Just got home yesterday from a trip from Houston to Los Angeles for...something I can't reveal yet.
I managed to cross a number of things off my bucket list.
Finished clinching I-10, clinched I-8, drove the La freeway system, did something else I can't reveal yet. I really enjoyed the trip.
Some observations:
—lord but did it take forever to get from San Antonio to El Paso. And just hundreds of miles of hills and nothing else.
—new Mexico was boring. There was literally an exit that was just signed as "exit." No road, no highway, no town. Just "exit 21."
—NM and its questionable control cities. Deming, Lordsburg?
—I-8 in CA is one of the most breathtaking views I've ever seen. In-Ko-Pa was fun
-phoenix was not that exciting to see. Where is the downtown? I saw no buildings
-LA was not as bad as expected. I mean there was trash everywhere and it was kinda sketchy and gross but the people were nicer than expected. The surrounding environment was gorgeous.
—LA has some strange street infrastructure. Major streets will go from six lanes, to narrow two lane side streets, then back to six lanes and all so narrow
—it was wall to wall gridlock like 24-7. Some oddly designed exits. Tons of sharp curves, half stack, half clover leaves. —Exits that dump you on a different street than the sign states but lead to that street
It was fun but I did gain a new love for my own city. I do want to go back to visit again because I actually rather liked LA. More than I expected to.
More appropriate for the Road Trips subforum.
Quote from: achilles765 on November 02, 2024, 06:06:20 PMdid something else I can't reveal yet.
Rick Ankrom, is that you?
Quote from: ClassicHasClass on November 02, 2024, 07:27:40 PMQuote from: achilles765 on November 02, 2024, 06:06:20 PMdid something else I can't reveal yet.
Rick Ankrom, is that you?
About the only thing that would surprise me is if it involved a Corco-style clinch on foot of CA 39 at Islip Saddle.
Quote from: achilles765 on November 02, 2024, 06:06:20 PM-LA was not as bad as expected. I mean there was trash everywhere and it was kinda sketchy and gross but the people were nicer than expected. The surrounding environment was gorgeous. (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?msg=2949650)
Every city I've ever visited could be described this way. I always see trash, I read about the "bad areas," but then you mainly run into normal, nice people. I was in Anchorage once at 3 AM due to my flight being delayed, and even in subzero weather there was people living on the sidewalk and burning trash. It's unfortunate but it's life. It's also why I've learned to just go visit places and not pay much attention to what I've read online. Assuming any given place is full of nothing but good or bad people is just unrealistic. I find I can enjoy places I visit much more when I remember to be more open-minded.
Quote from: achilles765 on November 02, 2024, 06:06:20 PM—LA has some strange street infrastructure. Major streets will go from six lanes, to narrow two lane side streets, then back to six lanes and all so narrow (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?msg=2949650)
Most likely due to roads being built and then widened over the decades. Different neighborhoods and jurisdictions doing things at different intervals. Geography also plays a role. La Cienega is a normal street near LAX, then is basically a freeway through the Baldwin Hills, then back to a normal street. Fairfax becomes a two-lane neighborhood street for a while, then widens back.
Quote from: ClassicHasClass on November 02, 2024, 07:27:40 PMQuote from: achilles765 on November 02, 2024, 06:06:20 PMdid something else I can't reveal yet.
Rick Ankrom, is that you?
Ok I think it's ok for me to reveal now. I was filming for Jeopardy!
I will be one of the contestants on the December 18 episode.
Ken Jennings: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6845
New Mexico signage... always makes me crack up especially when they have either a ridiculous control city(Las Vegas NM? Really?) or just bad signage in general.
Also, congrats on Jeopardy. And yes, LA is absolute gridlock, one of the worst examples of it in the country.
Straight off the plane from LA .....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxVU4wOha8k
Quote from: PNWRoadgeek on November 11, 2024, 12:11:25 PMNew Mexico signage... always makes me crack up especially when they have either a ridiculous control city(Las Vegas NM? Really?) or just bad signage in general.
