AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Detroit Bridge Wars  (Read 104319 times)

AsphaltPlanet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2812
  • Single Occupant Vehicle Commuter

  • Location: Toronto, Ontario
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 05:32:55 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #325 on: July 29, 2020, 03:24:29 PM »

Right, so my reason for pointing out that you aren't an engineer, and that Cbeach40 is, is that you don't have the same technical knowledge of roadway design as Cbeach40 does.  And you're trying to argue as if you do, whether you realize it or not is annoying.

So with that in mind, it doesn't matter that you don't like the design of the bridge approaches, because (like me) you're just some asshole with an opinion on the internet.  The idea that you're opinion of the bridge approach somehow carries weight is annoying.  Especially when arguing with an actual industry professional.

And nobody is claiming that traffic engineers are somehow infallible.  Thought, I'd argue that there would be considerable more oversight on a multi-billion dollar international bridge than there would be on some rural traffic signal in rural Kentuky.  If that's the best example HB could find of engineering malfeasance, he's unknowingly agreeing with me.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2020, 04:18:16 PM by AsphaltPlanet »
Logged
AsphaltPlanet.ca  Youtube -- Opinions expressed reflect the viewpoints of others.

SEWIGuy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1860
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 09:25:13 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #326 on: July 29, 2020, 03:33:14 PM »

I did not come to this forum to be made fun of.  Now, people in my family have been telling me that I'm very smart since I was little, and I didn't have reason to question if that was exaggerated until late 2013, but still, I think I'm fairly intelligent, and don't appreciate you making fun of my because of me defending myself from cbeach40 accusing me of being stupid.  I never claimed to be coming at this thread from an engineering perspective, but from my perspective as a roadgeek and a driver.  In any case, this who affair has been good for seeing how people really feel about me (combined with a few other things), and maybe it's time I take a step back from the roadgeek community and re-evaluate.  It's clear I'm not as welcome as I thought I was.


My apologies.  But flexing on your high school GPA is a little strange.
Logged

Ryctor2018

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 38
  • Location: Illinois
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 03:50:49 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #327 on: July 29, 2020, 03:51:28 PM »

I will attempt to guide this thread back on topic with some fun photos of construction & demo work posted on the Gordie Howe bridge site. First is the I-75/Clark St. bridge demo work.
Logged

Ryctor2018

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 38
  • Location: Illinois
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 03:50:49 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #328 on: July 29, 2020, 03:52:25 PM »

Clark & I-75:
Logged

Ryctor2018

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 38
  • Location: Illinois
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 03:50:49 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #329 on: July 29, 2020, 03:53:23 PM »

More Clark & the Fisher Fwy:
Logged

Ryctor2018

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 38
  • Location: Illinois
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 03:50:49 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #330 on: July 29, 2020, 03:54:36 PM »

Livernois & I-75 demo work:
Logged

Ryctor2018

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 38
  • Location: Illinois
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 03:50:49 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #331 on: July 29, 2020, 03:55:16 PM »

Logged

Ryctor2018

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 38
  • Location: Illinois
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 03:50:49 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #332 on: July 29, 2020, 03:56:07 PM »

Springwells & I-75:
Logged

Ryctor2018

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 38
  • Location: Illinois
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 03:50:49 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #333 on: July 29, 2020, 03:57:23 PM »

More Springwells & I-75:
Logged

Ryctor2018

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 38
  • Location: Illinois
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 03:50:49 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #334 on: July 29, 2020, 03:59:40 PM »

The insert states "Construction of relocated Springwells bridge over southbound I-75". I don't live in the area anymore. Does anyone know how much/far the bridge is relocated?
Logged

Ryctor2018

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 38
  • Location: Illinois
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 03:50:49 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #335 on: July 29, 2020, 04:00:48 PM »

Logged

Ryctor2018

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 38
  • Location: Illinois
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 03:50:49 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #336 on: July 29, 2020, 04:02:30 PM »

Aerial view of US Port of Entry:
Logged

Ryctor2018

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 38
  • Location: Illinois
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 03:50:49 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #337 on: July 29, 2020, 04:04:01 PM »

Wick drain installation at US Port of Entry:
Logged

Ryctor2018

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 38
  • Location: Illinois
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 03:50:49 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #338 on: July 29, 2020, 04:06:07 PM »

Canadian Port of Entry:
Logged

cbeach40

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 416
  • Location: Ontari-ari-ari-o
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 10:52:44 AM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #339 on: July 29, 2020, 04:10:12 PM »

What? This entire discussion was based on you bemoaning whether something is a freeway or not is in any way important.  :banghead:
And we obviously have different criteria for what does and does not count as a freeway.  I use the typical roadgeek definition.  You use your's.

