AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules for political content in signatures and user profiles. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: Future I-57/US 67  (Read 166854 times)

mgk920

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3745
  • Location: Appleton, WI USA
  • Last Login: July 08, 2020, 11:26:07 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #575 on: June 25, 2017, 10:37:55 AM »

Maybe this is in the sole realm of 'fictional/fantasy' musing, but assuming that this I-57 extension comes off as planned, could we see a push from the local pols along the way to extend 'I-57' further southward, perhaps towards I-49 in Alexandria, LA via the US 167 corridor (and beyond all the way to I-10 in the Lake Charles, LA area)?

 :hmmm:

Mike
Logged

cjk374

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2141
  • The road less travelled is well worn under my feet

  • Age: 46
  • Location: Simsboro, LA
  • Last Login: July 08, 2020, 07:36:03 AM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #576 on: June 25, 2017, 11:44:04 AM »

Maybe this is in the sole realm of 'fictional/fantasy' musing, but assuming that this I-57 extension comes off as planned, could we see a push from the local pols along the way to extend 'I-57' further southward, perhaps towards I-49 in Alexandria, LA via the US 167 corridor (and beyond all the way to I-10 in the Lake Charles, LA area)?

 :hmmm:

Mike

Not US 167....US 165 through Monroe & Alexandria down to Lake Charles.
Logged
Runnin' roads and polishin' rails.

US71

  • Road Scholar , Master of Snark
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9807
  • Sign Inspector, mad man with a camera

  • Age: 60
  • Location: On the road again
  • Last Login: July 08, 2020, 09:49:21 PM
    • The Road Less Taken
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #577 on: June 25, 2017, 11:48:25 AM »

Maybe this is in the sole realm of 'fictional/fantasy' musing, but assuming that this I-57 extension comes off as planned, could we see a push from the local pols along the way to extend 'I-57' further southward, perhaps towards I-49 in Alexandria, LA via the US 167 corridor (and beyond all the way to I-10 in the Lake Charles, LA area)?

 :hmmm:

Mike

Not US 167....US 165 through Monroe & Alexandria down to Lake Charles.

Wouldn't I-69 come close?
Logged
Fear itself is largely an illusion.

cjk374

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2141
  • The road less travelled is well worn under my feet

  • Age: 46
  • Location: Simsboro, LA
  • Last Login: July 08, 2020, 07:36:03 AM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #578 on: June 25, 2017, 11:54:09 AM »

Maybe this is in the sole realm of 'fictional/fantasy' musing, but assuming that this I-57 extension comes off as planned, could we see a push from the local pols along the way to extend 'I-57' further southward, perhaps towards I-49 in Alexandria, LA via the US 167 corridor (and beyond all the way to I-10 in the Lake Charles, LA area)?

 :hmmm:

Mike

Not US 167....US 165 through Monroe & Alexandria down to Lake Charles.

Wouldn't I-69 come close?

I-69 will allegedly get as close as El Dorado, then head east,  then curve southward intersecting I-20 west of Minden. Then go south and curve westward underneath Shreveport.
Logged
Runnin' roads and polishin' rails.

I-39

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1155
  • Last Login: July 07, 2020, 01:51:48 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #579 on: June 25, 2017, 01:54:51 PM »

Maybe this is in the sole realm of 'fictional/fantasy' musing, but assuming that this I-57 extension comes off as planned, could we see a push from the local pols along the way to extend 'I-57' further southward, perhaps towards I-49 in Alexandria, LA via the US 167 corridor (and beyond all the way to I-10 in the Lake Charles, LA area)?

 :hmmm:

Mike

Better idea: Extend I-57 from Sikeston to Little Rock, then multiplex it with I-30 to Texarkana and then extend it along the US 59/77 corridor to the Mexican border. Would replace I-69 between Memphis and Texas.
Logged

cjk374

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2141
  • The road less travelled is well worn under my feet

  • Age: 46
  • Location: Simsboro, LA
  • Last Login: July 08, 2020, 07:36:03 AM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #580 on: June 25, 2017, 02:13:53 PM »

Maybe this is in the sole realm of 'fictional/fantasy' musing, but assuming that this I-57 extension comes off as planned, could we see a push from the local pols along the way to extend 'I-57' further southward, perhaps towards I-49 in Alexandria, LA via the US 167 corridor (and beyond all the way to I-10 in the Lake Charles, LA area)?

 :hmmm:

Mike

Better idea: Extend I-57 from Sikeston to Little Rock, then multiplex it with I-30 to Texarkana and then extend it along the US 59/77 corridor to the Mexican border. Would replace I-69 between Memphis and Texas.

