|
The only thing that comes to mind would be to allow people to see common landmarks from both sides of the road, which should help them navigate on their own better. Of course a freeway is also likely to have signs all over the drat place telling you where to go (and I've found American interstates to be exceedingly good at this), so I doubt that's the case. I'd probably prefer to drive on a road where I can only see one direction, if only because the only time it ever happens is on cool mountain roads.
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 23:29
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 16:37 |
|
|
Cichlidae posted:Welp, I'm all settled in my new job. The benefits are lousy, but the pay's good, so I guess I'll make do. I'd find it unsettling to not see reverse direction traffic at least once every half mile or so, especially on an unfamiliar road. Reassurance that yes, there is a way back is comforting, both for returning from a destination or needing to backtrack because of a mistake.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2013 23:33
|
|
|
That doesn't bother me as much as north and south crossing over each other so that the oncoming traffic is on the right: https://www.google.com/maps/preview#!data=!1m4!1m3!1d43961!2d-118.6516226!3d34.5339188 (grade separated by mountains though)
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 01:14
|
|
|
For emergency services? Yeah you've got those occasional cross-overs, but so that they can see where they need to turn, especially if they weren't given any landmarks to work from?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 01:26
|
|
|
Qwijib0 posted:I'd find it unsettling to not see reverse direction traffic at least once every half mile or so, especially on an unfamiliar road. Reassurance that yes, there is a way back is comforting, both for returning from a destination or needing to backtrack because of a mistake. I think you're close to the answer. If I drive up a route, it would be nice to be able to recognize that I'm on the same road while I'm coming back the other direction. Particularly in a time before GPS / smartphones were ubiquitous. As a second guess, maybe to allow for future maintenance of traffic median crossovers if something happens like a bridge has to be closed unexpectedly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 01:46
|
|
|
Qwijib0 posted:I'd find it unsettling to not see reverse direction traffic at least once every half mile or so, especially on an unfamiliar road. Reassurance that yes, there is a way back is comforting, both for returning from a destination or needing to backtrack because of a mistake. That's my take. It's psychologically comforting to see others, to know that there is potential for help if you're in trouble.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 02:19
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:Welp, I'm all settled in my new job. The benefits are lousy, but the pay's good, so I guess I'll make do. I wonder if it makes the freeway seem wider, keeping people from slowing down? Also, if you do this, it means that you can probably see traffic in your direction around a bend. Minneapolis has installed high dividers on the crosstown within the last few years. There are major slowdowns where it turns and you no longer can see around the corner.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 02:53
|
|
|
I would assume it's so that drivers know that there's a roadway in the other direction if they need to turn around, so they don't try dumb poo poo like driving on the median.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 05:52
|
|
|
Remember that on a mostly empty road, it's much more likely to see someone come the other direction than to see someone going your direction pass by. Even if people going your way go faster, it takes them a lot longer to catch up. If you can't see the other side, the road will suddenly seem way, way quieter.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 08:41
|
|
|
Why can't France nut up and de-restrict its beautiful motorways outside of the populated areas? I'd rather have gone flat out on the E50 than on the A8, although I have to credit the Germans for making a road that is banked such that a car can follow a curve at over 180MPH.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 10:07
|
|
|
Das Volk posted:Why can't France nut up and de-restrict its beautiful motorways outside of the populated areas? I'd rather have gone flat out on the E50 than on the A8, although I have to credit the Germans for making a road that is banked such that a car can follow a curve at over 180MPH. If you look at it from a results-oriented perspective, French péage concessions have been maintained way better than your average West German Autobahn during the last two decades. I drove past another 20 kms of Baustelle on the A31 SB between Schüttorf and Bottrop last week: 80kph, sometimes 60 even, and no way to easily find out about it beforehand (I tried looking up my route online, but no dice). Infrastructural policy in Germany is supremely retarded atm, I wish them luck with having to replace 30% of their bridges over the next couple of years.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 11:15
