AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Driving Forward OK  (Read 32962 times)

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1338
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 12:53:09 AM
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #175 on: February 09, 2018, 02:53:24 PM »

I heard the new toll plaza on I-44 between Lawton and Chickasha will open next Tuesday evening, February 13. I wonder how long it will take to demolish the old toll plaza on the South side of Chickasha.
Logged

bugo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5864
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Oklahoma
  • Last Login: Today at 09:06:30 AM
    • No Frills Blog
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #176 on: February 09, 2018, 06:16:53 PM »

The new toll plaza on the Muskogee Turnpike at Coweta has been open for a few months now.
Logged
This signature has been censored by the AARoads Bureau of Morality.

rte66man

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 919
  • Location: Warr Acres, OK
  • Last Login: October 16, 2018, 08:59:16 PM
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #177 on: February 10, 2018, 08:21:11 AM »

What an ugly looking toll plaza.  Up here, our tollway authority has been building things like this: https://goo.gl/maps/HgrQRP8rXnq

What's the purpose of the walkway above the toll plaza?

That's an optical illusion.  Go back to post #149.  There is a closeup that shows each direction has 2 gantries, one for the signage and one for the Pikepass readers
Logged
When you come to a fork in the road... TAKE IT.

                                                               -Yogi Berra

1

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 5788
  • UMass Lowell student

  • Age: 19
  • Location: MA/NH border
  • Last Login: Today at 01:03:19 PM
    • Flickr account
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #178 on: February 10, 2018, 11:18:15 AM »

What an ugly looking toll plaza.  Up here, our tollway authority has been building things like this: https://goo.gl/maps/HgrQRP8rXnq

What's the purpose of the walkway above the toll plaza?

That's an optical illusion.  Go back to post #149.  There is a closeup that shows each direction has 2 gantries, one for the signage and one for the Pikepass readers

The walkway above the toll plaza in the link given is in Illinois. Post #149 is in Oklahoma. The walkway above the toll plaza definitely exists and is not an optical illusion.
Logged
Clinched, plus MA 108

Traveled, plus:
US ⒉⒔50
MA ⒐⒙22.40.99.10⒎10⒏1⒒1⒚127.141.15⒐286
NH 27,111A
NY 366
GA 42,140
FL A1A
CT 32

Flickr

rte66man

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 919
  • Location: Warr Acres, OK
  • Last Login: October 16, 2018, 08:59:16 PM
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #179 on: February 11, 2018, 01:44:18 PM »

What an ugly looking toll plaza.  Up here, our tollway authority has been building things like this: https://goo.gl/maps/HgrQRP8rXnq

Sorry, I thought they were referring to the Elgin, OK plaza.

What's the purpose of the walkway above the toll plaza?

That's an optical illusion.  Go back to post #149.  There is a closeup that shows each direction has 2 gantries, one for the signage and one for the Pikepass readers

The walkway above the toll plaza in the link given is in Illinois. Post #149 is in Oklahoma. The walkway above the toll plaza definitely exists and is not an optical illusion.
Logged
When you come to a fork in the road... TAKE IT.

                                                               -Yogi Berra

bugo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5864
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Oklahoma
  • Last Login: Today at 09:06:30 AM
    • No Frills Blog
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #180 on: June 30, 2018, 06:30:27 AM »



The turnpikes hit peak traffic in 2008 and have been declining slowly but steadily since then. Heck, even on the busier turnpikes like Muskogee and Turner, there are some days where it's possible to drive 15-20 minutes not see another car; this wasn't possible even when I moved to Tulsa in 2010.

I can't believe you really believe your statement in bold above.  I've been riding/driving the Turner since the early 60's.  It has NEVER had so little traffic that you could go 15-20 minutes w/o seeing any traffic, even at 3 in the morning (which I did quite a bit while at college at TU).  I have NEVER been on any stretch of the Turner at any time of the day or night that I have gone more than 3 minutes w/o seeing other traffic.

The stretch of the Muskogee Turnpike west of Muskogee has heavy traffic at times. The stretch south ("east") of Muskogee is less busy, but 15 or 20 minutes without seeing another vehicle? That's ludicrous. Even at 4am you might go 3 minutes without meeting another car. What a laughable thing to say.

Nexus 5X

Logged
This signature has been censored by the AARoads Bureau of Morality.