It would save billions of dollars that no one seems to have.
Logged
Runnin' roads and polishin' rails.

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6922
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:37:04 AM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #581 on: June 25, 2017, 10:01:34 PM »

Maybe this is in the sole realm of 'fictional/fantasy' musing, but assuming that this I-57 extension comes off as planned, could we see a push from the local pols along the way to extend 'I-57' further southward, perhaps towards I-49 in Alexandria, LA via the US 167 corridor (and beyond all the way to I-10 in the Lake Charles, LA area)?

 :hmmm:

Mike

Not US 167....US 165 through Monroe & Alexandria down to Lake Charles.

Wouldn't I-69 come close?

I-69 will allegedly get as close as El Dorado, then head east,  then curve southward intersecting I-20 west of Minden. Then go south and curve westward underneath Shreveport.

Some have cited the possibility that the I-530/AR 530 project from Little Rock south to the I-69 alignment near Monticello could conceivably be a southern extension of I-57.  If that occurs, place your bets on regional interests strongly suggesting a southward extension along US 425 and US 165 to at least Monroe, LA (I-20) or, more ambitiously, I-49 at Alexandria.  Whether such a corridor makes it all the way to I-10 would be purely speculative at this time (and more appropriately directed toward Fictional).
Logged

inkyatari

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1474
  • Widen I-80 through all of Illinois!

  • Age: 51
  • Location: Morris, IL
  • Last Login: July 04, 2020, 07:05:17 PM
    • Pie Factory Podcast - Classic Arcade gaming talk
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #582 on: June 26, 2017, 04:23:45 PM »

Maybe this is in the sole realm of 'fictional/fantasy' musing, but assuming that this I-57 extension comes off as planned, could we see a push from the local pols along the way to extend 'I-57' further southward, perhaps towards I-49 in Alexandria, LA via the US 167 corridor (and beyond all the way to I-10 in the Lake Charles, LA area)?

 :hmmm:

Mike

Better idea: Extend I-57 from Sikeston to Little Rock, then multiplex it with I-30 to Texarkana and then extend it along the US 59/77 corridor to the Mexican border. Would replace I-69 between Memphis and Texas.

I've made this suggestion previously.  The only problem is how I-30 ends in little rock, thus creating an unnecessary multiplex.  Unless you create two separate I-57's
Logged
I'm never wrong, just wildly inaccurate.

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6922
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:37:04 AM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #583 on: June 26, 2017, 06:55:46 PM »

Maybe this is in the sole realm of 'fictional/fantasy' musing, but assuming that this I-57 extension comes off as planned, could we see a push from the local pols along the way to extend 'I-57' further southward, perhaps towards I-49 in Alexandria, LA via the US 167 corridor (and beyond all the way to I-10 in the Lake Charles, LA area)?

 :hmmm:

Mike

Better idea: Extend I-57 from Sikeston to Little Rock, then multiplex it with I-30 to Texarkana and then extend it along the US 59/77 corridor to the Mexican border. Would replace I-69 between Memphis and Texas.

I've made this suggestion previously.  The only problem is how I-30 ends in little rock, thus creating an unnecessary multiplex.  Unless you create two separate I-57's

This thread-within-a-thread is now verging on Fictional!  That being said -- if by some twist of fate the plans for the central Shreveport-Memphis segment of I-69 are abandoned, then the Texas portion south of Texarkana (presently planned as I-69 and I-369) will require renumbering; I'd suggest I-47 for that purpose (an I-57 extension being reserved for I-530 + LA extension of such).  How that would play out in South Texas would be something TBD.  No need for a long multiplex down I-30!     
Logged

I-39

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1155
  • Last Login: July 07, 2020, 01:51:48 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #584 on: June 26, 2017, 07:08:29 PM »

Maybe this is in the sole realm of 'fictional/fantasy' musing, but assuming that this I-57 extension comes off as planned, could we see a push from the local pols along the way to extend 'I-57' further southward, perhaps towards I-49 in Alexandria, LA via the US 167 corridor (and beyond all the way to I-10 in the Lake Charles, LA area)?

 :hmmm:

Mike

Better idea: Extend I-57 from Sikeston to Little Rock, then multiplex it with I-30 to Texarkana and then extend it along the US 59/77 corridor to the Mexican border. Would replace I-69 between Memphis and Texas.

