Francis Scott Key Bridge (I-695) complete collapse after large ship hits it

[Beltway]

What vitriol to be exact?  More a case of you seem shocked that your opinions on the Key Bridge replacement weren't met with universal acclaim.  Where is that silent majority you mentioned that supposedly had your back again?

[Beltway]

Syracuse does have express bus service that utilizes I-81, primarily operated by Centro, the region's public transit provider.

Just checked the map.  None of them go from one end of the viaduct to the other.  You're talking about a few blocks of the 510.

VDeane's map-check misses the operational reality. The I-81 viaduct isn't just about end-to-end routing, it's about strategic throughput. Centro's regional express routes, including the 510, leverage the viaduct for speed continuity, bypassing congestion and signal delays that plague surface streets. Even a few blocks of elevated access can preserve schedule integrity across the entire route. Removing that link forces buses into congestion zones, hindering commuter confidence and regional cohesion.

The I-81 viaduct isn't just a conduit for current express routes, it's a guideway for expansion. Centro's ability to scale regional service depends on maintaining high-speed, congestion-free corridors. Removing the viaduct forces all future express growth into surface-level congestion, undermining reliability and eroding commuter trust. This isn't about a few blocks, it's about preserving the geometry of speed, confidence, and regional integration.

I have 30 years experience riding transit buses to and from work downtown, so I have a lot of direct view of the local and express services. GRTC Route 64 is the one that uses the RMA expressways for most of the journey, between Stony Point and the downtown. GRTC Route 2A the local bus.

Believe it or not, people do it.  My coworker didn't have a car for many years.  And when the pedestrian path over the Dunn Memorial Bridge had an emergency closure a couple years ago, NYSDOT got a few complaints from people who use it to commute.
And the disparity is itself a political decision.  In many other countries, it's quite possible to not need a car even in small metro areas.  Including the Netherlands, which had gone all-in on cars like the US before reversing course (and, though New Urbanists tend not to talk about it much, still has well-developed car infrastructure - proving that it's not about choosing one or the other).

Sure, some people do it even in small towns. Then there is the distinction between owning a car and having access to the use of a car (without being the owner).

Virginia has around 40 bus transit agencies serving 107 localities. The large localities have considerable commuter usage, in addition to the universal need for rudimentary public transit for people who don't have access to a car. The many small localities have the latter.

Other states (properly) have the same systems.

[Scott5114]

I am a lot more skilled at it than some people might guess.

Beltway, I've worked with people skilled at trolling. I've known people skilled at trolling. People skilled at trolling have been friends of mine. Beltway, you're no person skilled at trolling.

[Beltway]

I am a lot more skilled at it than some people might guess.

Beltway, I've worked with people skilled at trolling. I've known people skilled at trolling. People skilled at trolling have been friends of mine. Beltway, you're no person skilled at trolling.

Your trolling skill set's not quite legacy-grade yet. But I see potential. Here's a visual encouragement.

[Scott5114]

I am a lot more skilled at it than some people might guess.

Beltway, I've worked with people skilled at trolling. I've known people skilled at trolling. People skilled at trolling have been friends of mine. Beltway, you're no person skilled at trolling.

Your trolling skill set's not quite legacy-grade yet. But I see potential. Here's a visual encouragement.

See, the end goal of trolling is to elicit an emotional response in the target. If done well, the target will "crash out" (or "go on tilt") and unwittingly provide additional material for further ridicule or trolling. To do it well requires understanding the target enough to know what will push their buttons.

I am not sure what the point of posting this cartoon is, since as far as I can tell, it's a total non-sequitur. My guess is that the intent is to provoke me by comparing me to a demon and/or Satan, or perhaps to imply that I am going to hell, but I'm not a Christian, so that isn't a terribly effective approach.

Mike2357 you ain't. Hell, Poiponen did a better job, and I don't even think he was meaning to.

[Beltway]

I am a lot more skilled at it than some people might guess.