In_Correct

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 123
  • Location: TX
  • Last Login: Today at 09:09:11 AM
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #181 on: June 30, 2018, 07:28:59 AM »

I was on the Turnpike sections of Interstate 44. While Interstate 35 has much more traffic, Interstate 44 Turnpikes are filled with traffic.
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1338
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 12:53:09 AM
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #182 on: July 01, 2018, 03:32:45 PM »

Even though I-44 doesn't have its number ending in a "5" or "0" it is still a major route in the Interstate system. It's basically the main road linking the NE United States to destinations in the Southwest US. The road needs at least 3 lanes in each direction between OKC and Tulsa. I think there's other stretches of it in Oklahoma and Missouri that should be widened as well.
Logged

MikieTimT

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 77
  • Last Login: October 16, 2018, 10:37:06 PM
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #183 on: July 01, 2018, 09:41:29 PM »

Even though I-44 doesn't have its number ending in a "5" or "0" it is still a major route in the Interstate system. It's basically the main road linking the NE United States to destinations in the Southwest US. The road needs at least 3 lanes in each direction between OKC and Tulsa. I think there's other stretches of it in Oklahoma and Missouri that should be widened as well.

I would second that.  Between those stretches, and I-40 between L.R. and Memphis should take care of most of the bottlenecks in mid-America.
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 672
  • Location: Los Angeles
  • Last Login: Today at 01:00:47 PM
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #184 on: October 02, 2018, 03:55:24 PM »

Logged

rte66man

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 919
  • Location: Warr Acres, OK
  • Last Login: October 16, 2018, 08:59:16 PM
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #185 on: October 10, 2018, 08:40:29 PM »

Logged
When you come to a fork in the road... TAKE IT.

                                                               -Yogi Berra

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 672
  • Location: Los Angeles
  • Last Login: Today at 01:00:47 PM
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #186 on: October 10, 2018, 09:15:09 PM »

Logged

bugo

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5864
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Oklahoma
  • Last Login: Today at 09:06:30 AM
    • No Frills Blog
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #187 on: October 12, 2018, 11:57:24 AM »

Even though I-44 doesn't have its number ending in a "5" or "0" it is still a major route in the Interstate system. It's basically the main road linking the NE United States to destinations in the Southwest US. The road needs at least 3 lanes in each direction between OKC and Tulsa. I think there's other stretches of it in Oklahoma and Missouri that should be widened as well.

I-44 between OKC and St Louis is a major national route. I-44 "west" (really south) of OKC is a less important regional spur route. It really should be I-535.

Logged
This signature has been censored by the AARoads Bureau of Morality.

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1338
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 12:53:09 AM
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #188 on: October 12, 2018, 01:56:35 PM »

In it's current form between Wichita Falls and OKC it is a spur route. It's long enough to justify a 2-digit designation. I think the Interstate ought to be extended down to I-20 in Abilene, if not farther down to San Angelo. It wouldn't be hard to do. US-277 between Wichita Falls and Abilene has been four-laned and given a few near-Interstate quality upgrades in towns along the way.
Logged

kphoger

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 7793
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: Today at 12:57:54 PM
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #189 on: October 12, 2018, 02:04:11 PM »

In it's current form between Wichita Falls and OKC it is a spur route. It's long enough to justify a 2-digit designation.

I don't think there's any need to use up another number, when 44 works just fine.

I think the Interstate ought to be extended down to I-20 in Abilene, if not farther down to San Angelo. It wouldn't be hard to do. US-277 between Wichita Falls and Abilene has been four-laned and given a few near-Interstate quality upgrades in towns along the way.

Did they finally finish the last part between Holliday and Seymour?  I haven't driven it since March.

Anson would be the real challenge, although I think a new-alignment bypass along the eastern edge of town would be feasible.
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.

1

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 5788
  • UMass Lowell student

  • Age: 19
  • Location: MA/NH border
  • Last Login: Today at 01:03:19 PM
    • Flickr account
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #190 on: October 12, 2018, 02:07:11 PM »

In it's its current form between Wichita Falls and OKC it is a spur route. It's long enough to justify a 2-digit designation. I think the Interstate ought to be extended down to I-20 in Abilene, if not farther down to San Angelo. It wouldn't be hard to do. US-277 between Wichita Falls and Abilene has been four-laned and given a few near-Interstate quality upgrades in towns along the way.