I've made this suggestion previously.  The only problem is how I-30 ends in little rock, thus creating an unnecessary multiplex.  Unless you create two separate I-57's

This thread-within-a-thread is now verging on Fictional!  That being said -- if by some twist of fate the plans for the central Shreveport-Memphis segment of I-69 are abandoned, then the Texas portion south of Texarkana (presently planned as I-69 and I-369) will require renumbering; I'd suggest I-47 for that purpose (an I-57 extension being reserved for I-530 + LA extension of such).  How that would play out in South Texas would be something TBD.  No need for a long multiplex down I-30!     

Yes, the I-57 extension proposal is fictional, but it makes a lot more sense than building an all new I-69 between Memphis and Texas. And I was just suggesting extending the I-57 so as to unify the corridor under one number, but I don't think it really matters (with GPS systems, no one would really care if the corridor was 5 different two digits, I-69/70/57/30/47). I wouldn't mind seeing US 59/77 upgraded into I-47 from Texarkana to the Mexican border (considering I-47 does not yet exist).

Anyway..... getting back on track, here's to hoping I-57 is completed within the next 20 years!
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6922
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:37:04 AM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #585 on: June 26, 2017, 07:57:05 PM »

Anyway..... getting back on track, here's to hoping I-57 is completed within the next 20 years!

If MO can get some semblance of their shit together within 10-15 years, then a full I-57 completion is well within the realm of possibility.  If one defocuses a bit and looks at the Missouri "forest" rather than just the separate "trees" within, the whole state seems to function as one of the major potential national crossroads -- albeit unfulfilled at this time.  The AOS in the northeast quadrant, the US 36/I-72 corridor, some sort of connection to/via Jefferson City -- all projects (OK, maybe not Jeff City!) that have larger regional if not national implications.  Whether we -- or even MoDOT -- like it or not, MO lies in the pathway of connectivity in the Midwest -- and as can be seen by their relatively quick upgrade of US 71 to I-49, they're willing to do what they can (maybe they blew their multi-year "wad" on that particular project) when the resources present themselves. 
Logged

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2510
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: March 12, 2020, 06:05:15 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #586 on: June 27, 2017, 07:22:54 PM »

Does anyone really see future Interstate 57 going beyond Little Rock? I certainly don't.
Logged

I-39

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1155
  • Last Login: July 07, 2020, 01:51:48 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #587 on: June 27, 2017, 07:35:10 PM »

Does anyone really see future Interstate 57 going beyond Little Rock? I certainly don't.

No, any proposal to go beyond Little Rock is just (at this point) speculation on this forum.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6922
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:37:04 AM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #588 on: June 27, 2017, 09:51:02 PM »

Does anyone really see future Interstate 57 going beyond Little Rock? I certainly don't.

No, any proposal to go beyond Little Rock is just (at this point) speculation on this forum.

Yes, this is simply specuation:  if AR 530 is built out to Interstate standards within the next 15 years or so, there is the strong possibility that could be localized pressure to extend I-57 over that route as well as the finished part of I-530 (if I-57 is at least in the process of being finished north of Little Rock).  Many posters have gone a bit further, speculating an extension as far as central/southwest Louisiana -- abetted by the occasional regional rumblings about such matters (e.g. upgrading US 165 through Monroe down to Alexandria). 

But until there is genuine movement toward the completion of I-57 north of Little Rock, then everything south of there remains strictly opportunity.
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2151
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: July 03, 2020, 03:36:04 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #589 on: June 27, 2017, 10:51:26 PM »

I-57 is a diagonal interstate. It doesn't make any sense for it to over-write the I-530 designation in some distant hope of an interstate being extended to Monroe, LA. I'm sorry, but that's just not a major traffic corridor. And because I-57 runs so diagonal into Little Rock the act of making it do a hard dog-leg turn due South just doesn't seem right. If any Interstate is going to go into Monroe just let it be I-530 or even give it another 2di number like I-53.
Logged

US71

  • Road Scholar , Master of Snark
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9807
  • Sign Inspector, mad man with a camera

  • Age: 60
  • Location: On the road again
  • Last Login: July 08, 2020, 09:49:21 PM
    • The Road Less Taken
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #590 on: June 27, 2017, 10:59:42 PM »


But until there is genuine movement toward the completion of I-57 north of Little Rock, then everything south of there remains strictly opportunity.

Makes a great sound bite , though: "I supported I-57 north of Little Rock"
Logged
Fear itself is largely an illusion.

