Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

[Official] Myriad Islands Tunnel

82 replies to this topic
BenMillard
  • BenMillard

    aka Cerbera

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Jun 2002
  • None

#61

Posted 25 January 2007 - 01:50 AM Edited by Cerbera, 25 January 2007 - 04:19 AM.

I've made a basic layered water.dat file. This removes water from underneath the northern sea beds. I'm posting it here so any testers in the Myriad IRC channel who get the tunnel test can also get the test water.

Here's a cullzone to prevent rain and stuff below sea level (such as in the tunnels):
CODE
cull

# CULL zone edges are calculated correctly, then aligned to nearest unit in-game.
# http://www.gtaforums.com/index.php?showtopic=202532&view=findpost&p=3973453

# PosX, PosY, PosZ, 0, SizeY, BottomZ, SizeX, 0, TopZ, Flags, 0 [Direction X, Direction Y, Direction Z, Axis Offset]
# (X,Y,Z) to (X,Y,Z)
# SizeX:  ()
# SizeY:  ()
# PosX:
# PosY:
# PosZ:
# BottomZ:
# TopZ:

# Cull weather particles below 0z for locO_G's tunnel demo:
0, 0, -50, 0, 6000, -100, 6000, 0, 0, 8, 0

end
Replacing the cull section of locotun.ipl from the test pack with that.

(EDIT) See also the overview pic in MEd, taken by GForce.

mickarrow
  • mickarrow

    ---

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Feb 2004

#62

Posted 25 January 2007 - 03:18 PM

Any particular reason why you chose not to reply to my questions? I know you read them...

That water.dat is ok, but a cut-out of the islands is imo the first step that should be taken. Conflicts may arise with water levels, unless of course you postpone all the elevation of the tunnels towards the exits/entrances, or well inside the cut-out boundaries...


@locO: Very nice work once again. Do continue xmas.gif

BenMillard
  • BenMillard

    aka Cerbera

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Jun 2002
  • None

#63

Posted 26 January 2007 - 12:59 AM Edited by Cerbera, 26 January 2007 - 01:40 AM.

Mick: I think this topic has covered lane widths for the various routes in the past. I've added lane widths to the most recent plan to make this easier to find:
user posted image
1024 x 1024, 114kB.

Better water is necessary at some point, yes. I've created a water.dat Management topic for people to arrange that, since it's pretty a big task. From what I've read in other topics, that's an area you could help with?

Now for the main course.

Your plan for a gold route intersection on illRES would require massive changes to the landscape, further delaying the release of the northern islands. Also, the design you supplied was not good:
  1. Driving up tall exit ramps in order to go down into a deep tunnel network is just silly. You opposed my suggestion to use an underpass and even that wouldn't solve all the following issues.
  2. Only allows SW-bound traffic from illRES to enter the tunnel network (exiting SE along the tunnels).
  3. Only allows NW-bound traffic from the tunnels to enter illRES (exiting NE along the 4-lane surface road).
  4. The exit ramps you proposed spell bad news for the roads inside the crater:
    1. The existing crossroad just North of the proposed interchange would need to be demolished.
    2. The existing T-junction just North of that would need to be demolished.
    3. The remaining cross-road inside the crater could remain. But the roads from it would now either be:
      1. Dead ends (stop at whatever gets built on either side of the crater).
      2. Run through the crater's right via tunnels to reach other existing roads.
  5. Adding the missing exit ramps would have meant:
    1. The existing cross-road on the 4-lane surface just South of the proposed interchange would need to be demolished.
    2. The west coast road would need to be re-routed through a tunnel to reach the South illRES road network.
    3. The stub left over from the other half of the demolished crossroad is the only place the West coast road could resurface.
  6. As the illRES connector (gold route) is 2 lanes, a any grade-separated interchange is massively over-capacity for the amount of traffic it would serve.
(You can respond to these points by number to save quoting, if you really need to.)

Your plan would have required pretty much the whole of the illRES crater (and much of the area South of it) to be scrapped for an interchange which makes no sense. That's obviously not going to happen!