Also, congrats on Jeopardy. And yes, LA is absolute gridlock, one of the worst examples of it in the country.
I don't see what is so ridiculous about it. It's a county seat and one of the largest settlements in that particular part of the state. (For what it's worth, it was also around nearly a century longer than the more famous Vegas).
Now what I do find silly is control signage in Alaska for Houston... Which is a tiny settlement on the Parks Highway.
Quote from: Quillz on November 12, 2024, 06:46:33 AMI don't see what is so ridiculous about it. It's a county seat and one of the largest settlements in that particular part of the state. (For what it's worth, it was also around nearly a century longer than the more famous Vegas).
Now what I do find silly is control signage in Alaska for Houston... Which is a tiny settlement on the Parks Highway.
I think it's ridiculous because they could just go right to Pueblo or Colorado Springs heading northbound, two much larger and more famous cities. It is fine though if you are going to sign something in New Mexico though, considering there aren't that many large places in that part of the country. I also think that it's just as bad, if not worse, heading southbound because Albuquerque is relatively close.
I didn't know about this Houston thing... bet it will give me a good chuckle.
Quote from: achilles765 on November 02, 2024, 06:06:20 PM—new Mexico was boring. There was literally an exit that was just signed as "exit." No road, no highway, no town. Just "exit 21."
I remember seeing some exits like that on I-90 in the middle of the badlands of South Dakota.
Staying on-freeway is doing New Mexico wrong. That is a top ten scenic state, you just need to get away from the Interstates to see it.
Quote from: PNWRoadgeek on November 12, 2024, 07:15:37 PMQuote from: Quillz on November 12, 2024, 06:46:33 AMI don't see what is so ridiculous about it. It's a county seat and one of the largest settlements in that particular part of the state. (For what it's worth, it was also around nearly a century longer than the more famous Vegas).
Now what I do find silly is control signage in Alaska for Houston... Which is a tiny settlement on the Parks Highway.
I think it's ridiculous because they could just go right to Pueblo or Colorado Springs heading northbound, two much larger and more famous cities. It is fine though if you are going to sign something in New Mexico though, considering there aren't that many large places in that part of the country. I also think that it's just as bad, if not worse, heading southbound because Albuquerque is relatively close.
I didn't know about this Houston thing... bet it will give me a good chuckle.
I think that was the logic, to use a control city within the state. California will sign Yreka (a small county seat) before you see signage for Medford, Ashland, or Eugene, which would all make more sense.
Quote from: Quillz on November 13, 2024, 05:24:51 AMQuote from: PNWRoadgeek on November 12, 2024, 07:15:37 PMQuote from: Quillz on November 12, 2024, 06:46:33 AMI don't see what is so ridiculous about it. It's a county seat and one of the largest settlements in that particular part of the state. (For what it's worth, it was also around nearly a century longer than the more famous Vegas).
Now what I do find silly is control signage in Alaska for Houston... Which is a tiny settlement on the Parks Highway.
I think it's ridiculous because they could just go right to Pueblo or Colorado Springs heading northbound, two much larger and more famous cities. It is fine though if you are going to sign something in New Mexico though, considering there aren't that many large places in that part of the country. I also think that it's just as bad, if not worse, heading southbound because Albuquerque is relatively close.
I didn't know about this Houston thing... bet it will give me a good chuckle.
I think that was the logic, to use a control city within the state. California will sign Yreka (a small county seat) before you see signage for Medford, Ashland, or Eugene, which would all make more sense.
I don't think they do, at least from what I've seen. It's all Medford or Portland north of Redding. I'm not saying Yreka should be signed, but I just haven't seen any signs that list Yreka northbound.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on November 12, 2024, 09:44:18 PMStaying on-freeway is doing New Mexico wrong. That is a top ten scenic state, you just need to get away from the Interstates to see it.
