I miss MTR :(

[J N Winkler]

I think Mark Roberts (who I have on Facebook) John A Weeks III, and John Lansford are the three MTR notables that aren't on here (or at least don't post regularly under their names).

Ditto Scott Kozel and Larry Gross, who were constantly in tussles with each other and John Lansford.

I don't know about the latter two, but Scott Kozel is on here as "Beltway" though I don't think he has posted recently.

[hbelkins]

Mark Roberts seems to have a particular aversion to php-based message boards in general. Doubt we'll ever see him here.

If Lansford's still active on MTR, I wouldn't know. He went to my killfile a long time ago.

[J N Winkler]

Mark Roberts seems to have a particular aversion to php-based message boards in general. Doubt we'll ever see him here.

He normally set an "X-no-archive" header in his Usenet posts, omitting it infrequently as a deliberate courtesy to other specific regulars.  There is no convenient way to achieve similar functionality with a php-based Web forum.  (In principle it can be done by wget wrapper script if the board is configured to allow users to delete their own posts, but on this board I expect management would notice quickly if a prolific user were pruning his or her own posts and take steps to prevent it.)

If Lansford's still active on MTR, I wouldn't know. He went to my killfile a long time ago.

I haven't seen him on any of the infrequent occasions I have checked MTR through Google Groups.  Randy Hersh, who of course continued to post to MTR long after I quit, told me in 2010 or 2011 that Lansford had mentioned something about a fight with prostate cancer.  I assume it was successful since I haven't seen an obituary for him, but that sort of experience tends to prompt re-examination of life priorities and I suspect he may have concluded posting to MTR is not something he wishes to do any longer.

Long ago, when the concept of a "moderated MTR" was under discussion in 2003, Lansford along with Richard Moeur (Arizona DOT traffic engineer, not active in MTR since about 2004) was one of several MTR regulars who were very vocal in refusing to participate in a MTRM if it were set up.  I assume they wouldn't surface on a php-based Web forum such as this for which moderation is one of the strongest selling points.  As it happens, Scott Kozel was one of the most emphatic advocates of a MTRM, but has expressed unhappiness with moderating decisions on this board and has not posted in almost a full year (current last post date of 2012-12-11).

[cpzilliacus]

If Lansford's still active on MTR, I wouldn't know. He went to my killfile a long time ago.

I never had a problem with John Lansford, and found what he posted online frequently to be well-informed and interesting. 

[NE2]

You would.

[Brandon]

You would.

Some people can have some good information but be very hard to deal with on a personal level.  You and he should take a class in people skills together.

[NE2]

Other people can have some good information but be very right-wing. They should go to FEMA to get reeducated.

[hbelkins]

While it's true that Lansford's radical left-wing political views played a part in my decision to plonk him, the biggest reasons were these:

1.) His projections, intended or otherwise, that his P.E. designation somehow made him superior to everyone else, and his insistence on referring to himself as a P.E. in every post.

2.) His belittling of other state DOTs, particularly Virginia (prompting many arguments with Scott Kozel) and Tennessee (for the way they built US 23, later known as I-26).

I was a frequent visitor to his I-26 construction pages, but he finally got to a point where he was insufferable, at least in my eyes.



I generally read M.T.R. through Newsguy's Web interface, but the other day, just for the heck of it, I called up M.T.R. in Thoth (a Usenet client for Mac), where I have no killfiles set, and saw very little activity. Only one poster who I know for sure is in my killfile on the Web interface had posted since the last time I read M.T.R. with Thoth.

[NE2]

Radical left wing? bahahaha

[US71]

If Lansford's still active on MTR, I wouldn't know. He went to my killfile a long time ago.

I never had a problem with John Lansford, and found what he posted online frequently to be well-informed and interesting. 

A cursory glance on Facebook brought up 5 John Lansfords.

[J N Winkler]

A cursory glance on Facebook brought up 5 John Lansfords.

One of them (cat picture) is the John Lansford from MTR.  "About" statement says "Worked somewhere in a cubical" [sic], so it sounds like he has retired.

[Alps]

Radical left wing? bahahaha

He was as outspoken on the left as Kozel was on the right.

While it's true that Lansford's radical left-wing political views played a part in my decision to plonk him, the biggest reasons were these:

1.) His projections, intended or otherwise, that his P.E. designation somehow made him superior to everyone else, and his insistence on referring to himself as a P.E. in every post.

Although I'm closer politically to John than Scott in more ways than not, I sided with Scott in most debates due to this fact. Acting holier-than-thou is a great way to be hated in Usenet.

[NE2]

Radical left wing? bahahaha

He was as outspoken on the left as Kozel was on the right.

I must have changed more than I thought since my mtr days, or maybe his dickishness drowned out his political views, since I don't remember any of this. The main thing I remember about him is I-26, and four-lane freeway through the mountains hardly screams radical left wing.

[J N Winkler]

1.) His projections, intended or otherwise, that his P.E. designation somehow made him superior to everyone else, and his insistence on referring to himself as a P.E. in every post.

Although I'm closer politically to John than Scott in more ways than not, I sided with Scott in most debates due to this fact. Acting holier-than-thou is a great way to be hated in Usenet.

