Author Topic: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread  (Read 6064 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online oscar

  • TM Collaborator
  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 479
  • Last Login:Today at 07:46:53 pm
    • Hot Springs and Highways pages
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #30 on: April 13, 2016, 07:12:07 pm »
I'd be hesitant to allow that. I fear it opening up a Pandora's Box of "You did this; why don't you do this?"
+1. Case in point: US33 Truck (Goshen, IN), which has no conventional route markers and doesn't belong in the usausb set IMO.

OTOH, there's the Cordova segment of AK 10. Unsigned, because whenever the DOT posted route markers, they quickly disappeared (apparently at the hands of locals intensely hostile to plans to connect Cordova to the rest of AK 10).

Offline mapcat

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 524
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 05:56:08 pm
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #31 on: May 31, 2016, 05:29:16 pm »
Now that all the usaky routes have been drafted and are in peer-review, I'd enjoy working on another set. From the discussion below, it seems that froggie intends to get started on usaal and usams this summer, and theFXexpert has already done much of usaga. What plans are there for usaar and usatn? As far as I can tell, AR & TN maintainers yakra & rickmastfan67 aren't currently developing these.

If neither of those are available, which currently non-existent system is most needed? canqc? Or something in another continent?
Clinched:

Offline yakra

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1225
  • Last Login:Today at 06:15:21 pm
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #32 on: June 01, 2016, 11:41:55 am »
I have an Operation Arkansas Cleanup in progress, fairly very low priority but ongoing nonetheless. This should probably be finished before work on USAAR begins. It's mostly checking to make sure point labels are copacetic, and whatever else I notice that needs attention along the way.
I've added a guide to my color code scheme to help make sense out of the posts in that thread & similar ones.
That said, I'd probably be grateful to have the state taken off my hands.

Multiplexes:
I never did an Operation Multiplex for Arkansas, and it's possible that there are broken I/US concurrencies, as in Oklahoma ("Point drift", where coords along the multiplexes are off by the tiniest amount). However, I did look at one random segment of I-40 / US70, and that was fine. So it could be that things are okay, my small unscientific sample size notwithstanding. Maybe Tim straightened out all the multiplexes when AR was one of his states back in the CHM days.

A few notes:
• I'd started putting together a list of routes (county-by-county) by looking over the county maps, and did 23/76 counties. No real intent to start developing them though. I can provide the list if it'd help out.
• Lots of disconnected segments of the same route number, that may or may not be related. So, lots of City/Abbrevs will be needed. There could be some signed multiplexes along I/US (or other state) routes. There could be unsigned/implied multiplexes. I anticipate headaches. Probably, we won't even know how many exactly there are, which counties connect to which others, and which is the "primary" segment of each that doesn't a City/Abbrev, until all the work is drafted. I was envisioning just adding a City/Abbrev to all routes with >1 segment while work was in progress, then finding the longest segment of each and dropping the City/Abbrev.
• There are many, MANY, AR980s, and they all seem to serve airports. I've found 11 so far, and there are bound to be many others. I haven't checked on whether these are signed or not. I think, if they DO all serve airports (which looks likely), it might be neato to use the airport codes for the Abbrevs, though that's never been an official/approved convention. Just a thought.
• AR likes its US hwy spurs. I've found a few more of them not in the HB, and likely more will be uncovered as the state routes are put together. US 62 Spur (Pyatt) is signed. US 65 Spur (Eudora) looks like it's not. I haven't checked out US 63 Spur (Moro Bay State Park).
« Last Edit: June 01, 2016, 11:47:16 am by yakra »

Offline si404

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 634
  • Last Login:Today at 03:23:37 am
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #33 on: June 01, 2016, 12:05:23 pm »
usala is basically frozen and barely started. mwasleski is the maintainer of Lousiana.

Offline si404

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 634
  • Last Login:Today at 03:23:37 am
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #34 on: June 09, 2016, 01:23:46 pm »
updated map



(only dealing with highest level systems, ie not counting secondary highway systems in these tallies)
Active systems in 45.5 of 68 regions (67%): NB, NS, NT, ON, PE, YT, AZ, CT, DC, DE, GU, HI, IA, ID, IL, KS, KY (half), MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MP, MT, NC, ND, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TX, UT, VI, VT, WA, WI, WV
Preview systems in 8.5 of 68 regions (12.5%): AB, BC, AK, CO, IN, KY (half), SC, VA, WY
Devel systems in 5.1 of 68 regions (7.5%): MB, AS, CA, FL, GA, LA (a small part)
No systems in 8.9 of 68 regions (13%): NL, QC, SK, AL, AR, LA (most), MS, PR, TN

Over two thirds of the way there!