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6922
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:37:04 AM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #591 on: June 27, 2017, 11:34:43 PM »

I-57 is a diagonal interstate. It doesn't make any sense for it to over-write the I-530 designation in some distant hope of an interstate being extended to Monroe, LA. I'm sorry, but that's just not a major traffic corridor. And because I-57 runs so diagonal into Little Rock the act of making it do a hard dog-leg turn due South just doesn't seem right. If any Interstate is going to go into Monroe just let it be I-530 or even give it another 2di number like I-53.

Hard turns?  Dog-legs?  I-75 through Chattanooga & Knoxville says a big fat hello!  Plenty of precedents all over the Interstate system for a mixed-bag alignment.  I-57 is only slightly diagonal for most of its Illinois mileage, except (obviously) immediately south of Effingham.  And an alignment along US 165 in Louisiana more or less mimics the Illinois trajectory (a few degrees clockwise from vertical).  Having an interim diagonal segment in between wouldn't be all that bad -- considering the ludicrousness of three trunk Interstates all terminating in the Little Rock area.  Just so posters & readers don't have to toggle back & forth unnecessarily, I'll indulge a bit of fictional here, since it's already been brought up:  if you simply dropped the last integer of I-530 and made it (and a LA extension) I-53, it might be long-term appropriate to take it up US 65 to Springfield,MO, and then on to greater KC via MO 13/7.  Otherwise, keep it as is or consider an I-57 designation down the line. 

But until there is genuine movement toward the completion of I-57 north of Little Rock, then everything south of there remains strictly opportunity.

Makes a great sound bite , though: "I supported I-57 north of Little Rock"

Yes, it does.  Maybe that'll be Boozman's re-election slogan!
Logged

Anthony_JK

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1372
  • Age: 56
  • Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
  • Last Login: July 08, 2020, 10:56:51 AM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #592 on: June 28, 2017, 04:54:26 AM »

I'll indulge a bit of fictional here, since it's already been brought up:  if you simply dropped the last integer of I-530 and made it (and a LA extension) I-53, it might be long-term appropriate to take it up US 65 to Springfield,MO, and then on to greater KC via MO 13/7.

I have proposed exactly that, but as an I-51. I'd prefer I-53 to be what is now the I-57 extension to Popular Bluff, but continuing up US 67 to Festus, then cosigned with I-55 to the burbs of St. Louis, then an outer loop around St. Louis to US 40/US 61, then taking over the Avenue of the Saints corridor through MO and IA.

Or, if you want to cut out the I-69 extension between Monticello and Tenaha, you can make what was the segment of I-69 from Monticello to Brookhaven south of Memphis  at the I-55/I-269 junction into I-53. Heck, if money really wasn't an object, you could even make an I-53 extension down US 425 to Ferriday/Vidalia/Natchez, then down US 61 to Baton Rouge, then down I-110 and I-10 down to I-55, while shifting I-10 to proposed I-49 South and extending I-12 to Lafayette.

[All right, enough Fictional for now.]
Logged

US71

  • Road Scholar , Master of Snark
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9807
  • Sign Inspector, mad man with a camera

  • Age: 60
  • Location: On the road again
  • Last Login: July 08, 2020, 09:49:21 PM
    • The Road Less Taken
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #593 on: June 28, 2017, 08:49:18 AM »

I-57 is a diagonal interstate. It doesn't make any sense for it to over-write the I-530 designation in some distant hope of an interstate being extended to Monroe, LA. I'm sorry, but that's just not a major traffic corridor. And because I-57 runs so diagonal into Little Rock the act of making it do a hard dog-leg turn due South just doesn't seem right. If any Interstate is going to go into Monroe just let it be I-530 or even give it another 2di number like I-53.

Hard turns?  Dog-legs?  I-75 through Chattanooga & Knoxville says a big fat hello!  Plenty of precedents all over the Interstate system for a mixed-bag alignment.  I-57 is only slightly diagonal for most of its Illinois mileage, except (obviously) immediately south of Effingham.  And an alignment along US 165 in Louisiana more or less mimics the Illinois trajectory (a few degrees clockwise from vertical).  Having an interim diagonal segment in between wouldn't be all that bad -- considering the ludicrousness of three trunk Interstates all terminating in the Little Rock area.  Just so posters & readers don't have to toggle back & forth unnecessarily, I'll indulge a bit of fictional here, since it's already been brought up:  if you simply dropped the last integer of I-530 and made it (and a LA extension) I-53, it might be long-term appropriate to take it up US 65 to Springfield,MO, and then on to greater KC via MO 13/7.  Otherwise, keep it as is or consider an I-57 designation down the line. 