Beltway, I've worked with people skilled at trolling. I've known people skilled at trolling. People skilled at trolling have been friends of mine. Beltway, you're no person skilled at trolling.

Your trolling skill set's not quite legacy-grade yet. But I see potential. Here's a visual encouragement.

See, the end goal of trolling is to elicit an emotional response in the target. If done well, the target will "crash out" (or "go on tilt") and unwittingly provide additional material for further ridicule or trolling. To do it well requires understanding the target enough to know what will push their buttons.
I am not sure what the point of posting this cartoon is, since as far as I can tell, it's a total non-sequitur. My guess is that the intent is to provoke me by comparing me to a demon and/or Satan, or perhaps to imply that I am going to hell, but I'm not a Christian, so that isn't a terribly effective approach.
Mike2357 you ain't. Hell, Poiponen did a better job, and I don't even think he was meaning to.

Not directly aimed at you or comparing anyone to a demon and/or Satan.

What leads you to think it is about Christian theology, and that those are demons?

[Scott5114]

What leads you to think it is about Christian theology, and that those are demons?

It's reasonable to assume that horned creatures referring to "the big man downstairs" aren't talking about a physically large man on a lower floor of the building.

If your intent wasn't to compare anyone to Satan and/or demons then I'm sort of flummoxed as to what the intent was, since it's not self-evident.

[hotdogPi]

VDeane's map-check misses the operational reality. The I-81 viaduct isn't just about end-to-end routing, it's about strategic throughput. Centro's regional express routes, including the 510, leverage the viaduct for speed continuity, bypassing congestion and signal delays that plague surface streets. Even a few blocks of elevated access can preserve schedule integrity across the entire route. Removing that link forces buses into congestion zones, hindering commuter confidence and regional cohesion.

The I-81 viaduct isn't just a conduit for current express routes, it's a guideway for expansion. Centro's ability to scale regional service depends on maintaining high-speed, congestion-free corridors. Removing the viaduct forces all future express growth into surface-level congestion, undermining reliability and eroding commuter trust. This isn't about a few blocks, it's about preserving the geometry of speed, confidence, and regional integration.

I have 30 years experience riding transit buses to and from work downtown, so I have a lot of direct view of the local and express services. GRTC Route 64 is the one that uses the RMA expressways for most of the journey, between Stony Point and the downtown. GRTC Route 2A the local bus.

1. Writing Style: 
The passage uses advanced vocabulary ("operational reality," "strategic throughput," "preserve schedule integrity," "geometry of speed"), layered argument structure, and connective rhetoric ("isn't just about X, it's about Y"). This is the kind of elevated, somewhat formal prose that both experienced transit enthusiasts and advanced AI large language models can produce.

2. Content Knowledge: 
There's specific local transit detail: references to Centro (the Syracuse, NY transit operator), the 510 express route, the I-81 viaduct's operational function, as well as GRTC (Richmond, VA) Route 64 and 2A. The user claims 30 years' experience, which lends authenticity, though such details could also be synthesized by a thorough AI, especially one referencing regional bus networks and patterns.

3. Structure and Cohesion: 
The argument is consistent, focusing on network geometry and the importance of uninterrupted express corridors for system reliability and potential expansion. That's typical of a roadgeek, but also of an AI trained on transit advocacy.

4. Subtle Markers: 
Phrases like "This isn't about a few blocks, it's about preserving the geometry of speed, confidence, and regional integration" have a certain ChatGPT-esque ring. But direct personal claims ("I have 30 years experience riding transit buses to and from work downtown") are designed to imply authenticity—a method sometimes used by AI to simulate credibility, but also perfectly normal for passionate hobbyists or professionals.

5. Possible Contradictions: 
There's a slight oddity in abruptly switching from Syracuse (Centro, I-81) to Richmond (GRTC), which could reflect either a well-traveled transit watcher or a model assembling details from multiple locales.