Offline si404

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 634
  • Last Login:Today at 03:23:37 am
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #35 on: February 01, 2017, 08:35:47 am »
update


Ignoring any secondary systems and what not:
Active systems in 49 of 68 regions (72%): AB, AZ, CO, CT, DC, DE, GU, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MP, MT, NB, NC, ND, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NS, NT, NY, OH, OK, ON, OR, PA, PE, RI, SD, TX, UT, VI, VT, WA, WI, WV, YT
Preview systems in 8 of 68 regions (12%): AK, BC, GA, MB, SC, TN, VA, WY
Devel systems in 4.1 of 68 regions (6%): AS, CA, FL, LA (a small part), NL
No systems in 6.9 of 68 regions (10%): AL, AR, LA (most), MS, PR, QC, SK

We're almost three fourths of the way there (2 more systems activated and we will be)!

Offline 7/8

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 30
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Today at 07:13:19 pm
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #36 on: May 06, 2017, 12:55:08 pm »
Should Ontario's secondary (500's and 600's) and tertiary (800's) highways be added to the OP? I'm guessing these will be included separately from the King's Highway system. I'm hoping these will eventually be added, though I know it will be a while before that happens.

Offline Duke87

  • TM Collaborator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 117
  • Last Login:April 23, 2018, 08:03:14 pm
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #37 on: May 10, 2017, 08:45:40 pm »
Should Ontario's secondary (500's and 600's) and tertiary (800's) highways be added to the OP? I'm guessing these will be included separately from the King's Highway system. I'm hoping these will eventually be added, though I know it will be a while before that happens.

There is precedent for making a system of secondary routes (Montana), so I see no reason why not for those - but yes, it would be a separate system.

Offline si404

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 634
  • Last Login:Today at 03:23:37 am
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #38 on: May 30, 2017, 07:07:44 am »
Active systems in 51 of 68 regions (75%): AB, AZ, BC, CO, CT, DC, DE, GU, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MP, MT, NB, NC, ND, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NS, NT, NY, OH, OK, ON, OR, PA, PE, RI, SD, TX, UT, VI, VT, WA, WI, WV, WY, YT
Preview systems in 10 of 68 regions (15%): AK, CA, GA, MB, NL, PR, QC, SC, TN, VA
Devel systems in 2.1 of 68 regions (3%): AS, FL, LA (a small part)
No systems in 4.9 of 68 regions (7%): AL, AR, LA (most), MS, SK

Offline JJBers

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:January 14, 2018, 08:01:00 pm
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #39 on: June 08, 2017, 07:20:22 pm »
Active systems in 51 of 68 regions (75%): AB, AZ, BC, CO, CT, DC, DE, GU, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MP, MT, NB, NC, ND, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NS, NT, NY, OH, OK, ON, OR, PA, PE, RI, SD, TX, UT, VI, VT, WA, WI, WV, WY, YT
Preview systems in 10 of 68 regions (15%): AK, CA, GA, MB, NL, PR, QC, SC, TN, VA
Devel systems in 2.1 of 68 regions (3%): AS, FL, LA (a small part)
No systems in 4.9 of 68 regions (7%): AL, AR, LA (most), MS, SK
Now active in VA...
From Eastern Connecticut

Offline mariethefoxy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12
  • Last Login:November 07, 2017, 03:52:41 pm
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #40 on: July 25, 2017, 12:28:47 am »
are there plans to add in the 500 series county routes in New Jersey? they use a system that keeps the same number across county lines unlike the 600 and 700 routes which are unique only in their respective county

Offline mapcat

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 524
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 05:56:08 pm
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #41 on: July 25, 2017, 11:19:31 am »
are there plans to add in the 500 series county routes in New Jersey? they use a system that keeps the same number across county lines unlike the 600 and 700 routes which are unique only in their respective county
Maybe in the distant future, but many of us fear opening up a can of worms by including any system designated "county". I'd personally be against it even though I've got mileage on many of them.
Clinched:

Offline voyager105

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
  • Last Login:April 11, 2018, 09:50:32 pm
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #42 on: July 25, 2017, 09:38:58 pm »
There are a select few signed county routes in West Virginia that act mostly like state routes, the best examples being CR 21 (Old US 21) and CR 857 in Morgantown. There are probably 7-8 like these in the state, my question is do these have a possibility of getting added sometime?

Offline mapcat

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 524
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 05:56:08 pm
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #43 on: July 25, 2017, 10:29:06 pm »
Even less so than the ones in New Jersey, most likely. They are county routes, right? Not state secondary? Since the fractional routes are also county routes (IIRC), it would be hard to justify counting some and not all.
Clinched:

Offline voyager105

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
  • Last Login:April 11, 2018, 09:50:32 pm
Re: Canada and USA state/province/territorial highways master thread
« Reply #44 on: July 25, 2017, 10:36:42 pm »
Even less so than the ones in New Jersey, most likely. They are county routes, right? Not state secondary? Since the fractional routes are also county routes (IIRC), it would be hard to justify counting some and not all.
Right, they are county routes, but a few in WV might as well be state routes for all intents and purposes. CR 21 for example runs through four different counties while keeping the same number, while 857 runs concurrent with US 119 at one part. Also, both of those plus a few others, are signed, which very rarely happens with county routes. There are other roads like 151 and 707 which get unusually high numbers for county routes and also get signed like a state route.