This is the same thing a lot of other people have told me. That I-10 is the worst way to see NM and that I-25 or I-40 or off the interstate provide much better views. Someday i plan to try that out. Just this particular trip I couldn't really do that as I had a very strict schedule.
I'm in total agreement about I-10 being boring across Southern New Mexico. I can recall road trips from my childhood going from Yuma, AZ to places like Artesia and then out here to Lawton. I-10 from the AZ state line to Las Cruces was boring. The only thing I liked about it was the occasional train passing on the rail line running parallel to the highway. The scenery along I-10 gets more interesting once the highway enters Arizona.
If saving time is important then a drive from Las Cruces to Phoenix is best done on I-10. Anyone that has spare time and wants to make stops might want to depart I-10 at Deming and head up thru Silver City, NM and Globe, AZ.
At the very least the area is sparsely populated. I used to overnight in my car at the rest area on I-10 near Gage quite often during work trips. None of the hotels in Deming were special and I often just pocketed the per diem.
Quote from: PNWRoadgeek on November 13, 2024, 07:02:05 PMQuote from: Quillz on November 13, 2024, 05:24:51 AMQuote from: PNWRoadgeek on November 12, 2024, 07:15:37 PMQuote from: Quillz on November 12, 2024, 06:46:33 AMI don't see what is so ridiculous about it. It's a county seat and one of the largest settlements in that particular part of the state. (For what it's worth, it was also around nearly a century longer than the more famous Vegas).
Now what I do find silly is control signage in Alaska for Houston... Which is a tiny settlement on the Parks Highway.
I think it's ridiculous because they could just go right to Pueblo or Colorado Springs heading northbound, two much larger and more famous cities. It is fine though if you are going to sign something in New Mexico though, considering there aren't that many large places in that part of the country. I also think that it's just as bad, if not worse, heading southbound because Albuquerque is relatively close.
I didn't know about this Houston thing... bet it will give me a good chuckle.
I think that was the logic, to use a control city within the state. California will sign Yreka (a small county seat) before you see signage for Medford, Ashland, or Eugene, which would all make more sense.
I don't think they do, at least from what I've seen. It's all Medford or Portland north of Redding. I'm not saying Yreka should be signed, but I just haven't seen any signs that list Yreka northbound.
I haven't been around there in a while, but Yreka (along with Weed and Mt Shasta City) is an 'official' control city for I-5 according to AASHTO:
https://transportation.org/traffic/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2024/05/Interstate-Control-Cities.pdf (https://transportation.org/traffic/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2024/05/Interstate-Control-Cities.pdf)
Quote from: achilles765 on November 13, 2024, 09:17:29 PMQuote from: Max Rockatansky on November 12, 2024, 09:44:18 PMStaying on-freeway is doing New Mexico wrong. That is a top ten scenic state, you just need to get away from the Interstates to see it.
This is the same thing a lot of other people have told me. That I-10 is the worst way to see NM and that I-25 or I-40 or off the interstate provide much better views. Someday i plan to try that out. Just this particular trip I couldn't really do that as I had a very strict schedule.
"The Interstate highway system has let Americans go coast-to-coast without seeing anything."
And it's largely true. Interstates generally prioritize "getting there" over anything else, so they will usually take the most efficient way possible. Many of the western states are vast and have huge swaths of beauty that can simply not ever be seen from major highways.
Noticed this even in Alaska. Doing a tour of the Dalton Highway revealed so much beauty that is lost even on the already fairly barren highways within the state.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on November 13, 2024, 09:54:16 PMI'm in total agreement about I-10 being boring across Southern New Mexico. I can recall road trips from my childhood going from Yuma, AZ to places like Artesia and then out here to Lawton. I-10 from the AZ state line to Las Cruces was boring. The only thing I liked about it was the occasional train passing on the rail line running parallel to the highway. The scenery along I-10 gets more interesting once the highway enters Arizona.