There are higher priorities (actual or perceived): Dallas to Amarillo, Austin to Houston, I-14, and I-69.

Also keep in mind that most US routes in the middle of nowhere in Texas are 75 MPH already. I'm not sure about US 277, but I would guess that it is.
Logged
Clinched, plus MA 108

Traveled, plus:
US ⒉⒔50
MA ⒐⒙22.40.99.10⒎10⒏1⒒1⒚127.141.15⒐286
NH 27,111A
NY 366
GA 42,140
FL A1A
CT 32

Flickr

kphoger

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 7793
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: Today at 12:57:54 PM
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #191 on: October 12, 2018, 02:11:56 PM »

Also keep in mind that most US routes in the middle of nowhere in Texas are 75 MPH already. I'm not sure about US 277, but I would guess that it is.

US-277 is 75 mph for most of its route all the way to Del Rio.  The sections that aren't 75 are 65 or 70, and those are basically the curvy bits south of Abilene and areas near towns.  It's almost exclusively 75 mph from Wichita Falls to Abilene.  The two- and three-lane sections that were still left north of Seymour were 65 mph, but it sounds like those have now been twinned since I was there last.
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1338
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 12:53:09 AM
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #192 on: October 13, 2018, 01:27:10 AM »

Quote from: kphoger
Did they finally finish the last part between Holliday and Seymour?  I haven't driven it since March.

That stretch should have all been completed for some time. It has been a couple or so years since I last drove that route. When I did the only part between Holliday and Seymour that wasn't four-laned was the stretch thru Dundee. The bypass was under construction at that time. I would be shocked if that wasn't finished.

TX DOT has plans to extend Kell Freeway on the SW corner of Wichita Falls to connect to the bypass around Holliday. I don't know when they're going to start building it. But that's by far the biggest hurdle in the way of extending I-44 toward Abilene.

Quote from: X
There are higher priorities (actual or perceived): Dallas to Amarillo, Austin to Houston, I-14, and I-69.

I would agree US-287 between Fort Worth and Amarillo needs an Interstate upgrade desperately. Truck traffic on that route is ridiculous. But then so is truck traffic on US-69 in Oklahoma; maybe even worse, but there doesn't seem to be any hurry to upgrade that one into an extension of I-45. Regardless, I've driven on US-287 enough to really want an Interstate-class route.

The overall grand scheme of I-14 is a giant pile of wasteful pork. The only parts of it that are justifiable at all is the stretch from Killeen to College Station and over to Huntsville. But the jagged, saw-tooth path they have proposed inspires me to root against it ever getting completed. I can't emphasize enough how much I hate crooked, jagged, mileage wasting Interstate routes. I hate a bunch of I-69 for the same reason. Interstates are supposed to be direct, time-saving routes. They shouldn't bend all over the place like some po-dunk 2-lane section line gravel road. But that's what we have going now with both I-14 and I-69. They stink.

An I-44 extension to Abilene and San Angelo is justifiable. I-35 is an over-loaded NAFTA corridor. I-44 is another important SW to NE national route. Connecting it to the Mexico border via an I-27 extension would create a good relief route for commercial traffic on I-35. Plus it would provide a good option for traffic coming from places like Southern AZ or CA and headed to points in the Northeast. They would be able to bypass DFW while staying on Interstate quality road the whole way.
Logged

kphoger

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 7793
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: Today at 12:57:54 PM
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #193 on: October 14, 2018, 03:57:56 PM »

An I-44 extension to Abilene and San Angelo is justifiable. I-35 is an over-loaded NAFTA corridor. I-44 is another important SW to NE national route. Connecting it to the Mexico border via an I-27 extension would create a good relief route for commercial traffic on I-35.

You say that as if "the Mexican border" is either a destination or origin of commercial traffic.  In reality, though, "Monterrey" or "Laredo" or "Fort Worth" is the destination or origin.  Any alternative to I-35 that utilizes I-44 would only be useful for NAFTA traffic if it connects to Laredo at the south end and Oklahoma City at the north end (which means it would not be serving NAFTA traffic with an origin or destination between those two points), and I'm struggling to imagine how that would use any sort of I-27 extension.  Do you imagine an I-27 extension reaching all the way to Laredo?