Conclusion (pedantically): 
There's no clear "smoking gun" that this was written by AI, but there's a blend of formal, somewhat impersonal advocacy style, dense terminology, and synthesized regional facts that are characteristic of both advanced AI outputs and road/transit wonks. If I had to vote with a nitpicky roadgeek lens: this could plausibly be written by either, but the tone leans a little toward AI-generated advocacy—especially given the slightly "over-constructed" flow and the strategic use of buzzwords.

The only way to know for sure is by context (was it posted by a known roadgeek or as a hot take in a discussion?), and sometimes running suspect text through AI-detection tools—but even those aren't foolproof. What makes it hard is that the roadgeek community is packed with people who naturally write like this!

[PColumbus73]

VDeane's map-check misses the operational reality. The I-81 viaduct isn't just about end-to-end routing, it's about strategic throughput. Centro's regional express routes, including the 510, leverage the viaduct for speed continuity, bypassing congestion and signal delays that plague surface streets. Even a few blocks of elevated access can preserve schedule integrity across the entire route. Removing that link forces buses into congestion zones, hindering commuter confidence and regional cohesion.

The I-81 viaduct isn't just a conduit for current express routes, it's a guideway for expansion. Centro's ability to scale regional service depends on maintaining high-speed, congestion-free corridors. Removing the viaduct forces all future express growth into surface-level congestion, undermining reliability and eroding commuter trust. This isn't about a few blocks, it's about preserving the geometry of speed, confidence, and regional integration.

I have 30 years experience riding transit buses to and from work downtown, so I have a lot of direct view of the local and express services. GRTC Route 64 is the one that uses the RMA expressways for most of the journey, between Stony Point and the downtown. GRTC Route 2A the local bus.

1. Writing Style: 
The passage uses advanced vocabulary ("operational reality," "strategic throughput," "preserve schedule integrity," "geometry of speed"), layered argument structure, and connective rhetoric ("isn't just about X, it's about Y"). This is the kind of elevated, somewhat formal prose that both experienced transit enthusiasts and advanced AI large language models can produce.

2. Content Knowledge: 
There's specific local transit detail: references to Centro (the Syracuse, NY transit operator), the 510 express route, the I-81 viaduct's operational function, as well as GRTC (Richmond, VA) Route 64 and 2A. The user claims 30 years' experience, which lends authenticity, though such details could also be synthesized by a thorough AI, especially one referencing regional bus networks and patterns.

3. Structure and Cohesion: 
The argument is consistent, focusing on network geometry and the importance of uninterrupted express corridors for system reliability and potential expansion. That's typical of a roadgeek, but also of an AI trained on transit advocacy.

4. Subtle Markers: 
Phrases like "This isn't about a few blocks, it's about preserving the geometry of speed, confidence, and regional integration" have a certain ChatGPT-esque ring. But direct personal claims ("I have 30 years experience riding transit buses to and from work downtown") are designed to imply authenticity—a method sometimes used by AI to simulate credibility, but also perfectly normal for passionate hobbyists or professionals.

5. Possible Contradictions: 
There's a slight oddity in abruptly switching from Syracuse (Centro, I-81) to Richmond (GRTC), which could reflect either a well-traveled transit watcher or a model assembling details from multiple locales.

Conclusion (pedantically): 
There's no clear "smoking gun" that this was written by AI, but there's a blend of formal, somewhat impersonal advocacy style, dense terminology, and synthesized regional facts that are characteristic of both advanced AI outputs and road/transit wonks. If I had to vote with a nitpicky roadgeek lens: this could plausibly be written by either, but the tone leans a little toward AI-generated advocacy—especially given the slightly "over-constructed" flow and the strategic use of buzzwords.

The only way to know for sure is by context (was it posted by a known roadgeek or as a hot take in a discussion?), and sometimes running suspect text through AI-detection tools—but even those aren't foolproof. What makes it hard is that the roadgeek community is packed with people who naturally write like this!