The plans have been available for review for a long time, all of them showing a simple junction on illRES. You've waited too long to put forward an alternative design and it has a lot of faults with it. Sorry.

mickarrow
  • mickarrow

    ---

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Feb 2004

#64

Posted 26 January 2007 - 03:25 PM

Massive changes? Hardly. There's the never released connector you showed on irc and that's about it. Filling up a gap and making 2 new ones in a mesh is not a 24 hour job. The only tedious task remaining is the re-lighting , wich idd would be necessary for my crab-way concept, but isn't necessary right away.
And about that 'further delay' comment, I honestly think you shouldn't talk about delaying MI's progress. Planning is good and necessary up to a point. If mainly G and locO didn't came to aid, MI's progress would still be all talk.
Now, there's no reason why this should delay a release of a cut up, lighted island. The 0.6, or even the 0.99, is not a finished product. It's a WIP. Roads have been altered in the past and will be altered in the future too.

Now for those points:

1. You may find it silly, I find it entertaining. The rollercoaster effect (dark to light and vice versa) is an example of something where I believe gameplay should win over realism.
2 and 3 : Could be solved by using a basic X-junction, where the tunnels' arms reach the existing road.
4.: Funny, when you talk about 'demolished' it almost sounds as if we're using bulldozers in stead of mouses and keyboards. But anyway, I don't see why those roads can't co-exist. The crab-arms could meet the crater's main road next to the existing X-junction, thus making a larger X-junction.
4i en 4ii are really far fetched, since the basic roadwork in the crater will still exist.
5. You've jumped on an unnecessary train of thought here. There's absolutely no call for eiter a, b or c ....
6. Again with the realism confused.gif But even so, all we know now, is that the crater will house G's gas-station. Who knows what other people might build there that'll require mass transport... I think questioning the need or use of a certain road should go to illcom in stead of empty land.


QUOTE
You can respond to these points by number to save quoting, if you really need to

Euhm, yeah I really need to. Last time I checked the 'C' in CMP stands for 'Community', not 'Cerbies'.


So for the end of your post, no I don't see any reason why you'd want to do a make-over of the entire crater when it's basically just an alternative connection for the current lay-out.
And that 'it's not going to happen' and 'You waited too long'... jeez, moddeling of the main tunnels has started only recently. The gold tunnel was even posted less then a month ago. As a frequent IRC-user I assume you're familiar with one of my favourite quotes I often hear there: 'Nothing is set in stone.' MI is WIP and most likely always will be.

ow, and I believe we've also got an issue with the grey route. If you'd really want to go for realism, I think a 4 lane tunnel entrance located at the end of the road coming from illsub is a rather unbelievable transition.

Snow Racer
  • Snow Racer

    Member Title

  • Feroci Racing
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2003
  • Norway

#65

Posted 30 January 2007 - 05:14 AM

QUOTE (Cerb)
hi SR, GForce and locO_G tell me you've given up making your tunnel
is that true?


yes... I hope that it will be no problem for you

BenMillard
  • BenMillard

    aka Cerbera

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Jun 2002
  • None

#66

Posted 30 January 2007 - 06:14 AM

Snow Racer:
OK, well at least now I know for sure. LocO_G has offered to finish it, which should make the interchange between grey and green easier to manage.

Mick:
illRES was released in MISA 0.5, including the crater and road network. Since then, illspirit has developed them and added the illRES and illURB tunnel connectors. These updates have recently been sliced up by GForce and put in-game. He has made alpha test releases of them in the IRC channel.

The area you want replaced is real. It has taken time to arrange and effort to make, involving many people.
  1. This isn't GTA Mario Kart. The landscape and tunnels have to be plausible else they will stick out like a sore thumb. The authenticity of areas like your illSUB mansions makes the game more immersive -- we should strive for more of that.

    You'd get a "light to dark" transition using any type of surface connection into the tunnels, including the one already made.
  2. What is a "basic X-junction"? A sketch might help, along with pictures of real-world instances (if there are any).
  3. Same as 2.
  4. The point is real people's time and effort gets wasted if things have to be rebuilt every time has a half-baked idea. The current tunnel plan respects existing work and lot owners since it was developed with those who own affected areas.

