RHW (RealHighway) - Development and Support

[io_bg]

OMG, looks awesome! I want it too!  
Edit: why not bring these pics to the new page?

Some PR shots:







I'm such a tease, aren't I? 

[metarvo]

Like I always say, teasing yet pleasing!    There's even a FA-RHW-6.

[ecoba]

Some PR shots:







I'm such a tease, aren't I? 

I know this has already been quoted, but I had some words on it.

This is why I wish I was SA. If was Daniel, then I would already have it, see.

This is one of the greatest things I am itching for in RHW 4. It seems that the RHW has become the primary networks for highways.

And SA are those also teasers from Alentene? You can't keep us waiting much longer you know.

Ethan

[Pat]

Daniel you are soooooo mean lol but dang we love it!!!!

[joelyboy911]

Ah. I want it sooo bad!


I can wait..... but not very long.

[Jack Bauer]

The 3-way wides looks great! will there be a 4 and 5-way versions?

[pagenotfound]

I.
LOVE.
THIS.

[shanghai kid]

I love the 3-way wide, as it can be used on a hill, to be used a truck lane whitch trucks who are extra heavy uses to not slow down the traffic(it's well used here in Norway on hills so that the slow going heavy trucks uses this extra lane to drive up hills while letting other traffic keep their speed).

[Battlecat]

That's a very cool setup for the wider highway transition, it looks very realistic!  It would be really cool to see something like that for the basic RHW (1 lane each direction).  In narrow mountains in BC we have a lot of narrow highways which widen to add a single passing lane in one direction only for a couple kilometers, (so 2 lanes in one direction and one lane in the other).  I have no idea if what I describe is technically possible, but certainly something I'd love to see someday.  Keep up the great work, I'm really looking forward to the next release! 

[kings_niners]

I have a request to make for Version 4, although I know you guys have capped the width of the RHW at a five lane width, is it possible to have a tempoary 6 lane, or auxilary lane when merging a RHW-4 with a larger RHW-8 or 10. It seems silly and a bit unrealistic to always have to merge a RHW-4 down to an MIS inorder for it to merge on to the new highway. The piece I'm thinking of would be similar to that of the RHW/MIS-1 Exit Ramp C, and then one that would either end it/ start it. Just thought I'd throw this idea out there see if anyone else has a similar desire for such a piece, and as always great job NAM team on the progress being made on the newest version.

[Korot]

Well, If that would be done, soon everybody wants that RHW-12 to become fully fledged, having it's own interchange pieces and such, and then another person pops up, asking for a RHW-14, and so on and so on. Though what might be possible is a pieces that merges a RHW-8 and a RHW-4 to a RHW-10, adding one lane to the side and merging the other, somewhat like the RHW-6 to 2 RHW-4's piece. However, if this piece is made, I also suggest C & D ramps for RHW-6 to 10.

Regards,
Korot

[joelyboy911]

In a sense (and I think this discussion has been had) only one more override needs to be created to have *infinitely wide* RHWs. Since each tile you drag is a 1 tile network, and each starter piece has all the overrides it needs, it could *theoretically* be done, without a huge amount more work.

I think.

[deathtopumpkins]

Joelyboy is correct. In case anybody hasn't noticed, the inside tile for the wider RHWs is exactly the same for each network. Thus all that is needed is a middle tile, and you could create a 100-lane RHW if you so desired.

[Tarkus]

And from that, if the outer tiles are kept the same width as the RHW-8 and RHW-10, because I "modularized" their ramp interface pieces by leaving the inner tile off, they can be re-used for an RHW-14 (the smallest requiring a middle tile) and RHW-16, RHW-20 and RHW-22, and so on.  (RHW-8+6x and RHW-10+6x, if you want to get mathematical.)

The 6S pieces had to be set up a little differently due to how that network lays, but if RHW-12 interfaces are made to the same specs as the RHW-8 and 10 interfaces, leaving the inner tile off, it would be possible to modularize it and thus use it for an RHW-18, RHW-24, etc.  It'd even be possible to do something like this for the "C" networks, in theory.

The issue, however, would be diagonals and fractional angles.  Modularizing those is more difficult.

I am interested in revisiting this concept at some point down the line.  I don't see it happening with the next release, as we've got enough stuff in semi-complete state now that needs to be finished, and I already have some idea of where to focus development on RHW Release 5.

And all that being said, I do have a development pic here for the first time in quite awhile . . . an inside Type B ramp interface for the RHW-4.  You'll notice there's a small hunk missing out of it--that'll get filled in with an overhang when everything's done.



-Alex

[nerdly_dood]

That is, frankly, marvelous.

My one suggestion is that with ALL merge lanes, no matter what side they're on, the dotted line is always white. And with onramps, the yellow left-shoulder line turns white shortly before it turns into the dotted line. I've got an example of a left-onramp near my city up in Google Earth, but the image quality isn't that great so you can't really tell the line colors. But what I'm thinking of is something like this (although it's somewhat crude, it does its job well enough)

[Tarkus]

My one suggestion is that with ALL merge lanes, no matter what side they're on, the dotted line is always white. And with onramps, the yellow left-shoulder line turns white shortly before it turns into the dotted line.

You're right on the left-shoulder "channelizing" line--just consulted the MUTCD and found that one under Section 3B.05.  The dotted line is not always white, however, as illustrated by Exit 31 on I-84 in Oregon.  Both sides of the interchange use the dashed yellow lines.  I also checked the I-105/I-5 interchange here in Eugene, and it has white lines as in your illustration (which, actually, isn't crude at all ).  I think I'll probably switch it to white as I would hazard it's more common.

-Alex

[Ryan B.]

Alex, your MUTCD specialist confirms.    

[deathtopumpkins]

Well Alex, that's just another way Oregon has to be unique.  Though I must say I do like the yellow lines, from a functional standpoint the white makes more sense.

And the whole thing looks great with those shiny new textures. 

[Shadow Assassin]

Very nice work, Alex!

It took me a few seconds to notice that was an Inside B-type ramp though.

[nerdly_dood]

The reason why I called my modifications crude is that while turning the lines grayscale, I also changed some surrounding pavement grayscale - and as the pavement has a very slight brown tint, I figured someone's monitor/eye combination would be good enough to notice.

Also, if wide diagonal chevrons are used, as they often are in Virginia (but not on the one left-entrance near my city - it's not a consistent rule) then the yellow line turns white a few feet before the first diagonal stripe, as in the image above it turns white a few feet back from where the lane merges.

These yellow/white line things apply both to the yellow line on the left-hand side of the main travel lanes, with left-hand entrances and exits, as well as on the left-hand side of regular right-hand on/offramps, regardless of the number of lanes.