Started by Pat, March 13, 2007, 01:18:14 PM
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: burgsabre87 on December 17, 2007, 07:30:39 PMLooks good to me! One way the interchange could be improved is by getting rid of one-half of the interchange. There are two connections there; one isn't needed.
Quote from: blade2k5 on December 17, 2007, 07:42:14 PMWonderful update Pat...I love those intersections, nice job on them. Can't wait to see more
Quote from: suplado! on December 17, 2007, 08:09:20 PMwow -- those are really cool intersections...
Quote from: thundercrack83 on December 17, 2007, 08:33:26 PMLove the interchange, my friend! You've got all the elements--the overpass, the railroad, the exits--great work! I'll be looking forward to seeing more!
Quote from: Tarkus on December 17, 2007, 09:17:56 PMPat, nice job there on that interchange--it's really quite a creative design. I can't wait to see what you do with the fun new toys that we're going to be unleashing on the community here very, very soon. -Alex
Quote from: Jmouse on December 17, 2007, 10:13:28 PMWoo hoo, I win, I win! Kinda sorta?I've never seen a configuration like that, but who knows, you may have engineers all over the world slapping their foreheads by Thursday afternoon! I do have a question though (and in case I haven't said it at least 357 times, I'm certainly no transport-system ace!). Why did you change from roads to streets in what is likely to be a very busy interchange? Also, are those parallel roads under the avenue (based on the yellow arrows)? If so, why not an avenue?I'm so glad we have experts here at SC4D who are willing to help the rest of us! Until next time...Joan
Quote from: Ennedi on December 18, 2007, 05:22:06 AMYour interchange is really cool, Pat! @burgsabre87: You are right and not in the same time Yes, because streets cross the RHW, it is possible to go on the viaduct in two ways - turning right from the RHW and turning left too. But I think most drivers will turn right, because this way doesn't cause any collisions. Without street crossings on RHW this interchange would work as a typical cloverleaf one. But there are sometimes such connections between two lanes of a highway, especially for service vehicles, road maintenance and other special purposes. If it is this case, everything is OK Some time passes from my last visit in Waterfalls and I must say I love your Edmonton River and lake, Pat! I think your landscape arranging is better with every update, and it can be easy seen you like this kind of work!Excellent work my friend!
Quote from: TheTeaCat on December 18, 2007, 10:55:41 AMAnother great update you have done here Ok heres my 2pence worth.I agree with the other comments here about the junction but.....ok here goes .. it seems very cramped and cluttered to me. Personally I would not like to have to make a 90 turn off any highway onto a road as the traffic behind approaches quickly and I would be slowing down seems a recipe for disaster and those are the things you my friend get to deal with. Any entrance/exit to a motorway would be on an angle. Could not the same effect have been created with the avenue intersecting the RHW? Or looking at it again ... how about still having the elevated section but with slip roads off the avenue before it elevates which cross the RHW and rejoin after the elevated section? This would achieve the same effect without the puzzle pieces being used and no u turns eitherimages removed to make easy transitions - patAs I say thats my 2 pence worth but praise is due for attempting to use something you are not used too Laters TTCedit: thumbs added
Quote from: kimcar on December 18, 2007, 11:38:47 AMSo sorry for not posting often. Still like your work , only missed time . As your river falls- Very nice i guess i gonna use your trick one of these day. As the interchange it`s well done too , even if i don`t use then i like to see what`s new . Good to have engineers like you keep it up and have fun.
Quote from: FrankU on December 19, 2007, 01:17:18 AMI must agree with TheTeaCat.Your interchange looks nice, but is a bit elaborate. TTC's version looks much more realistic. It is easier, there are no u-turns to make and I think traffic flow will be much easier. Besides that; it is much cheaper, because there is just a simple bridge to build. In SC4 this is not really an issue, but you might ask the next civil enigneer around you: in real life this is crucial.Another thing: would it not be nice to raise the rural highway (if that is what I see), so that it also crosses the railway? I think that an avenue or highway should never have a level intersection with a railroad. Takes too much time and is too risky...Nice work though.
Quote from: Starmanw402007 on December 20, 2007, 11:31:20 AMI enjoyed viewing those waterfalls Pat. Keep Up the Great work with the project. I'll be keeping intouch. Might use them for all my cities.Your Friend;Mayor Of Steven's Point & Maxiston(Proud To Be Cities Of Sim Nation!)
Quote from: paroch on December 20, 2007, 12:36:15 PMHi Pat,Nice updates. Fantastic use of the TPW - you and Tooheys are my two masters that I look to for inspiration, ideas and directiopn - thankyou.And for the junction. I like the sheer elaborateness of your zigzag junction. It reminds me of a bridge in the town I grew up - it was only a footbridge but involved similar angles. Tea Cat's example is certainly more practical and realistic - but that's what makes SC4 fun - you can create stuff that is a bit different. Hmnnnn, it's given ,me some crazy junction ideas I must try out myself now......
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on December 20, 2007, 07:00:49 PMNice work on the interchange. Though, as TTC said, it's a little cramped, but I've seen worse in RL.
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on December 23, 2007, 12:32:37 AMThe bridges fit in... you chose well. Nice work with the ploppable water... practice pays off real well, eh?
Quote from: paroch on December 23, 2007, 01:07:19 AMHey Pat,First off, I've just noticed your user name has changed - you've dropped the "firefghtr" bit. I guess it's easier to say Nice update. That high arch bridge looks fantastic there. And the river banks looks great too, You make those white rocks work well. I like the deep sharp valley/canyon - see you're giving me even more ideas of thinkgs I must try out. Any chance you can create the time for me to do them as well The port is nice and it looks functional - but your rivers are just WAY up there.If we don't catch up before..... Have a great Christmas Pat.
Quote from: bat on December 23, 2007, 02:48:12 AMWonderful port there! And nice details on the river! Also congrats on more than 3200 posts!
Quote from: Jmouse on December 23, 2007, 08:05:24 AMThanks for the explanation, Pat, but it will take more than a simple question to keep you level! Anyway, you can be sure I'll keep tabs on the next step. I love it when players try new things and share their work with the community.The arched bridge over the canyon has the old-fashioned look I like, and the port is looking good as well.Hope you and your family have a well-deserved Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.Until next time...Joan
Quote from: thundercrack83 on December 23, 2007, 10:49:44 AMWow!Big Shur looks amazing, my friend! I love the river in the canyon with the bridge...stunning work! It's always a pleasure to see an update here!
Quote from: blade2k5 on December 23, 2007, 12:15:42 PMNice update...the bridges look like they fit right in with the scenery and you're getting pretty darn good with ploppable water.....Can't wait for update #46
Quote from: kimcar on December 23, 2007, 03:30:08 PM Oh yeh. Great work on this river. Very well done the layout too.Nice bridge that you use too. Keep it up
Page created in 0.228 seconds with 34 queries.