    The interchange you proposed doesn't fit without removing the junctions I listed. Sketching your new proposal would be helpful.
  5. Solving 2 and 3 would require the things in 5 for any grade separated interchange in that area, as far as I can tell.
  6. The tunnel feeding illRES is one lane per direction. That's not enough for grade separation to make sense in the first place.

mickarrow
  • mickarrow

    ---

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Feb 2004

#67

Posted 30 January 2007 - 11:30 PM

1. It isn't Mario Kart, but it isn't a car driving simulator either. As GTA goes, it's something in the middle of those two. I believe making at least one of the tunnel exits more fun then just a hole in the ground, tends more towards the foresaid middle point.
As for the light/dark transition, I believe there's a misunderstanding. I used those words as a help to pin point the point where the tunnel would get the rollercoaster effect, that's why I placed them in between brackets after the word 'rollercoaster'.
2. With a basic X-junction I mean exactly that. 2 or more roads crossing each other like the lines in the letter 'X'. Since english is not my mother tongue, I thought describing this as an X-junction would do the trick. Apparently not.
4. If that's the case I know some bridges that need to be demolished. The designed illsub bridge for example. That bridge replaced illspirit's original bridge, wich in your words, was a disrespect for the existing work and means illspirit wasted his time and effort in making the original bridge.
5. I don't know about grade seperation, but here's a quick sketch of what I meant.( I realize I only showed some crappy Paint sketches on irc, so now the non-irc'ers can see what I'm actually talking about)

user posted image



ow, and there's still the illsub thing (read previous posts)...

BenMillard
  • BenMillard

    aka Cerbera

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Jun 2002
  • None

#68

Posted 31 January 2007 - 07:53 AM Edited by Cerbera, 01 February 2007 - 04:55 AM.

It's nice to try and add more interest to the road network.
  1. GTA is much more like a driving simulator than Mario Kart. The point of the game is to give a realistic, immersive environment to play in however you like.
  2. OK, I understand now. That's called a "crossroad" in English. You're doing a better job in English than I could do in your language!
  3. No pictures of crossroads which use big, one-lane flyovers for a tunnel network, then? tounge.gif
  4. Firstly, the illSUB bridges aren't part of the tunnel planning. Also, the original "bridges" were intentionally temporary so people could reach illSUB before the final bridges were made. Once the final bridges were made, they were not demolished.

    My understanding is that the illRES connector is the final version so the baseland can be lit properly.
  5. Grade separated. This crossroad is not grade separated, so I wonder:
    1. Why would big exit ramps have been made when it's just a normal crossroad?
    2. The connection is with a tunnel, which is UNDERGROUND. Why would the connection to it be running high up inside a ridge? notify.gif
    3. The tunnel for illRES only has one lane in each direction. Why would such an extravagant set of ramps be built for a normal crossroad?
    4. There are already one crossroad and two T-junctions inside the crater. Why would another crossroad be added when an existing T-junction could simply be turned into a crossroad?
What illspirit has made for illRES which is the result of a lot of planning during which you could have said something. Replacing it with something silly doesn't benefit MISA, imho. If a much better idea is put forward, maybe MISA contributors could put up with the delays. I'm not sure how illspirit would react, though.

If you'd like some inspiration for a better plan, Boston's 'Big Dig' is somewhat like the MISA network. It features a few partially underground interchanges. Best pictures I found during my research were:Some more information about its construction can be found on Road Traffic Technology's Big Dig, Central Artery/Tunnel Project, Boston.

TRN4L
  • TRN4L

    Novus Ordo Seclorum

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jul 2003

#69

Posted 31 January 2007 - 05:26 PM

I watched a TV show about this tunnel network wink.gif Its pretty funky although I cant say it related to MI at all. Not to say anything is wrong with the plan for our tunnels but i DO feel that FUN>Real and REAL≠Fun although real can ≈fun tounge.gif hope you've enjoyed today's mathematics seminar. he he j/k but yeah sometimes its more fun to be a little more over the top sometimes.

aad
  • aad

    3d artist

  • Feroci Racing
  • Joined: 15 Mar 2004
  • None

#70

Posted 01 February 2007 - 08:01 AM

i gues making it look real, but giving our own twist to it will be the best thing to do, just like rockstar did. And realism is anywhere near gta its just about the fun and the gameplay, so i just hope that these intersections, railways etc will be combined nicely so crousing with the train, or speeding trough the tunnels will be a lot of fun to do and not just driving and watching but just enjoying the stuff that has been made i gues.

Cya

Aad.

mickarrow
  • mickarrow

    ---

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Feb 2004

#71

Posted 02 February 2007 - 02:24 PM

QUOTE
What illspirit has made for illRES which is the result of a lot of planning during which you could have said something.