I think quoting "PE" at the end of his posts was his version of a bullshit filter.  Observe that, with very few exceptions (notably Guy Olsen, a New Jersey licensed professional engineer who also signed his posts "PE"), Lansford hardly ever got into quarrels with fellow PEs or with other MTR regulars who had something in their background that allowed them to take the PE credential in their stride.  I don't recall that he ever tried to play the PE card with me, but it was definitely something that caused Scott Kozel major irritation after Lansford stopped agreeing with him on the Fredericksburg western connector, which was the original root of the Gross/Kozel/Lansford arguments.

I must have changed more than I thought since my mtr days, or maybe his dickishness drowned out his political views, since I don't remember any of this. The main thing I remember about him is I-26, and four-lane freeway through the mountains hardly screams radical left wing.

I think it is all to do with things that developed long after you left MTR.  When the Great Recession hit from 2008 onward, Lansford was outspoken in attributing it to lax regulation of derivatives and credit-default swaps and in endorsing expansionary fiscal policies to keep GDP from going into free fall, all of which were positions embraced by the moderate left.  In contradistinction, the MTR regulars who leaned right kept blaming the crisis on the Clinton-era mandate to expand homeownership among minorities and other low-income groups, and raising the specter of out-of-control debt growth.

Lansford has generally struck me as a well-informed but moderate and generally nonideological voter, who--notwithstanding the actual substance of the views he expresses--actively resents being identified as "liberal" and would probably vote Republican if there were any candidates left from the now nonexistent Javits wing of the party.

[Alps]

Radical left wing? bahahaha

He was as outspoken on the left as Kozel was on the right.

I must have changed more than I thought since my mtr days, or maybe his dickishness drowned out his political views, since I don't remember any of this. The main thing I remember about him is I-26, and four-lane freeway through the mountains hardly screams radical left wing.

Actually, more to the point, Scott never got that that political on MTR, at least that I saw. I may have just ignored extended Lansford-Kozel rants, though.

[bugo]

Radical left wing? bahahaha

lulz

[US71]

Radical left wing? bahahaha

Anyone who isn't Extreme Right is "Radical Left".

[jeffandnicole]

I think the main thing I remembered about him (and this is only if I'm thinking of the right person) is that if it was done in North Carolina, then that was the standard across the United States. 

One issue in particular was the design speed of highways (which is typically 5 mph over the posted speed limit).  He believed NC's standard was the universal standard, even though other states had higher or lower maximum speed limits.  It may have been NC's standard to design roads with a 75 mph design speed (or 70mph or whatever based on their maximum at the time), but other states could have - and were - higher or lower.

I think federal funding was another issue - again, same thing - different states have different guidelines for whatever reason, but if it didn't agree with NC's guidelines, in his opinion it wasn't compliant.

[J N Winkler]

He did work for NCDOT--I think probably for the entirety of his career--so I made allowances accordingly.  I do remember him asserting at one stage that there was no such thing as a freeway in the US with a design speed of over 70 MPH.  At the time I found this hard to believe, but after seeing plan set title sheets for literally thousands of freeway construction projects all over the US, I cannot remember a single one with a design speed of over 70 MPH.  There might have been a handful with a 75-MPH design speed, but certainly none with a higher design speed.  This is despite there being published curve superelevation tables or nomographs from various jurisdictions at various times for design speeds of up to 100 MPH (the Germans even went up to 170 km/h in the Reichsautobahn era).

[NE2]

There might have been a handful with a 75-MPH design speed, but certainly none with a higher design speed.

http://www.nycroads.com/roads/nj-turnpike/ claims it was 75 south of New Brunswick.

[jeffandnicole]

There might have been a handful with a 75-MPH design speed, but certainly none with a higher design speed.

http://www.nycroads.com/roads/nj-turnpike/ claims it was 75 south of New Brunswick.

Probably true. 

I heard, but never saw proof, that the AC Expressway had a 90 mph design speed.

I guess it could be true - between Rt. 42 & the GSP it's a very straight road with minimal curves.  But I'm not wasting my time writing letters hoping for an 85 mph limit on the road.

[J N Winkler]

There might have been a handful with a 75-MPH design speed, but certainly none with a higher design speed.

http://www.nycroads.com/roads/nj-turnpike/ claims it was 75 south of New Brunswick.

The turnpike has been designed with a minimum radius on main roadways of 10,000 feet.  With such generous curves and a design speed of 75 miles per hour, transition curves and super-elevation are both unnecessary.  Tangent lengths are such as to avoid too frequent curves on one hand and monotonous alignment on the other.

Source for the above is New Jersey Turnpike Authority, Engineering studies and estimates:  New Jersey Turnpike South Section, September 1949.

I don't know if this is a title sheet design speed in the FAPG 630(b) Supplement sense, though.

[agentsteel53]

This is despite there being published curve superelevation tables or nomographs from various jurisdictions at various times for design speeds of up to 100 MPH (the Germans even went up to 170 km/h in the Reichsautobahn era).

I-280 in California and I-55 in Illinois come to mind offhand as vague recollections of intentional high-speed curves.