What I used is also what major roadgeek sites like Kurami and Alpsroads define as a freeway. Like, being free flow and having and absence of cross traffic is pretty well the most essential feature to any definition of freeway.

Quote
Quote
Design speed is not relevant to whether or not something is a freeway, it's relevant to whether or not something is built to Interstate standards. Seriously, try reading before responding.
Sure, make one sentence take over the argument.

I said that having a low design speed does not disqualify something from being a freeway, but it does disqualify it from meeting Interstate standards. The Interstate standards part is a different aspect of the discussion, not applicable here.

So know what I was doing there? I was agreeing with you.  :banghead:

Quote
Maybe you should try looking at things from the perspective of a driver and roadgeek instead of an engineer.

That is literally what I'm doing, looking at things as a driver would see them and finding how it fails to meet driver expectancy. Which happens to be my job.

And as far as non-engineers go, they for the most part don't really care if a road is an expressway or freeway, at least when the flow is interrupted. It takes a really special kind of person to bemoan the lack of a freeway network - on roads that function like freeways, for example AB-2 between Calgary and Edmonton - while simultaneously saying violations of freeway design standards do not determine if it's not a freeway.

Like, the argument is perplexing in just how much it contradicts itself.

Quote
Quote

That's because you're cherry picking what you're mad about to fit your arbitrary definition. You're making up your own reality then being mad that those who actually work and study the field actually don't subscribe to your Dunning-Kruger inanity.
Again, I'm measuring against what a roadgeek would consider to be part of the freeway system.  And if you don't think I'm smart, you should know that someone said my IQ was near genius level when I was young and I had a 4.0 through high school and college.  How do you measure up?

I don't know, I'd say by being accomplished and happy enough in my recent life that I don't have to lean on childhood and school age glories to prop myself up?

Quote
Quote
Like, you set the bar there. Interstate standards all the way to the border. So yeah, a full at-grade intersection, regardless of access, is a HUGE violation of those standards. A maintenance turn-around is not a problem as traffic does not conflict. This is a full on transverse movement. I'm just awestruck that could in any way be construed as Interstate standard.

For someone who allegedly works for a DOT, you sure don't seem to know much about roads.
Quote
Funny how you only respond to points when you think you can use them to be arrogantly dismissive.

I mean, I'm not going to respond when I have nothing to address about the point. I just will respond to arguments that are terrible. And sorry I don't sugar coat when I call out people for making awful points.


Quote
  If you set the bar at cross traffic, here's the MassPike.  I don't hear anyone arguing that it shouldn't be part of I-90.

I wouldn't say that shouldn't be part of I-90. I would say that sort of design should be eliminated from I-90 as it's terrible and does not meet what drivers would expect from an Interstate class freeway, but it doesn't matter.

Quote
As for not having the AASHTO Green Book memorized, why would I?  Not everyone who works at a DOT is a design engineer.  My degree is in computer science.  Getting my current job was my first exposure to transportation as anything other than a hobby.

I don't have the AASHTO green book memorized, I just use this really handy website to look things up: www.google.com
It's great, can find a lot of things there.

But yeah, that's fine, but when you're making arguments about things like roadway design and driver expectancy and the like you're really pulling some Dunning-Kruger effect stuff there.

Quote
No, they don't teach it here. They don't teach a lot of things in either country, but that doesn't mean that it's not important or those who are actually in the field do study it.

I mean, they don't devote much time to highways and bridges, but here we are.  :-D
Well, we were discussing in the context of public opinion.  Public opinion is created by the public, not epidemiologists.  Last I checked, the public was composed of laypeople.
[/quote]

Funny how something that laypeople don't know about makes it into pop culture like The Onion or hit shows like Downton Abbey. Or has been routinely discussed when it comes to the NHL or Major League Baseball and its effect on their season for those in the sporting world.
But yeah, to claim that it's not something people were aware of is simply ludicrous.