And when should I have said somehing? It's only in the pic you posted januari 23 I see a vague blur of a road connecting the tunnel to the existing roads. Prior to that date all there was is just a yellow line on the map.
So what delay? As far as I know, the tunnels are not completed yet, neither are the train tracks. Both these things have been going on for months now, and all of a sudden need to be done asap?? Yes, we all like it be done, but the quick change in paste strikes me a bit awkard.

In reply to the points you mention, I'd say read my previous replies. My answer to most of them is allready written. The only new thing I see wich could be idd a bit awkard is 5c. An answer to this could be to make the yellow tunnel 4 lane as well. I believe no work has been done on that part yet, so no problem there.
Another solution could be to make a road ring around the inside of the crater, but at the same height as my proposed tunnel exit. On and off ramps could be made on either side of the crater, where one set of them would be the crab-arms. Now I know this won't happen, 'cause this IS a major changement of the existing landscape wich would require a lot of time to make. Another wacky, but fun idea.

When I told this wacky idea on irc (I even called it wacky myself), the only response I got from you was that it wouldn't be made because illy allready made the connector. I believe I made clear that this alone doesn't really is a point. Since then you've come up with many, many new points to prove me wrong, but as I see it, apart from 5c, they all boil down to personal opinion and taste.


ow, and there's still the illsub thing (read previous posts)...

BenMillard
  • BenMillard

    aka Cerbera

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Jun 2002
  • None

#72

Posted 03 February 2007 - 10:41 AM

It's strange you're telling me to read your previous posts when I have done and replied to them in detail. Even stranger is the fact you haven't read mine - I address the illSUB point and explained how much has already been made.

It's also strange that you view "personal opinion and taste" as being insufficient justification, yet that's the whole basis of your proposal to change the illRES connector.

TRN4L
  • TRN4L

    Novus Ordo Seclorum

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jul 2003

#73

Posted 03 February 2007 - 04:46 PM

Agree to disagree you two, cause weather you like it or not, neither of you decides what the final is going to look like. So if you want it to look a certain way i suggest you make your appeal to LocO_G cause he's the one doing the modeling.

locO G
  • locO G

    LocO by name... But keeping an even keel.

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Oct 2005

#74

Posted 04 February 2007 - 03:05 AM

Tunnel Update

Here's a postcard of WIP...

user posted image

There's still a lot of work left to do.
I'll keep you all posted.


Bret_HartvsSting
  • Bret_HartvsSting

    Homeboy

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2006

#75

Posted 04 February 2007 - 08:20 AM

Where is the general discussion for Myriad Islands. I know this isn't the right place but I can't find it. I have an architectural suggestion. Plus I also wouldn't mind getting involved in building some stuff (if the help is needed).

BenMillard
  • BenMillard

    aka Cerbera

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Jun 2002
  • None

#76

Posted 04 February 2007 - 08:27 AM Edited by Cerbera, 04 February 2007 - 08:52 AM.

Actually TRN, that's not the case. The tunnels are a major part of MISA's infrastructure; they'll have big effect on how people move between then islands. As such, everyone deserved a say in how they are made. The plan is the result of folding all the viewpoints together, so it suits as many people as possible in a quality way while respecting existing work. It's a tough balance to strike.

Mickarrow's idea sucks, for starters. But also, it can't be folded in without losing that balance.


Loco, I think you've made a right pig's ear of that interchange. Won't somebody think of the weaving?! nervous.gif

But seriously, why didn't you make it as a Four Level Stack, as has been agreed in the plan for ages? You've just ignored all the people who worked together to establish the design. And that contradicts the very spirit of Myriad Islands.

If you refuse to follow the plan, I'll have to find someone else. Someone who will respect the input of the many people who put it together. I really hoped you were going to be that person...but it sure looks like I was wrong! It's not the first time I've misjudged someone's character, either. dontgetit.gif

mickarrow
  • mickarrow

    ---

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Feb 2004

#77

Posted 04 February 2007 - 12:19 PM Edited by mickarrow, 04 February 2007 - 12:56 PM.

QUOTE (mickarrow)
If you'd really want to go for realism, I think a 4 lane tunnel entrance located at the end of the road coming from illsub is a rather unbelievable transition.


QUOTE (Cerbera)
I address the illSUB point and explained how much has already been made.


So: That's it eh? Ha, it's the connector-story all over again. What I find strange is that your realism-card gets only played when it suits you. Oh well...


QUOTE (Cerbera)
It's also strange that you view "personal opinion and taste" as being insufficient justification, yet that's the whole basis of your proposal to change the illRES connector.

