists? I think it would work better being done in 1947 vs. 2017. The common motorist pretty much knows US routes are basically a secondary system at this point anyway. US 200 wouldn't really improve anything over the current chain of 200s.
In fact, the "chain" wasn't even complete until 1969 at the earliest, so I don't think making this US 200 was ever a consideration.
Except for niche corridors that have no interstate bypassing them for various reasons. Like parts of USs 6, 7, 13, 222 as examples. US Numbered Highways have generally been relegated to serving as through routes for secondary corridors.
I'd simply make it US 102; however, I don't see any problems with MSR 200 (or any other MSRs, for that matter).
where would us 0 go if it were commissioned?
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 18, 2017, 06:46:40 PM
where would us 0 go if it were commissioned?
Probably over US 2 west. It would make sense since it is a cross country route which the X0 routes were originally implied to be.
No, it would be a numbering violation.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 18, 2017, 07:17:12 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 18, 2017, 06:46:40 PM
where would us 0 go if it were commissioned?
Probably over US 2 west. It would make sense since it is a cross country route which the X0 routes were originally implied to be.
Remember...X0 = No Zero! No zero U.S. Route...no more U.S. Route numbering violations; there's enough as it is. (U.S. 400, I'm talking about you! :ded:)
Quote from: TravelingBethelite on April 22, 2017, 06:25:32 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 18, 2017, 07:17:12 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 18, 2017, 06:46:40 PM
where would us 0 go if it were commissioned?
Probably over US 2 west. It would make sense since it is a cross country route which the X0 routes were originally implied to be.
Remember...X0 = No Zero! No zero U.S. Route...no more U.S. Route numbering violations; there's enough as it is. (U.S. 400, I'm talking about you! :ded:)
As opposed to 101 supposedly being counted as a two digit number with "10" being the first digit?
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on April 22, 2017, 08:04:19 PM
Quote from: TravelingBethelite on April 22, 2017, 06:25:32 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 18, 2017, 07:17:12 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 18, 2017, 06:46:40 PM
where would us 0 go if it were commissioned?
Probably over US 2 west. It would make sense since it is a cross country route which the X0 routes were originally implied to be.
Remember...X0 = No Zero! No zero U.S. Route...no more U.S. Route numbering violations; there's enough as it is. (U.S. 400, I'm talking about you! :ded:)
As opposed to 101 supposedly being counted as a two digit number with "10" being the first digit?
Being opposed to...what? :confused:
Quote from: TravelingBethelite on April 22, 2017, 08:17:08 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on April 22, 2017, 08:04:19 PM
Quote from: TravelingBethelite on April 22, 2017, 06:25:32 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 18, 2017, 07:17:12 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 18, 2017, 06:46:40 PM
where would us 0 go if it were commissioned?
Probably over US 2 west. It would make sense since it is a cross country route which the X0 routes were originally implied to be.
Remember...X0 = No Zero! No zero U.S. Route...no more U.S. Route numbering violations; there's enough as it is. (U.S. 400, I'm talking about you! :ded:)
As opposed to 101 supposedly being counted as a two digit number with "10" being the first digit?
Being opposed to...what? :confused:
How would 0 be a violation if it was put in place correctly in the grid over western U.S. 2 when something like US 101 already exists on the logic that "10" is the first digit?
I think this belongs in fictional highways.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 22, 2017, 09:26:34 PM
I think this belongs in fictional highways.
Maybe so, but you're the one reviving old threads that haven't been touched on in forever.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on April 22, 2017, 09:35:16 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 22, 2017, 09:26:34 PM
I think this belongs in fictional highways.
Maybe so, but you're the one reviving old threads that haven't been touched on in forever.
What does that have to do with anything?
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2017, 02:57:46 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on April 22, 2017, 09:35:16 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 22, 2017, 09:26:34 PM
I think this belongs in fictional highways.
Maybe so, but you're the one reviving old threads that haven't been touched on in forever.
What does that have to do with anything?
Has to do with you get all opinionated about thread placement after digging up a dead topic. Point was that this thread wasn't bothering anyone until you dug it up. Yes it is a fictional topic, but really you seemed to be the only one who actually went out of their way to say anything about it....again...LONG dead thread.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on April 23, 2017, 03:40:36 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2017, 02:57:46 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on April 22, 2017, 09:35:16 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 22, 2017, 09:26:34 PM
I think this belongs in fictional highways.
Maybe so, but you're the one reviving old threads that haven't been touched on in forever.
What does that have to do with anything?
Has to do with you get all opinionated about thread placement after digging up a dead topic. Point was that this thread wasn't bothering anyone until you dug it up. Yes it is a fictional topic, but really you seemed to be the only one who actually went out of their way to say anything about it....again...LONG dead thread.
sorry dude, just saying. Also, yes, I dug it up, but it was not THAT old.