I never said "the whole argument is premised on it".  That was your claim.  It was one thing of many.  I would say the whole thing is mainly premised on the corridor vs. network approach.  I would say that being between the border posts is not a reason for using a lower level of facility regardless, especially as one only encounters customs upon entering a country - we don't have exit inspections on the US/Canada border.

Yes, I still pine for the 90s, and quite frankly don't understand why more people don't.  But it's hardly the only argument.  I view the freeway network the same way one would view any other network, be it a transit network, broadband network, etc.  Not as a collection of corridors that may or may not connect that happen to meet certain criteria.  That has always been the fundamental thrust of my argument, and I don't understand why people don't see that (or care).

Because your argument is contradictory and incoherent.

I did not come to this forum to be made fun of.  Now, people in my family have been telling me that I'm very smart since I was little, and I didn't have reason to question if that was exaggerated until late 2013, but still, I think I'm fairly intelligent, and don't appreciate you making fun of my because of me defending myself from cbeach40 accusing me of being stupid.

I never said you were stupid, I'm sure you're smarter than I am in a number of areas (for example, based on your degree I'm sure you're far more tech savvy than I). I merely called out your arguments for being flawed, and when you doubled down, I pointed out you didn't know what you were talking about.

If you're going to have a debate, bring facts. If you want to express opinions, don't present them as facts and don't do so with snark and false authority.

The KYTC secretary, a former state representative, finally stepped in and said, "I'm not an engineer, but I see the need for a traffic light here, so we're going to install one." This was an instance where practicality won out over engineering guidelines.

Sounds more like an instance where a politician went with currying political favour instead of doing what's right from an empirical standpoint. But hey, corrupt politicians like are everywhere, every DOT has to deal with them.  :rolleyes:
« Last Edit: July 29, 2020, 06:49:11 PM by cbeach40 »
Logged
"I have no idea. People who boast about their IQ are losers."
- Stephen Hawking, when asked what his IQ is

hbelkins

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14811
  • It is well, it is well, with my soul.

  • Age: 58
  • Location: Kentucky
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 11:34:24 AM
    • Millennium Highway
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #340 on: July 30, 2020, 11:47:37 AM »

And nobody is claiming that traffic engineers are somehow infallible.  Thought, I'd argue that there would be considerable more oversight on a multi-billion dollar international bridge than there would be on some rural traffic signal in rural Kentuky.  If that's the best example HB could find of engineering malfeasance, he's unknowingly agreeing with me.

I don't consider that to be engineering malfeasance. I consider that to be an instance of the layperson being right even when the engineers were "right" in their initial denial of the signal installation. In other words, common sense overrides doing things according to an arbitrary set of standards.

Of course, now, they'd probably insist on spending millions more to build a divided highway there and a J-turn/R-cut. Like they're doing here on a road that is already four lanes.

https://www.richmondregister.com/news/madison_county/no-green-light-transportation-cabinet-says-it-wont-fund-light-on-martin-bypass/article_45a4c8e3-fc38-5586-8914-bb8db4458770.html?fbclid=IwAR2154uZmvH6MkwU42SZ1ITm_cLS3LuGp3RgaX9PjPJbvLw40B_TwC24LpI
Logged

AsphaltPlanet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2812
  • Single Occupant Vehicle Commuter

  • Location: Toronto, Ontario
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 05:32:55 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #341 on: July 30, 2020, 12:29:49 PM »

And nobody is claiming that traffic engineers are somehow infallible.  Thought, I'd argue that there would be considerable more oversight on a multi-billion dollar international bridge than there would be on some rural traffic signal in rural Kentuky.  If that's the best example HB could find of engineering malfeasance, he's unknowingly agreeing with me.

I don't consider that to be engineering malfeasance. I consider that to be an instance of the layperson being right even when the engineers were "right" in their initial denial of the signal installation. In other words, common sense overrides doing things according to an arbitrary set of standards.