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:Welp, I'm all settled in my new job. The benefits are lousy, but the pay's good, so I guess I'll make do. It also shows you are on the same road as you started. With the way highways sometimes 'continue' only if you follow an off ramp or other divergence, it provides a help full mirror to compare to your own driving experience. People may or may not read signs, but they are always judging their own position by their surroundings. Koesj posted:Infrastructural policy in Germany is supremely retarded atm, I wish them luck with having to replace 30% of their bridges over the next couple of years. Don't you know it's cheaper if you buy in bulk. This is a brilliant plan that cannot fail.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 16:04
|
|
|
EoRaptor posted:Don't you know it's cheaper if you buy in bulk. This is a brilliant plan that cannot fail. Costco sells bridges so I can't see how this would fail. http://www.costco.com//.product.115...content=Default
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 18:11
|
|
|
Mandalay posted:That doesn't bother me as much as north and south crossing over each other so that the oncoming traffic is on the right: https://www.google.com/maps/preview#!data=!1m4!1m3!1d43961!2d-118.6516226!3d34.5339188 Why does it do this? It seems pointless to build the bridges over each other when each side of the road could just stay on that side of the divide?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 18:32
|
|
|
Opals25 posted:Why does it do this? It seems pointless to build the bridges over each other when each side of the road could just stay on that side of the divide? Usually has to do with alignment issues when upgrading the capacity of a road. Arizona has a similar situation with the Beeline-- they needed more lanes and there was no room, and the only solution was to cross the lanes over in the mountains. It's awesome to drive too-- speed limit is 75 but I don't think it had to conform to interstate grades (granfathered?, state highway?) so there are awesome hills and turns one can take at speed. https://www.google.com/maps/preview...!4d-111.3221751 
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 19:03
|
|
|
My best guess is that the downward grade has to be at or below x% for truck traffic, and the topography was easier this way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 19:22
|
|
|
Mandalay posted:Costco sells bridges so I can't see how this would fail. http://www.costco.com//.product.115...content=Default 2'-11" width does not meet AASHTO recommendations for minimum width.  It apparently does meet the AASHTO requirement for uniform pedestrian loading of 85 lbs/ft2, which I was surprised at. Although I doubt the typical installation method of "mow grass, place bridge" will let it support that 1800 pounds.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 19:39
|
|
|
Devor posted:2'-11" width does not meet AASHTO recommendations for minimum width. It's Costco. Buy the bridges in bulk. Install side by side.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2013 19:40
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:Welp, I'm all settled in my new job. The benefits are lousy, but the pay's good, so I guess I'll make do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2013 01:31
|
|
|
Qwijib0 posted:Usually has to do with alignment issues when upgrading the capacity of a road. Arizona has a similar situation with the Beeline-- they needed more lanes and there was no room, and the only solution was to cross the lanes over in the mountains. It's awesome to drive too-- speed limit is 75 but I don't think it had to conform to interstate grades (granfathered?, state highway?) so there are awesome hills and turns one can take at speed. Wow! I saw that from a plane when I was flying into Sky Harbor a couple years back, but I couldn't find it on a map, so I figured I'd just imagined it. minidracula posted:Can you say what your new job is, without risking too much of your pseudonymity? I'm doing all the traffic simulation and design for a big big big (bigger than the Busway and likely bigger than the Q-Bridge) project.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2013 02:54
|
|
|
Hopefully you have more modern software this time around.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2013 20:42
|
|
|
I drive from the NE, turning south, at this intersection pretty regularly, and I always seem to manage to forget how to do it correctly. You're supposed to yield (I think; I've never noticed a yield sign) at the red X, and continue over across heavy, high-speed traffic coming from the SW. Making a left takes an eternity, and it's always backed up. How would you guys improve it? Groda fucked around with this message at 23:34 on Dec 13, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2013 23:30
|
|
|
Groda posted:I drive from the NE, turning south, at this intersection pretty regularly, and I always seem to manage to forget how to do it correctly. You're supposed to yield (I think; I've never noticed a yield sign) at the red X, and continue over across heavy, high-speed traffic coming from the SW. Alternately, you could separate the current entrance into two one-way roads (preferably a second roadway in a different location and not reversing traffic on the current road) that places traffic on "the wrong side of the road" to eliminate the left turn conflict between traffic entering and exiting. Use appropriate traffic controls to prevent accidental turns into the wrong entrance. Unless stopping through traffic causes major congestion problems, signalization is probably the better (and less expensive) option. Something like this, but not quite as expansive. Eastbound only gets a red if someone triggers a pedestrian phase. Varance fucked around with this message at 00:02 on Dec 14, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2013 23:46
|
|
|