If saving time is important then a drive from Las Cruces to Phoenix is best done on I-10. Anyone that has spare time and wants to make stops might want to depart I-10 at Deming and head up thru Silver City, NM and Globe, AZ.
I found this all to be true on my trip. It was the quickest and most direct way, and Arizona was largely much more interesting than NM.
I'm really glad we went through San Diego and took I-8 on the way home. I-8 in California may now be one of my favorite stretches of interstate I've ever driven. I-10 in California was not terrible either.
Quote from: DTComposer on November 13, 2024, 10:48:10 PMQuote from: PNWRoadgeek on November 13, 2024, 07:02:05 PMQuote from: Quillz on November 13, 2024, 05:24:51 AMQuote from: PNWRoadgeek on November 12, 2024, 07:15:37 PMQuote from: Quillz on November 12, 2024, 06:46:33 AMI don't see what is so ridiculous about it. It's a county seat and one of the largest settlements in that particular part of the state. (For what it's worth, it was also around nearly a century longer than the more famous Vegas).
Now what I do find silly is control signage in Alaska for Houston... Which is a tiny settlement on the Parks Highway.
I think it's ridiculous because they could just go right to Pueblo or Colorado Springs heading northbound, two much larger and more famous cities. It is fine though if you are going to sign something in New Mexico though, considering there aren't that many large places in that part of the country. I also think that it's just as bad, if not worse, heading southbound because Albuquerque is relatively close.
I didn't know about this Houston thing... bet it will give me a good chuckle.
I think that was the logic, to use a control city within the state. California will sign Yreka (a small county seat) before you see signage for Medford, Ashland, or Eugene, which would all make more sense.
I don't think they do, at least from what I've seen. It's all Medford or Portland north of Redding. I'm not saying Yreka should be signed, but I just haven't seen any signs that list Yreka northbound.
I haven't been around there in a while, but Yreka (along with Weed and Mt Shasta City) is an 'official' control city for I-5 according to AASHTO:
https://transportation.org/traffic/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2024/05/Interstate-Control-Cities.pdf (https://transportation.org/traffic/wp-content/uploads/sites/43/2024/05/Interstate-Control-Cities.pdf)
Huh, haven't seen any signs for those three cities. Maybe AASHTO just lists them and CalTrans doesn't actually post the signs for them? I don't know.
Quote from: Max RockatanskyAt the very least the area is sparsely populated. I used to overnight in my car at the rest area on I-10 near Gage quite often during work trips. None of the hotels in Deming were special and I often just pocketed the per diem.
My family made similar stops during road trips thru that area late at night. Back then the rest areas had warning signs about rattlesnakes. Don't go walking off outside the rest area grounds unless you're very careful.
Quote from: achilles765I'm really glad we went through San Diego and took I-8 on the way home. I-8 in California may now be one of my favorite stretches of interstate I've ever driven. I-10 in California was not terrible either.
I remember when I was a little kid and my family would drive from Yuma to San Diego to visit places like Sea World. The sand dunes between Yuma and El Centro were a popular location for movie shoots. The first
Star Wars movie was filming out there when we were living in Yuma. West of El Centro I-8 gets into the mountains. I remember some of the Interstate's bridges over various valleys and chasms being really tall. Pretty entertaining drive.
In Virginia on I-95 Southbound the control cities listed seem to dismiss the Commonwealth itself as a destination.
They have multiple signs for I-95/I-85 with destinations "Rocky Mt. NC, Miami", and "Durham, Atlanta".
All are valid but far away.
I like how Atlanta also uses far-away control cities for its freeways as it is sort of the nexus of the Southeast: I-85, I-20, I-75 "Greenville","Augusta","Tampa", "Birmingham" and "Chattanooga. Tampa is only named at I-285 interchanges, the official Atlanta "Bypass".
There are a few exits across the country that have no name, just "Exit", a very few in NC say "SR----"
When I lived in LA in the 90s California hadn't yet added exit numbers to the exits. They kept them looking cool even with the numbers slapped on in corners.