That's not strange, that's the basis of a discussion. You have your opinion and I have mine. That's what I said, it all boils down to either of us having another personal opinion and taste. Unlike 5c, wich is a mere, though real, technical problem that has nothing to do with what taste you have.
So please, stop trying to twist my words. By now you should know I'd just twist em back...


And then there's this rather funny quote:
QUOTE (Cerbera)
If you refuse to follow the plan, I'll have to find someone else.

I wonder who's next on your enlistment list

BenMillard
  • BenMillard

    aka Cerbera

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Jun 2002
  • None

#78

Posted 04 February 2007 - 01:59 PM

Oh, I thought you were referring to the illSUB bridges again, sorry. smile.gif The illCOM tunnel exit isn't located at the end of the illSUB road. It's a separate road on the opposite side of a junction.

I don't have anyone else lined up for making the tunnel route. That's why I'm so keen that locO_G does it properly. If he chooses to ignore the plan, his tunnels can't be used. Maybe he just didn't understand the interchange, since plan isn't terribly clear. I'd be happy to clarify it for him and hope that's all which is needed.

TRN4L
  • TRN4L

    Novus Ordo Seclorum

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jul 2003

#79

Posted 04 February 2007 - 11:57 PM Edited by TRN4L, 05 February 2007 - 12:59 AM.

QUOTE (Cerbera @ Feb 4 2007, 01:27)
Loco, I think you've made a right pig's ear of that interchange. Won't somebody think of the weaving?! nervous.gif

But seriously, why didn't you make it as a Four Level Stack, as has been agreed in the plan for ages? You've just ignored all the people who worked together to establish the design. And that contradicts the very spirit of Myriad Islands.

If you refuse to follow the plan, I'll have to find someone else. Someone who will respect the input of the many people who put it together. I really hoped you were going to be that person...but it sure looks like I was wrong! It's not the first time I've misjudged someone's character, either. dontgetit.gif

Cerbera, you really might want to choose your words more carefully. I don't know if this is your intention but this response sounds really disrespectful. For you to ASSUME that loco ignored the plans. Also, for you to ASSUME that this has any negative bearing of the character of a man who's been nothing but humble, gracious, respectful and patient. If this were aimed at me, I would feel slighted to say the least. Loco_G and Gforce carried this mod through to where it is now. (with .5 out and .6 on the way) If it were not for Loco, I would never have came back. Also before you say it disrespects the opinion of those who helped plan the tunnels, why don't you get the public's opinion. I did. Some of them at least. GTAuron, Gforce, Loco, Dertyjerzian and myself think there is nothing wrong with the layout of the interchange. Loco agrees that if the majority of the community thinks it should be changed then he will change it. (Another statement which shows his character, since you felt it necessary to attack said character.) Also what right do you have to threaten giving the job to someone else? Last time i checked that wasn't your job. You also said: "...And that contradicts the very spirit of Myriad Islands." Well let me be the one to tell you that you questioning loco's character and threatening to, in essence, void all the days of work he's done to the tunnels (which got NO WHERE beyond the planning phase until he stepped up and took the reigns) INARGUABLY contradicts the spirit of MI. If none of this is your intention then I owe you an apology for suggesting that it may be. Even if it isnt, you still owe Loco an apology, because that's how it comes across.

dertyjerzian
  • dertyjerzian

    I have a custom member title. I call it "Solid Snake"

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 08 Jun 2005

#80

Posted 05 February 2007 - 01:06 AM

QUOTE (Cerbera @ Feb 4 2007, 08:59)
Oh, I thought you were referring to the illSUB bridges again, sorry. smile.gif The illCOM tunnel exit isn't located at the end of the illSUB road. It's a separate road on the opposite side of a junction.

I don't have anyone else lined up for making the tunnel route. That's why I'm so keen that locO_G does it properly. If he chooses to ignore the plan, his tunnels can't be used. Maybe he just didn't understand the interchange, since plan isn't terribly clear. I'd be happy to clarify it for him and hope that's all which is needed.

I've seen these tunnels that locO_G made, and hear yee, hear yee: I like them. I'm not a part of myriad at the moment, but I like those tunnels. A lot, Cerb confused.gif They look fantastical. Very real, though he swears there's a lot more work to do tounge.gif

GREAT work locO!