Of course, now, they'd probably insist on spending millions more to build a divided highway there and a J-turn/R-cut. Like they're doing here on a road that is already four lanes.

https://www.richmondregister.com/news/madison_county/no-green-light-transportation-cabinet-says-it-wont-fund-light-on-martin-bypass/article_45a4c8e3-fc38-5586-8914-bb8db4458770.html?fbclid=IwAR2154uZmvH6MkwU42SZ1ITm_cLS3LuGp3RgaX9PjPJbvLw40B_TwC24LpI

Was the layperson right?  I mean, it's not like a politician has never played political favour to their constituents by giving to their demands regardless of merit right?
Logged
AsphaltPlanet.ca  Youtube -- Opinions expressed reflect the viewpoints of others.

cbeach40

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 416
  • Location: Ontari-ari-ari-o
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 10:52:44 AM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #342 on: July 30, 2020, 12:45:43 PM »


I don't consider that to be engineering malfeasance. I consider that to be an instance of the layperson being right even when the engineers were "right" in their initial denial of the signal installation. In other words, common sense overrides doing things according to an arbitrary set of standards.

Of course, now, they'd probably insist on spending millions more to build a divided highway there and a J-turn/R-cut. Like they're doing here on a road that is already four lanes.

https://www.richmondregister.com/news/madison_county/no-green-light-transportation-cabinet-says-it-wont-fund-light-on-martin-bypass/article_45a4c8e3-fc38-5586-8914-bb8db4458770.html?fbclid=IwAR2154uZmvH6MkwU42SZ1ITm_cLS3LuGp3RgaX9PjPJbvLw40B_TwC24LpI

That's not common sense, that's people who don't know what they're doing using the wrong tool to try to solve the problem.

Putting in a simple signal at the intersection would not solve the problem as left turning drivers would not have any additional gaps and would increase the number of high speed rear end collisions. Plus would delay people on the busy road, which usually leads to increased speeding and aggressive driving in the adjacent sections. Adding a protected left turn phase would solve the left turn problem, but would exasperate those other problems as people are delayed longer and the light is red for more time.

Common sense does not mean going with what solution seems right to the layperson, regardless of whether it will actually solve the problem. Common sense is finding whatever solution that will actually work at solving the problem.
Logged
"I have no idea. People who boast about their IQ are losers."
- Stephen Hawking, when asked what his IQ is

skluth

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1005
  • Age: 64
  • Location: Palm Springs, CA
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 06:19:25 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #343 on: July 30, 2020, 11:22:51 PM »

Thanks Ryctor2018 for the pix. It's nice to see the progress happening for the bridge, though I feel sorry for the poor souls living on the side street detours. It beats the crap out of the most irrational argument I've seen this side of the Brady/Manning debate on Football Outsiders in the late Aughts.
Logged

cbeach40

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 416
  • Location: Ontari-ari-ari-o
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 10:52:44 AM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #344 on: July 31, 2020, 09:50:22 AM »

Project team uploaded a new video this morning of the pour of the footings from a few weeks back.
Logged
"I have no idea. People who boast about their IQ are losers."
- Stephen Hawking, when asked what his IQ is

kalvado

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3595
  • Location: upstate NY
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 11:14:55 PM
Re: Detroit Bridge Wars
« Reply #345 on: July 31, 2020, 10:11:26 AM »


I don't consider that to be engineering malfeasance. I consider that to be an instance of the layperson being right even when the engineers were "right" in their initial denial of the signal installation. In other words, common sense overrides doing things according to an arbitrary set of standards.

Of course, now, they'd probably insist on spending millions more to build a divided highway there and a J-turn/R-cut. Like they're doing here on a road that is already four lanes.

https://www.richmondregister.com/news/madison_county/no-green-light-transportation-cabinet-says-it-wont-fund-light-on-martin-bypass/article_45a4c8e3-fc38-5586-8914-bb8db4458770.html?fbclid=IwAR2154uZmvH6MkwU42SZ1ITm_cLS3LuGp3RgaX9PjPJbvLw40B_TwC24LpI

That's not common sense, that's people who don't know what they're doing using the wrong tool to try to solve the problem.

Putting in a simple signal at the intersection would not solve the problem as left turning drivers would not have any additional gaps and would increase the number of high speed rear end collisions. Plus would delay people on the busy road, which usually leads to increased speeding and aggressive driving in the adjacent sections. Adding a protected left turn phase would solve the left turn problem, but would exasperate those other problems as people are delayed longer and the light is red for more time.

Common sense does not mean going with what solution seems right to the layperson, regardless of whether it will actually solve the problem. Common sense is finding whatever solution that will actually work at solving the problem.
As for me, I would gladly continue this discussion as it may be pretty interesting and educative. But I would prefer a different thread, as this one is tainted and on a different topic.. moderators, can you split off?
Logged

 


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.