Groda posted:I drive from the NE, turning south, at this intersection pretty regularly, and I always seem to manage to forget how to do it correctly. You're supposed to yield (I think; I've never noticed a yield sign) at the red X, and continue over across heavy, high-speed traffic coming from the SW. Jughandle, baby! It's too bad there's not a lot of ROW. Straight-up signalization is also a great option, as Varance said, but I wanted to throw something new out there. If the oncoming volume is that high, you'll need either signalization or grade separation to get people across safely there. You could eliminate access, of course, but that's a lot trickier to do without political repercussions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2013 18:12
|
|
|
I don't think there's enough room for a jughandle, since there's a tunnel a bit further down the road.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2013 18:51
|
|
|
Jeoh posted:I don't think there's enough room for a jughandle, since there's a tunnel a bit further down the road. Maybe I should have clarified: ROW is right-of-way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2013 18:58
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:Maybe I should have clarified: ROW is right-of-way. I'm working on a small sidewalk job where we took out the buffer between the curb and the sidewalk in some locations because it was in front of people's houses, and didn't want to impact their yards too much. Except it's not! There's like 20' of additional room within the ROW there, it's just that people treat it like their yard, and put in landscaping/walls.  It's like some weird adverse possession where if you put up a fence, local governments will be afraid to challenge you on it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2013 19:07
|
|
|
This is a thing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzHwff8Leow
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 02:19
|
|
|
Dominus Vobiscum posted:This is a thing. Someone has watched far too many MLG videos.  Alternatively: ENDUT! HOCH HECH!
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 10:23
|
|
|
Groda posted:I drive from the NE, turning south, at this intersection pretty regularly, and I always seem to manage to forget how to do it correctly. You're supposed to yield (I think; I've never noticed a yield sign) at the red X, and continue over across heavy, high-speed traffic coming from the SW. Put in an overpass for the EB traffic and signalize the left turns underneath. That was done here (it's still under construction on the map) and it works pretty well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 13:07
|
|
|
Dominus Vobiscum posted:This is a thing. I fully support spending ten grand on each and every bridge project to produce a video like this. Holy poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 15:35
|
|
|
I completely lost it when the truck jumped over the barriers. That video is   :
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 15:43
|
|
|
Jeoh posted:I completely lost it when the truck jumped over the barriers. That video is The whole video was hella surreal. But that truck topped the cake.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 16:35
|
|
|
Dominus Vobiscum posted:This is a thing. There will be a "random" drug test on Monday for exactly one employee.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 18:04
|
|
|
Now I need to start a petition to get the UK government to do a similar video for the High Speed Rail 2 project! Even people not directly affected by the project would accept it then! 
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 19:50
|
|
|
Jeoh posted:I completely lost it when the truck jumped over the barriers. That video is This is the best thing I have ever seen.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 20:53
|
|
|
So, I have been traveling through a lot of bridge tunnels recently, and I have noticed the tunnel portions have 2 sets of lights. Is this a normal thing for tunnels, or just a wierd VDOT thing that they do with bridge tunnels.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 21:40
|
|
|
MyFaceBeHi posted:Now I need to start a petition to get the UK government to do a similar video for the High Speed Rail 2 project! Even people not directly affected by the project would accept it then! You want the second half of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnAMDg7IVWs&t=26s
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 21:50
|
|
|
Ryand-Smith posted:So, I have been traveling through a lot of bridge tunnels recently, and I have noticed the tunnel portions have 2 sets of lights. Is this a normal thing for tunnels, or just a wierd VDOT thing that they do with bridge tunnels. What do you mean by a bridge tunnel? Do you mean a tunnel on land, as compared to a normal tunnel under a body of water? Like this cut-and-cover tunnel on MD 200: https://maps.google.com/maps?q=icc&....31&hq=icc&z=17 Tunnels in general need lights to see, somewhat obviously. The tunnel lights need to be pretty bright sometimes, because if you drive into a tunnel during a sunny day, your eyes can't adjust to dim "normal night-time" lighting. So for tunnels, you might need more lights to provide adequate light levels.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 23:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 16:37 |
|
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chesapeake_Bay_Bridge%E2%80%93Tunnel and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monitor%E2%80%93Merrimac_Memorial_Bridge%E2%80%93Tunnel (Virgina has a lot of bridge tunnels)
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2013 00:20
|
|