If you wish, I'd nominate posts advocating for the destruction of the American Legion Bridge (both here and in Fictional) for comparison as they are intentional satire / parodies. I can confirm that my posts on the subject are of human origin. You could also look at counterarguments I, and others, have made from going on 30-ish pages ago when it started out as an actual discussion.

[kphoger]

The I-81 viaduct isn't just about end-to-end routing, it's about strategic throughput. Centro's regional express routes, including the 510, leverage the viaduct for speed continuity, bypassing congestion and signal delays that plague surface streets. Even a few blocks of elevated access can preserve schedule integrity across the entire route. Removing that link forces buses into congestion zones, hindering commuter confidence and regional cohesion.

Wow, that is some eloquent shit.

Charmin isn't just about wiping your rear end, it's about confidence.  You daily activities, including serving at the local homeless shelter, benefit from Charmin toilet paper for anal cleanliness, avoiding dingleberries and irritation that plague unhygienic indigents.  Even a few squares of our cushiony touch can preserve dignity throughout your entire day.  Using a cheap store brand product forces you into discomfort, hindering your morale and effectiveness.  So try Charmin today for a cleaner, more confident you!

It's reasonable to assume that horned creatures referring to "the big man downstairs" aren't talking about a physically large man on a lower floor of the building.

Actually, I'd say the "big man downstairs" concept comes more from Greek mythology than it does Christian theology.  The Greeks had Hades as king of the underworld.  In contrast, Christian theology looks forward to Satan himself, and other forces of evil, being consigned to the same eternal punishment as the human damned.  Or, in approximate terms:  in Greek mythology "the big man" is lord of hell, whereas in Christian theology "the big man" will be tormented there.

Maybe the reason so many Christians have a Hellenistic image of hell in their minds is that they watched too many Bugs Bunny cartoons as a kid.

[Beltway]

Actually, I'd say the "big man downstairs" concept comes more from Greek mythology than it does Christian theology.  The Greeks had Hades as king of the underworld.  In contrast, Christian theology looks forward to Satan himself, and other forces of evil, being consigned to the same eternal punishment as the human damned.  Or, in approximate terms:  in Greek mythology "the big man" is lord of hell, whereas in Christian theology "the big man" will be tormented there.
Maybe the reason so many Christians have a Hellenistic image of hell in their minds is that they watched too many Bugs Bunny cartoons as a kid.

From as early as the 9th century, Satan was frequently depicted in Christian art as a monstrous figure with a combination of human and animal features, including horns, cloven hooves, a tail, and sometimes hairy legs. This imagery borrowed from pagan deities such as the Greek god Pan and the Egyptian god Bes, whose animalistic traits were co-opted and associated with evil by early Christian thinkers.

Dante's Inferno in the 14th century reinforced the image of a structured, hierarchical hell with Satan frozen at its core. Medieval mystery plays and cathedral art depicted Satan as a grotesque ruler of the damned in Hell, he was horned, winged, and enthroned. The pop culture of the day ..

[kphoger]

Christian art
Dante's Inferno
Medieval mystery plays
cathedral art

The ancient Western world's version of cartoons?  Art influencing culture?

[vdeane]

Going by Heretical Edge, Hades is actually Manakel, the ship's doctor of the Olympus (the ship the Seosten Empire sent to find Rysthael, otherwise known as Earth).  He gained the power of necromancy after he was exposed to Tartarus, which is why when Apollo (otherwise known as Lucifer, who wrote the Greek myths) made him the king of the underworld (also, Persephone was a revenant that possessed the corpse of Kore and declared herself to be Manakel's wife because she's attracted to powerful necromancers).  After Apollo went rogue in the ages since, Puriel (aka Zeus) got back at him by making Lucifer the devil in Christian mythology.

Although it would probably be easier to just stop caring what he thinks

I might need to talk to my therapist about that topic.
(not Beltway specifically, though it would be funnier)

Another syndrome that some road geeks have is luposlipaphobia.

If you hate roadgeeks so much, why are you on the main roadgeek forum? You should probably leave.

