AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 11 
 on: Today at 04:27:06 AM 
Started by TheHighwayMan394 - Last post by Scott5114
(cough)

(unnumbered exit from I-44 in OKC)

 12 
 on: Today at 04:23:44 AM 
Started by bugo - Last post by bugo
According to the Texas state highway map and the Texas Highway Designation Files, TX 40 begins at TX 6 southeast of College Station and heads northwest, ending at FM 2154. TX 47 begins at TX 21 and heads southeast, ending at FM 60. It seems strange that these state highways end at farm roads. Are there plans on extending either of these highways further? TX 47 in particular looks like it could be extended south and east.

Also, what's the deal with TX 308? It begins at FM 60 and heads northwest, ending just short of Villa Maria Road, which isn't even a state highway.

The road system is weird in the College Station area. I could make an Aggie joke, but it wouldn't be very funny.

 13 
 on: Today at 04:21:19 AM 
Started by TheArkansasRoadgeek - Last post by Scott5114
Also good see that PTC has dumped Clearview.
Everyone has dumped Clearview. Its not permitted anymore.
But notice that the W in WEST is larger than the other letters.  Wasn't that introduced with Clearview?

No, that was introduced in the 2003 MUTCD. It just so happened that a few years after that was both when that version of the MUTCD was being picked up by DOTs and also when Clearview was being experimented with.

 14 
 on: Today at 02:27:21 AM 
Started by mass_citizen - Last post by jakeroot
I just saw this cool automated flagger sign on Imgur.

That seems needlessly complicated, when they could have just used traffic signals.

I wonder if they figured the novelty of the sign would encourage compliance.

Certainly possible. Although I'm not sure how many people knowingly blow through red lights.

 15 
 on: Today at 02:25:11 AM 
Started by Bruce - Last post by jakeroot
DFW is not a good choice simply because itís overbooked. With Toyota and other companies moving in, they canít build new houses and new subdivisions fast enough. Throw in another huge company and DFW canít handle the influx.

That's part of what makes a city, a city. Growth is as inevitable as the next sunrise.

DFW would be able to deal with growth better if it didn't focus so much of its residential growth away from where these companies are locating themselves. I'm not sure if local zoning laws prohibit skyscrapers outside of certain areas, but they should take a page out of Vancouverism and just start building skyscrapers everywhere. Make things more urban. Put less strain on the highways.

 16 
 on: Today at 02:17:31 AM 
Started by Bruce - Last post by Road Hog
DFW is not a good choice simply because itís overbooked. With Toyota and other companies moving in, they canít build new houses and new subdivisions fast enough. Throw in another huge company and DFW canít handle the influx.

 17 
 on: Today at 02:12:40 AM 
Started by Mapmikey - Last post by bugo
The US 13 extension is odd because it would have ended at a state route, SC 28. It could have been extended to Athens, GA but I am guessing that Georgia didn't want anything to do with it.

 18 
 on: Today at 02:08:54 AM 
Started by TheArkansasRoadgeek - Last post by jakeroot
In my experience, Ford's, particularly recent models, have transmissions that tend to shudder when changing gears (P>D, D>R, etc). Consumer Reports owner surveys have shown that some Ford Models (Fiesta and Focus) have terrible autoboxes. Keep that in mind if you're looking newer (not that it matters as I'm sure you've already bought).

Not to be nit picky, but the transmission shudder isn't when changing directional gears or in and out of park, it's upshifts and downshifts (1>2, 2>3, 3>2, ...). My wife has a '13 Fiesta and I'm well-aware of the headaches the PowerShift transmission has. When it works, it's a wonderful transmission - very crisp, quick shifts, almost unnoticeable. The Achilles heel is the clutch pack design, as my wife's car has been through at least three of them (all on Ford's dime  :thumbsup: ). Not to jinx it, but I think they've finally found one that works, which is too bad, since the next redesign of the Fiesta & Focus will have a "traditional" slushbox.

Yes, you would be correct. Although, on cold starts, where a Toyota or Nissan (with a more traditional slushbox or CVT) will go into D and pull away without a fuss, Ford's seem to struggle noticeably more, both shifting into D (a bit of shuddering), and then pulling away and changing gears. Very few cars seem to struggle under this scenario quite like the PowerShift gearbox does (except Chrysler's 200 with the ZF 9-speed, which may very well be my least favorite car+transmission of all time).

By the way, welcome back.

 19 
 on: Today at 01:57:09 AM 
Started by MaxConcrete - Last post by Bobby5280
Quote from: kphoger
Now that we're already adrift of the topic...  Are there any plans to fix the roller coaster that is I-44 down by Lawton?

Pigs would probably learn how to fly before ODOT made any plans to do anything like that. Lawton is down at the bottom end of ODOT priorities. I assume you're talking about I-44 as it runs through Lawton since that has the most roller coaster-like ups and downs (such as the Cache Rd & I-44 interchange next to a railroad line and bridge crossing). Little if anything can be done about that other than a total re-build of the interchange and re-configuring the elevation of the I-44 main lanes. A couple or so years ago the old interchange was rehabilitated, but not replaced.

IMHO the biggest thing that needs to be addressed on I-44 thru Lawton is the sub-standard stretch cutting through Fort Sill. The lanes need to be rebuilt and configured with inner and outer shoulders that comply with current Interstate highway standards. The next thing would be re-building the short stretch of I-44 between the end of the H.E. Bailey Turnpike & US-62/281/277 split and the Medicine Park exit. That crap is rough. I-44 from the Medicine Park exit down to just North of the Fort Sill Key Gate exit was re-surfaced a few years ago.

Also, IMHO, the most pressing need in Lawton for improving highway safety is doing something about Rogers Lane (now with US-62 aligned on it). The road has no shoulders at all. There's hardly any lighting along it. Numerous blind spots exist, such as the intersection of Rogers Lane with 67th Street. Thanks to a big concrete wall blocking much of the sight triangle it's easy for Eastbound traffic on US-62 to T-bone anyone entering Rogers Lane from 67th Street. That intersection and the one at 38th Street should be converted to freeway style interchanges (like the ones at Sheridan Rd and Ft Sill Blvd). In a perfect world the whole thing would be converted into an Interstate spur. There's more than enough room to build it, now that the old Artillery Village housing area on Fort Sill has been removed and re-built elsewhere. But none of this matters. As I've said before in some other posts, it's going to take an extremely grisly fatal head-on collision with multiple deaths before ODOT realizes the problems on Rogers Lane exists.

 20 
 on: Today at 01:48:46 AM 
Started by doogie1303 - Last post by jakeroot
Jakeroot accurately demonstrates [turning left on red], though I read RCW 46.61.202 to mean that you can't pull forward to wait (but even if you can, it'd be silly to at a red arrow since if you do, you won't get a protected green if nobody else is waiting to turn left).

RCW 46.61.202 is meant to prohibit traffic from entering when the desired street is full of cars. This is why it says "on the other side of the intersection", not "within the intersection".

In this scenario, you don't need a green arrow to turn, since it's a left on red (just wait 'till it's clear, then go).

The "notwithstanding any traffic control signal indications to proceed" line is meant to give police the power to override existing laws when necessary.


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.