RHW (RealHighway) - Development and Support

[DAB_City]

Sounds good... I see what you mean about FLUPS, since they are often used parallel under other networks. Are there plans for expanding RHW FLUPs? You guys seem to be doing so much!   

[Bergulf]

Hey..
A new problem occured with the flexSPUI.
After making the flexSPUI, I had RHW-6s underneath it with a single tile apart. But right under the bridge RHW-2 occured.
Please don't tell me that this mentioned in the redme. 

Image of the problem:


-Bergulf

[ivo_su]

^^^
Maybe if  you close with one tiles ramps so that no empty space between them and the  sails of the RHW-6S should occur and you will solve your problem.

- Ivo

[Lach77]

^^^
Maybe if  you close with one tiles ramps so that no empty space between them and the  sails of the RHW-6S should occur and you will solve your problem.

- Ivo

Another thing I might point out is that SPUI intersections are usually much tighter than that in real life. The reason is safety as large intersections like the the one you have become quite dangerous as cars that run a late amber are at risk of not clearing the intersection by the time traffic starts entering from the other direction. Larger intersections like the one you have are more typically served by diamond interchanges. So by their nature SPUIs need to be very tight with both sets of onramps/offramps as close together as possible. Not sure if that helps you but if you like realistic highways than that is another reason to follow Ivo's advice 

[mike3775]

^^^
Maybe if  you close with one tiles ramps so that no empty space between them and the  sails of the RHW-6S should occur and you will solve your problem.

- Ivo

Another thing I might point out is that SPUI intersections are usually much tighter than that in real life. The reason is safety as large intersections like the the one you have become quite dangerous as cars that run a late amber are at risk of not clearing the intersection by the time traffic starts entering from the other direction. Larger intersections like the one you have are more typically served by diamond interchanges. So by their nature SPUIs need to be very tight with both sets of onramps/offramps as close together as possible. Not sure if that helps you but if you like realistic highways than that is another reason to follow Ivo's advice 

The problem with that though, is if you make anything larger than an RHW-4, you can't use the SPUI, and many use larger RHW's because of traffic issues.  When I build RHW's, I tend to start at RHW-4, but the traffic increases so it has to be upgraded to a RHW-6, then 8 and finally 10.  And SPUI's are great as they are compact and do not take up much space, and by the time highways are due to be upgraded, development around the RHW has more than likely occurred.

[MandelSoft]

^^ I've used a SPUI for a RHW-6C and it works just fine...

[TEG24601]

I came across the problem when working with SPUI.  Usually, at least AFAIK, I just went over the segment with RHW and it corrected itself.

[cowcorn]

^^^ If you are willing to take one more tile on each side you could also build a very good looking DDI.

Edit : You could actually build a DDI in the same footprint as what you have done since the one-way on-lope puzzle pieces don't require an extra flat tile before the RHW. Plus, the DDI would have better flow, even though it's only cosmetic.

Edit 2 : Disregard. You would need an extra tile. for the overhang of the 6S.

[mike3775]

^^ I've used a SPUI for a RHW-6C and it works just fine...

I have to.  What TEG posted will usually fix the problem.  I have had that happen on a few occasions as well. 

[roadgeek]

Two Laned Flex Flys would be perfect, I mean after all the new add ons I figured out how to use and access with the newest RHW release, I personally think only Two Laned Flex-Fly's are missing.

L2 RHW-4 FlexFlys have been considered and have already been prototyped. The one problem is that you can't have a 90-deg curve for RHW that's 4x4 because it would be too small; You'd have to either go with a larger footprint for a 90-deg or just use two 45-deg curves instead.

I can imagine how hard they must be to make, if they're not already in works.

And I thought ground-level FlexCurves would be even harder... 

Man I can't wait!
Ya gotta add in L2 and L3 Flexcurves also!

Wish I had the time to do some of that myself; not that I would have a clue how to do it.

Oh well, CAN'T WAIT!!!!!

[Will12]

What about L2 to L0 diagonal transitions for RHW 4, 6S/C and MIS L2

[GDO29Anagram]

What about L2 to L0 diagonal transitions for RHW 4, 6S/C and MIS L2

Pretty much any request that involves adding new things will have to wait until Project 0E is completed. And I'm sure Alex would say the same thing.

[Tarkus]

Man I can't wait!
Ya gotta add in L2 and L3 Flexcurves also!

L2 FLEXCurve = "FLEXFly" . . . it already exists.   The plans are to port FLEXFly/FLEXCurve to other levels as well . . . L3 would be particularly useful for stacks, and L1 would have utility for T-interchanges.

What about L2 to L0 diagonal transitions for RHW 4, 6S/C and MIS L2

They've been planned for some time, but they're model-based items . . . and diagonal to boot.  We don't even have diagonal ERHW-6S or ERHW-6C yet at this point.  First things first.

And as Ganaram rightly guessed, at this juncture in development, our response to most feature inquiries/requests will be along the lines of "it's in the plans and/or we'll look into it, but Project 0E comes first".

-Alex

[ivo_su]

In this line of thought to what stage the project is E0 and would you show something new from him as you were doing previously. I also have countless questions to you, but no sense of them because everything will sooner or later the time comes. And I'm sure that great stability is the highest priority so keep.

- Ivo

[Blue Lightning]

Turns out the geometry of the Type A FLEXFly curves won't allow for stack interchanges beyond that of RHW-2 (T interchanges exempt). They simply aren't big enough.

However, using two Type B FLEXFly curves (still under development) will do the trick, but will also have to rely on diagonal RHW coding/puzzle pieces.

[noahclem]

Type-B FLEXFly will be an incredibly useful development!! Some day.... 

Hope all's going well on the 0E end of things 

[DAB_City]

Type-B FLEXFly will be an incredibly useful development!! Some day.... 

Hope all's going well on the 0E end of things 

What's the difference [between Types A and B FLEXFly]?

[noahclem]

I believe type B is 45 degrees

[Tarkus]

Type B is indeed 45-degrees.

In this line of thought to what stage the project is E0 and would you show something new from him as you were doing previously.

We don't really have anything new to show at the moment on the 0E front.  It has gotten to the point at which I was able to compile a very rough build to pass onto the rest of the team about a week ago, but that's about it.  I haven't done much modding since then.

The main barriers to clear with it are the re-implementation of diagonal Wider RHWs, and overpasses involving override RHWs.

-Alex

[Haljackey]

So I was working with HOV lane markings for the first time and I got an idea:



Currently there are only HOV markings for the inner lanes of the RHW 6/8-C. Since the inner lanes are on their own tile, could it be possible to restrict certain types of traffic from using it? There are Bus blockers and HOV TE-lots that exist, allowing similar things to be done to road and one-way road networks.

-Essentially by making these lots for the RHW 'C' networks, only buses could be allowed to use the diamond lanes, allowing users to create their own perfectly functioning HOV bus lanes.

Of course buses can still use the other lanes but it would make the highway more realistic. Worth thinking about?