I tend to see this as Beltway has "certain opinions" about what road enthusiasts should be.  I find that ironic given some of the groups he participates (and touted at least once) in on the Facebook side of things would be the equivalent to road fan McDonald's value menu (cheap and unfilling).  That kind of thing is fine I suppose but they in no way resemble his 1997-era hobby page ideals he seems to hold so highly.

I wonder if he thinks that groups like NYCRoads.com that have a disproportionate amount of people who are vehemently pro-car (one person even coined the phrase "bikey-wikey") are representative of "true roadgeeks" and that the rest of us are just posers.

VDeane's map-check misses the operational reality. The I-81 viaduct isn't just about end-to-end routing, it's about strategic throughput. Centro's regional express routes, including the 510, leverage the viaduct for speed continuity, bypassing congestion and signal delays that plague surface streets. Even a few blocks of elevated access can preserve schedule integrity across the entire route. Removing that link forces buses into congestion zones, hindering commuter confidence and regional cohesion.

The I-81 viaduct isn't just a conduit for current express routes, it's a guideway for expansion. Centro's ability to scale regional service depends on maintaining high-speed, congestion-free corridors. Removing the viaduct forces all future express growth into surface-level congestion, undermining reliability and eroding commuter trust. This isn't about a few blocks, it's about preserving the geometry of speed, confidence, and regional integration.

I have 30 years experience riding transit buses to and from work downtown, so I have a lot of direct view of the local and express services. GRTC Route 64 is the one that uses the RMA expressways for most of the journey, between Stony Point and the downtown. GRTC Route 2A the local bus.

The traffic studies for the EIS actually identified that travel time to/from downtown would stay the same or improve.  Guess you're back to claiming it's wrong again.

[Max Rockatansky]

^^^

I would imagine that page is more in line with what Beltway envisions as being ideal. 

Circling back a dozen or so pages I wonder what his thoughts are on non-numbered highways?  I wasn't sure if he was eluding the content of our page or my post content here on the forum.  One could infer either from what he said, but the gist I got was that his view of the hobby is comprised only of the "numbered routes." 

Amusingly I did have a long pause in one of the I-8 CAroutexroute podcasts when Daniel mentioned the term "Roadgeeking."  Beltway has used that term so much regarding his thoughts on how the hobby ought of be that it got me thinking about this thread.  Daniel might have edited it out but I amused by it.

[hbelkins]

The only way to know for sure is by context (was it posted by a known roadgeek or as a hot take in a discussion?), and sometimes running suspect text through AI-detection tools—but even those aren't foolproof. What makes it hard is that the roadgeek community is packed with people who naturally write like this!

I've never used an AI tool to write anything.

At work, we keep getting reminders about their availability to help us craft news releases and social media posts, but I eschew them. If you're a writer by trade, why would you need AI-written text. A thesaurus is sometimes helpful, though, as is a dictionary and the AP Stylebook.

[Max Rockatansky]

Me personally I have no desire to use AI in my writing.  I actually enjoy writing about researching the things that I go do.  It probably wouldn't be much help anyways since a lot of things I do are pretty obscure.

[Beltway]

I would imagine that page is more in line with what Beltway envisions as being ideal. 
Circling back a dozen or so pages I wonder what his thoughts are on non-numbered highways?  I wasn't sure if he was eluding the content of our page or my post content here on the forum.  One could infer either from what he said, but the gist I got was that his view of the hobby is comprised only of the "numbered routes." 

How about rural secondary routes? I recently visited all 6 of the rural secondary crossings of the Appomattox River west of Petersburg. Of course Virginia secondary roads do have route numbers.

I visit the reconstruction project of Commerce Road and the replacement of its creek bridge several times a week, here in Richmond. No route number there.

A few years ago the replacement project for a bridge over a creek on Riverside Drive near my neighborhood. Visited regularly, city street, no number.

How many road hobbyists are interested in secondary roads? I am.

[Beltway]

Christian art
Dante's Inferno
Medieval mystery plays
cathedral art

The ancient Western world's version of cartoons?  Art influencing culture?