I-277 south of San Angelo has almost zero long-haul truck traffic, in my experience—especially south of Sonora.  Del Rio is just not a huge cross-border destination.
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1338
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 12:53:09 AM
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #194 on: October 14, 2018, 11:52:28 PM »

Quote from: kphoger
Do you imagine an I-27 extension reaching all the way to Laredo?

It's one possibility, one that is part of the overall Ports to Plains Corridor. The Ports to Plains Corridor does run from San Angelo down to Del Rio and then farther South along the Rio Grande to Piedras Negras, Carrizo Springs and Laredo. Then the corridor runs down to the Rio Grande Valley cities at the coast. Best case long-term scenario, but still also a long shot, both I-27 and I-2 could meet in Laredo, but with I-27 hitting two other border cities before reaching Laredo.

Obviously Del Rio is not as busy a border crossing as Laredo. Monterrey has a major highway linking to Nuevo Laredo in a very direct path. I-35 is just across the border. US-277 North out of Del Rio is not a major highway; it's pretty much all 2-lane between Del Rio and San Angelo. Traffic levels could increase if the Ports to Plains Corridor was fleshed out completely.

Another possibility for extending I-27 is having it go from San Angelo to end at I-10 in Junction. That would give places like Lubbock & Amarillo a direct Interstate-quality route to San Antonio and points farther South and East.

If either of those versions of I-27 can be built thru San Angelo it would give I-44 a good reason to be extended to San Angelo as well. Meanwhile, I think TX DOT can slowly but steadily improve US-277 between Wichita Falls and Abilene. That would at least eliminate the current dead end of I-44 in Wichita Falls.
Logged

kphoger

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 7793
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: Today at 12:57:54 PM
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #195 on: October 15, 2018, 01:49:12 PM »

Obviously Del Rio is not as busy a border crossing as Laredo. Monterrey has a major highway linking to Nuevo Laredo in a very direct path. I-35 is just across the border. US-277 North out of Del Rio is not a major highway; it's pretty much all 2-lane between Del Rio and San Angelo.

But I think that reasoning is backwards.  The San Antonio–Monterrey corridor is a big four-lane highway because that's where the traffic is.  To say that's where the traffic is because it's a major highway doesn't make sense.  Monterrey has a huge industrial sector, making stuff that gets shipped to America; the two Laredos have trucking firms and drayage yards by the dozen.  In contrast, the industrial zone in Coahuila south of Del Rio (Allende, Sabinas, Monclova, Castaños) is more focused on producing raw materials like steel and coal, rather than consumer goods for export to the States.  That's why I was saying the only way an I-35 bypass through Texas would be valuable to cross-border traffic would be if it connected to Laredo and some other major shipping node in the USA.
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1338
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 12:53:09 AM
Re: Driving Forward OK
« Reply #196 on: October 16, 2018, 01:04:23 AM »

To repeat it a little more clearly: the Ports to Plains Corridor goes through both Del Rio and Laredo on the way down to the coast. It doesn't dead end in Del Rio. The grand plan would appear to extend both I-27 and I-2 to Laredo. That's not my fantasy. I would just as soon extend I-27 directly (in a direct diagonal path) to Junction, TX and end it at I-10 there. It would be a less costly extension; something that could ultimately create a San Antonio to Denver corridor.

There is a hell of a lot of traffic and development along I-35. Laredo is also a very busy border crossing. Not every person driving on I-35 in Texas is going to a destination along I-35 in Texas. Right now most traffic headed from South Texas to places up in the Texas Panhandle, Oklahoma or points farther North would at least take I-35 up to San Antonio before leaving I-35 for other alternatives. There's no good high capacity/high speed alternative highway. Some people who frequently must use I-35 might like it if some of that long distance traffic took a different route. Extensions of I-27 and I-44 could get a bunch of that traffic around the San Antonio, Austin and DFW metro areas.

In the eastern US there's a few Interstates that work as bypass routes for more major routes. I-81 in conjunction with other routes (like I-78 and I-84) helps filter a lot of traffic from busy parts of I-95. I-35 needs something like that in Texas. Aside from the Ports to Plains Corridor it's also possible US-281 going North out of San Antonio could at least be four-laned all the way to Wichita Falls with freeway upgrades in key places.
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.