Quote from: architect77 on November 23, 2024, 06:55:54 PMWhen I lived in LA in the 90s California hadn't yet added exit numbers to the exits. They kept them looking cool even with the numbers slapped on in corners.
Interstate 10 should have had them, at least in the Inland Empire area. I always remember the old 210/10 junction being signed. I think the state did it as an experiment, then it became a national standard during the next decade.
Quote from: Quillz on November 24, 2024, 12:29:26 AMQuote from: architect77 on November 23, 2024, 06:55:54 PMWhen I lived in LA in the 90s California hadn't yet added exit numbers to the exits. They kept them looking cool even with the numbers slapped on in corners.
Interstate 10 should have had them, at least in the Inland Empire area. I always remember the old 210/10 junction being signed. I think the state did it as an experiment, then it became a national standard during the next decade.
IIRC, I-10 had the furthest extent of the 1971-era experimental (center-tabbed) mile-based exit numbers in LA, if the 1982 Gousha atlas I once had was accurate.
The only example of that era's exit numbers on I-10 that I can think of now is at the junction with Route 1 in Santa Monica:
(https://www.aaroads.com/california/images001/ca-001_sb_pch_santa_monica_08.jpg)
The other roads that had these 1971 number installations, as seen from these AAroads photos that are 16-20 years old. (Some of these have been replaced with the modern exit number signage)
US 101 along the Santa Ana Freeway
(https://www.aaroads.com/california/images101/us-101_nb_exit_001a_05.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/california/images101/us-101_nb_exit_001b_03a.jpg)
I-5 west of I-710 to Boyle Heights (I distinctly remember the old signage near exit 132/133)
(https://www.aaroads.com/california/images005/i-005_nb_exit_133_01.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/california/images005/i-005_nb_exit_134b_02.jpg)
110 north of I-10 to Stadium Way
(https://www.aaroads.com/ca/110/ca-110_nb_exit_022_01.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/ca/110/ca-110_nb_exit_022_03a.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/ca/110/ca-110_nb_exit_022_11.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/ca/110/ca-110_nb_exit_024b_04.jpg)
Exit number tabs were definitely on the 110 in the '90s. I think that was part of the pilot study also.
Most of those signs are really grungy looking. I'd usually expect to see that kind of thing in a "rust belt" city rather than Sunny California.
I think it's wild that CA had a spec for exit tabs in the 70s but somehow took 20 years to develop one once they finally decided to add exit numbers on a statewide basis. Why not just bring back the 70s spec?
Fair chance it was a funding issue given it was a 1970s thing. That was when the great malaise of the state highway system started.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on November 24, 2024, 01:43:54 PMMost of those signs are really grungy looking. I'd usually expect to see that kind of thing in a "rust belt" city rather than Sunny California.
Because there's really no need to replace them until they get too worn out to be legible or it's a safety issue.
About six months ago, some of the old button copy signs on the 101 through the SF Valley got replaced with the modern retroreflective signage.
Those button copy gantry sign were built with a 30 year service life in mind.
Right now with all the fog and gloom in the Central Valley I'm amused at the prospect of anything "sunny." The Sierra foothills and much of the Mojave were both a cloudy bluster this weekend.
Quote from: Quillz on November 24, 2024, 12:29:26 AMQuote from: architect77 on November 23, 2024, 06:55:54 PMWhen I lived in LA in the 90s California hadn't yet added exit numbers to the exits. They kept them looking cool even with the numbers slapped on in corners.
Interstate 10 should have had them, at least in the Inland Empire area. I always remember the old 210/10 junction being signed. I think the state did it as an experiment, then it became a national standard during the next decade.
Well i don't remember I-10 specifically but I do have video of driving around that would prove whether I-10 had it. Since all of LA's freeways are interstates, I know they didn't have exit number tabs back then. Why would I-10 be any different?