Cartoons are very simple forms of artwork. True art works are far more elaborate.

Christian theology places Satan and most demons in the second heaven (the immediate region above Earth), not "downstairs in Hell." Other than that the rest of the image jibes with Christian theology in how that kingdom operates in a hierarchy and in loveless and punitive management when members fail at their task.

[74/171FAN]

I think I have made clear on the Wiki my personal interest in secondary routes. (though the thought of even clinching them all in my original county of Prince George is insane)

Secondarily, religion is not allowed to be discussed on the forum.  -Mark

[Beltway]

I think I have made clear on the Wiki my personal interest in secondary routes. (though the thought of even clinching them all in my original county of Prince George is insane)

Secondarily, religion is not allowed to be discussed on the forum.  -Mark

From Forum Guidelines -- What's not allowed:
Posting topics and debates related to religion. These kind of topics almost always start a heated debate.

So apparently that includes posts that have some casual religious idea in it?

[freebrickproductions]

The only way to know for sure is by context (was it posted by a known roadgeek or as a hot take in a discussion?), and sometimes running suspect text through AI-detection tools—but even those aren't foolproof. What makes it hard is that the roadgeek community is packed with people who naturally write like this!

I've never used an AI tool to write anything.

At work, we keep getting reminders about their availability to help us craft news releases and social media posts, but I eschew them. If you're a writer by trade, why would you need AI-written text. A thesaurus is sometimes helpful, though, as is a dictionary and the AP Stylebook.

Me personally I have no desire to use AI in my writing.  I actually enjoy writing about researching the things that I go do.  It probably wouldn't be much help anyways since a lot of things I do are pretty obscure.

I feel like paraphrasing a post I saw on BlueSky a while back:
"If an author didn't bother to write it themself, why should I bother to read it?"

[kphoger]

So apparently that includes posts that have some casual religious idea in it?

I guess technically we were "debating" whether the cartoon horn-headed dude was Judeo-Christian or Hellenistic in origin... 

[Scott5114]

Cartoons are very simple forms of artwork. True art works are far more elaborate.

If I wasn't already inclined to dismiss your opinions as irrelevant, I would be now.

[Beltway]

Cartoons are very simple forms of artwork. True art works are far more elaborate.

If I wasn't already inclined to dismiss your opinions as irrelevant, I would be now.

That's some classic forum shade right there. Scott5114 sounds like the kind of admin who's seen one too many pixelated exit signs and has zero chill left for anything resembling "casual input." Dismissing opinions as "irrelevant" over a cartoon quip? Peak pedantry, as his bio proudly claims.

[Beltway]

VDeane's map-check misses the operational reality. The I-81 viaduct isn't just about end-to-end routing, it's about strategic throughput. Centro's regional express routes, including the 510, leverage the viaduct for speed continuity, bypassing congestion and signal delays that plague surface streets. Even a few blocks of elevated access can preserve schedule integrity across the entire route. Removing that link forces buses into congestion zones, hindering commuter confidence and regional cohesion.

The traffic studies for the EIS actually identified that travel time to/from downtown would stay the same or improve.  Guess you're back to claiming it's wrong again.

I respect the modeling effort behind the FEIS, but I remain unconvinced by its assumptions. The claim that ~80,000 AADT can be rerouted with "no effect" on the highway system, strains both network logic and precedent.

I looked at the FEIS link that Rothmann posted a few weeks ago. I was disappointed to see that instead of a 6-lane boulevard or pair of one-way 3-lane streets, and high-capacity ramps connecting that to I-81 at either end, proposed there are just the ordinary 4-lane streets and one-lane connectors to I-81.

So the ~80,000 AADT is just going to go "poof" with little or no effect on the highway system? I-481 is already largely spoken for capacitywise.

Likeisaid, the severing of MD I-695 East with its former ~32,000 AADT has increased congestion all over the network and Baltimoreans are complaining about it constantly. So are they overreacting?