But until there is genuine movement toward the completion of I-57 north of Little Rock, then everything south of there remains strictly opportunity.

Makes a great sound bite , though: "I supported I-57 north of Little Rock"

Yes, it does.  Maybe that'll be Boozman's re-election slogan!

Sounds better than "I voted to take away your healthcare".
Logged
Fear itself is largely an illusion.

jbnv

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3648
  • I take the back roads.

  • Age: 44
  • Location: Independence/Baton Rouge, LA
  • Last Login: July 08, 2020, 03:18:10 PM
    • Photos on Flickr
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #594 on: June 28, 2017, 08:53:47 AM »

An interstate along US 165 from Lake Charles to Little Rock is of far more theoretical value to Louisiana than the current I-69 alignment. If Louisiana politicians start talking about that, then these ideas will enter the realm of plausibility. Look at I-14, which is pure vaporware at this point.
Logged
🆕 Louisiana Highways on Twitter | Yes, I like Clearview. Deal with it. | Redos: US | La. | Route Challenge

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2510
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: March 12, 2020, 06:05:15 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #595 on: June 28, 2017, 02:55:03 PM »

Is an Interstate along the US 165 corridor in Arkansas and Louisiana really needed? How likely is even a freeway to be built along 165?
Logged

rte66man

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1244
  • Location: Warr Acres, OK
  • Last Login: July 08, 2020, 08:25:38 AM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #596 on: June 28, 2017, 03:17:11 PM »

If you simply dropped the last integer of I-530 and made it (and a LA extension) I-53, it might be long-term appropriate to take it up US 65 to Springfield,MO, and then on to greater KC via MO 13/7.  Otherwise, keep it as is or consider an I-57 designation down the line. 

Never happen.  US65 from Harrison south to Conway would cost untold BILLIONS to build out to interstate standards. While it looks good in the fictional realm, it will never happen.  But I guess we can always dream........
Logged
When you come to a fork in the road... TAKE IT.

                                                               -Yogi Berra

jbnv

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3648
  • I take the back roads.

  • Age: 44
  • Location: Independence/Baton Rouge, LA
  • Last Login: July 08, 2020, 03:18:10 PM
    • Photos on Flickr
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #597 on: June 28, 2017, 04:21:25 PM »

Is an Interstate along the US 165 corridor in Arkansas and Louisiana really needed? How likely is even a freeway to be built along 165?

US 165 in Louisiana was upgraded to a four-lane expressway about a decade ago. I don't know what traffic counts are. The basic fact is that US 165 connects three of Louisiana's largest cities and represents an alternate route from southeast Texas through Louisiana to Little Rock, Memphis and other points north and east.

Yes, it will probably be decades before the traffic volumes justify making the corridor a freeway. Even when they do, there will be plenty of issues getting it around/through the various cities and towns along the way and limiting access along the stretch.

The same argument about need applies to I-69 between Texas and Memphis. And I dare someone to demonstrate that completed I-69 will provide more benefit to Louisiana than freeway US 165.
Logged
🆕 Louisiana Highways on Twitter | Yes, I like Clearview. Deal with it. | Redos: US | La. | Route Challenge

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6922
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:37:04 AM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #598 on: June 28, 2017, 04:57:26 PM »

If you simply dropped the last integer of I-530 and made it (and a LA extension) I-53, it might be long-term appropriate to take it up US 65 to Springfield,MO, and then on to greater KC via MO 13/7.  Otherwise, keep it as is or consider an I-57 designation down the line. 

Never happen.  US65 from Harrison south to Conway would cost untold BILLIONS to build out to interstate standards. While it looks good in the fictional realm, it will never happen.  But I guess we can always dream........

Probably so.  Looks good on a map, but the Ozarks do pose a formidable obstacle to efficient construction.  Never been on this particular road; for realistic assessment, I'll gladly defer to those who have.   
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2151
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: July 03, 2020, 03:36:04 PM
Re: Future I-57/US 67
« Reply #599 on: June 28, 2017, 10:17:09 PM »

Quote from: sparker
Hard turns?  Dog-legs?  I-75 through Chattanooga & Knoxville says a big fat hello!

At least I-75 in Tennessee has an excuse for the hard turns (mountains). There's not quite so much of that through Central Arkansas. If I-57 is completed between Walnut Ridge and Sikeston there will be a lot of Chicago-Dallas traffic on that route. Monroe is not a major destination for traffic along that corridor. Hell, there's not any rush to get I-530 completed to the proposed I-69 corridor. That's just disconnected segments of 2-lane road going through there.
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.