RHW (RealHighway) - Development and Support

[JoeST]

Yes there is... it is the NHP slope mod, found on the LEX....you will have to select from 3 that are included with that download tho... i chose the medium, because it sounded the most... well medium :p

Joe

[deathtopumpkins]

Thanks! I'll try it.

[debutterfly]

If you want to be realistic then you should have at most 5 meters...That's approximately 15 feet for you Americans  I've only seen one overpass that is over 15 feet high. It is a flyover ramp that connects I-465 South to I-74 East. (Note: it's angled at like 12.5 degrees and the speedlimit is only 25mph.). That ramp goes well over 28 feet high or 9.3 meters. Here's a linkie I-465 and I-70 Goto "Street View" and look at how high that ramp is.  Then look in the opposite direction.  One would be half (5 meters) and the other whole (10 meters) and there could be a third at 15 meters and if you're really getting up there  a fourth at 20 meters. Link's fixed.

[deathtopumpkins]

Your link doesn't work. It just takes you to the zoomed out view of the world, with nothing entered.
I think 5 would be pushing it...

[videosean]

The overpass at Alum Creek & 70 is at least double the height of most overpasses around here - as I drive through this curve on the lower (east bound) part of the curve I almost feel like I'm flying over the 2 story houses below.

Just to the south 70 crosses over Livingston and that's normal height to my eye.  It's also on a bit of an angle I think due to the curve.  Could it's height have anything to do with the railroad it passes over just to the west?  Possibly more height needed for freight rail cars than for semi trucks?

[deathtopumpkins]

You're correct about more height needed for rail cars. We have two overpasses here right next each other, one over the CSX yard before the Newport News Marine Terminal (where most Appalachian coal is shipped out of) and the other over Jefferson Blvd., and the rail overpass in much higher... It's kind of interesting to drive over. Two different heights.

[videosean]

I went looking for pictures and haven't found any of the really high overpass but that railroad passes over Livingston:
(source)
I think that helps explain the extra height of the I-70 bridge in that area.  It has to cross a railroad that is already high enough to cross surface streets.  The pic is the Main street crossing which runs parallel to Livingston to the north.

Here's a pic taken driving west on 70 over the Alum Creek bridge. Since you can't see the houses that would be off the right side of the road I don't think it gives a really good idea as to how high it is.  Come to think of it I think there are some 3 story apartment buildings in that area (harder to see from the highway as they're off the high side of the curve) that the highway's surface is well above.

[deathtopumpkins]

videosean, did you get my PM?

[Tarkus]

Well, I'm not sure about the height issue at the moment.  I will say I am all for realistic scaling, but there will be logistical issues to worry about with regards to the elevated NAM pieces and how they interact with the Elevated and High Elevated RHWs if they are scaled differently.  If the normal Elevated RHW were to be scaled at 7.5m or so, and the High Elevated were scaled at 15m, it would mean that the High Elevated RHW could not go over the existing NAM elevated pieces, or the Maxis elevated networks.  There would need to be a new set of 7.5m NAM puzzle pieces made.  I'm worried if we were to go that route, it'd open up a can-of-worms that doesn't need to be opened. 

Also, a lot of times, real-world models extend down below the elevated road's surface by at least a meter or two from what I've seen.  That's another thing that needs to be taken into consideration.

And Rechi, the limit for the polygon count is fairly strict--if you go over that range, pieces of the model start disappearing or the game begins to behave strangely.  I'd wait on doing lower ones at the moment, and you can go ahead and send the .3ds models whenever you're ready, and I'll see what I can do with them (though it may be a couple of days--real life is hectic right now for me).  I'll PM you my e-mail address.  They'll be implemented in a draggable fashion, just like the ground RHW.

-Alex (Tarkus)

[mightygoose]

well you could use the 7.5m to go under all existing elevated networks???

[Tarkus]

well you could use the 7.5m to go under all existing elevated networks???

True, but then there will need to be 7.5m elevated pieces.

-Alex (Tarkus)

[simplaya1234]

How did you kind all those sunken highway or road pieces? They're all functional too right? Can you send me the links to download all those sunken roads, etc.?

well i know buddybud toyed with half height elevated pieces as well as half height sunken pieces and those looked fine with automata running around....

<INSERT IMAGES HERE>

but that was all lost in a hard drive disaster, but it is possible and automata as you can see is definately not an issue, i dont know about whether you would still need subway or not but hey.... theres your proof of concept study, and the possibilities if combined with the MIS are well, ......think about it.......

How did you kind all those sunken highway or road pieces? They're all functional too right? Can you send me the links to download all those sunken roads, etc.?


MOD Edit:
There's no reason to be shouting! Text reduced to normal size.
/RippleJet

[RippleJet]

How did you kind all those sunken highway or road pieces? They're all functional too right? Can you send me the links to download all those sunken roads, etc.?

simplaya1234, you quoted mightygoose, but did you read what he said as well?

but that was all lost in a hard drive disaster, but it is possible and automata as you can see is definately not an issue, i dont know about whether you would still need subway or not but hey.... theres your proof of concept study, and the possibilities if combined with the MIS are well, ......think about it.......

[allan_kuan1992]

This is not the best place to request these creations. This was stressed before...

The NAM team refuses to use transit-enabled lots as using lots of them can mess up the traffic simulator.
buddybud made most of the creations as lots, and some of them as transit-enabled lots (as well as some overhanging prop lots). Also, many of the creations became corrupted after a hard drive glitch.

- Allan Kuan

[Ennedi]

Alex, sorry for being off-topic, but please remove some old messages from your inbox, I'd like to contact with you regarding official SC4D business 

Thank you for doing it yesterday, but it seems you receive a lot of messages every day  Please do it again 
Adam

[Meastro444]

Mightygoose, those are all lots, no puzzle pieces involved, except for that highway ramp.

[The REAL Tolsome]

@Tarkus: ....but Tarkus I make it not for nothing, it's really hard and long work and I must spent my full spare time (and this is really not much) to make the pieces. So, when you really want Elevated RHW, I make it, sure, but than it must be sure, that you take it. When something is wrong or must be other, no problem, say it to me and I do it other, but I spent not my time for nothing.

@all: The Maxis Highway and all elevated Highways are 15,57... m high, so I make the RHW 8 m high. And we need not HIGH Elevated RHW, because the normal or the HERHW can go under the NAM pieces. With the HRHW and a HRWH-2 we can do a new level of connections, so we can make combination with level 15,5 and level 8.

[Shadow Assassin]

Did the RHW-2 MIS ramp interfaces. More coming soon...

I also updated the puzzle pieces so they would meet seamlessly with the RHW-2.

[Rodney99]

OMG!!! Those RHW2 ramps are looking incredible and im loving the double painted white lines as the new texture Although in Western Australia the Mainroads department have adopted a new standard replacing the double painted line with a thick single painted line. I like the old standard better tho 

[ehbk2006]

Superb in every way.