BenMillard
  • BenMillard

    aka Cerbera

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Jun 2002
  • None

#81

Posted 05 February 2007 - 09:39 AM Edited by Cerbera, 07 February 2007 - 12:31 PM.

TRN: If locO_G can't figure out what the plan shows (which is entirely understandable) then I can clarify it for him. From what you've said, it sounds like he knows the interchange doesn't match the plan and is still keeping it that way? If that's the case, he's intentionally ignoring the plan.

You've got a chicken-and-egg problem in your message. The plan is the result of the community's involvement over the past few months; it represents the best consensus we could achieve. LocO_G has taken it on, for which I'm grateful. But then choosing deviate significantly from what took so much time to get agreement on? That's clearly not the way to do it.

Of course there needs to be some wiggle room where the rubber meets the road. But his interchange has some big mistakes in it, like multiple exit ramps onto the main carriageway in close proximity. These are planned as merges and diverges on the ramps themselves, which is much tidier and more authentic.

I hope this was just a misunderstanding, and that all he needs is a better explanation of how it should be.

(EDIT) Whew, it did all turn out to be a misunderstanding! I've provided locO_G with a better plan and we've worked through some of the finer detail at length. He'll be attempting a test to this more detailed sketch:
user posted image
311 x 770, 35kB - fuzzy JPG.
311 x 770, 250kB - crisp PNG.

By keeping this as a classic Four Level Stack, only 4 levels are needed:
  1. Grey route (vertical in picture).
  2. Blue exchange tunnels.
  3. Red exchange tunnels.
  4. Green route (horizontal in picture).
This minimises the gradient needed for each movement. The brown exit tunnels run between level 1 and 4 over their length.

(EDIT2) Fixed link to large PNG image.

dertyjerzian
  • dertyjerzian

    I have a custom member title. I call it "Solid Snake"

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 08 Jun 2005

#82

Posted 07 February 2007 - 10:59 AM

QUOTE (Cerbera @ Feb 5 2007, 04:39)
TRN: If locO_G can't figure out what the plan shows (which is entirely understandable) then I can clarify it for him. From what you've said, it sounds like he knows the interchange doesn't match the plan and is still keeping it that way? If that's the case, he's intentionally ignoring the plan.

He's not intentionally ignoring the plan dude. It seems to me like everyone in irc is supporting his model of the interchange. I like it. I know for a fact the rest of the folks who are active in irc when I am do too.

If I were to assume the most logical explanation from what I've seen and been a part of in this particular area of discussion, I would assume that locO modeled the interchange as a test or a try-out to run by everyone, and everyone liked it so much we've begun pushing him and supporting him to continue it.

The truth is, this is not some blatant hijack of the design. locO has a very modest attitude about it that I've seen, and more over he doesn't seem to want to ruffle your feathers. It seems, to me, that he is concerned even that maybe it will be better to go with a four stack.

Hopefully, the rest of us have swayed him to keep going with HIS tunnel, cause it rocks and is art and is beautiful and is from his heart straight to MI, god willing.

If you want to make things interesting though, MI is in New Jersey, and so am I... There ain't no four stacks in NJ. There is however an interchange MUCH like the one locO modeled if you can be arsed to google-earth around the south west side of Jersey for the Delaware River end of I-295 wink.gif Also, pretty much... the rest of.. interchanges in jersey are Clover designs. So now we have new fire and another option to stew about <3

Just my two cents, because locO spent some good time on that model. It's well done.

BenMillard
  • BenMillard

    aka Cerbera

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Jun 2002
  • None

#83

Posted 07 February 2007 - 11:57 AM Edited by Cerbera, 07 February 2007 - 02:20 PM.

We sorted it out on IRC, Derty. The end of the message you quoted gave the details. Your suspicions are correct, it was just a misunderstanding. I jumped to the wrong conclusion.

The tunnels are just test pieces at the moment. LG understands that building them is an iterative process to make sure everything works out before the final build. He's graciously agreed to go along with that, although he has doubts that this design will fit. I guess we'll see while testing the more detailed design.

Cloverleaf interchanges are unsafe due to the order of their exit and entrance ramps. They also take up even more area than a Four Level Stack, so there's less chance of it fitting. Recent highway projects I've researched are avoiding them (including the underground ones).

Maybe a Partialy Unrolled Cloverleaf or a Whirlpool intechange or some custom layout will end up being needed. We'll have see how the Four Level Stack tests go. smile.gif




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users