Author Topic: usasc: South Carolina State highways  (Read 2448 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mapmikey

  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 279
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 06:43:34 pm
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
usasc: South Carolina State highways
« on: February 20, 2016, 03:05:07 pm »
Returning from my trip to Texas, I am trying to figure out if I need to do anything with any SC .wpt files to have the system put into official development and peer review.

Based on this aaforums thread - http://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=17029.0 it seems like it was decided that the small number on non-conforming labels weren't worth fixing...

Mike
Clinched:
I: 4 12 16 17 20 26 27 30 59 64 66 68 72 73 ew74 77 78 79 82 83 ew84 85 ew86 e88 97 99
US: 4 6N 9W 11E 11W 13 15 19W 21 44 46 48 58 72 92 113 117 123 130 158 163 176 178 192 206 209 211 219 220 221 222 258 264 276 290 311 319 322 340 360 378 401 ew422 501 521 522 601 701
PriSystems: VA, DE

Offline mapcat

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 616
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 11:20:12 pm
Re: usasc: South Carolina State highways
« Reply #1 on: February 20, 2016, 07:23:51 pm »
Regardless of whether they're worth fixing, I think we should move this system up to preview. The label issue could still be debated while the peer review is proceeding.
Clinched:

Offline Jim

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1188
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 10:56:31 pm
Re: usasc: South Carolina State highways
« Reply #2 on: February 23, 2016, 01:11:14 pm »
Having heard no objections to the move, I am promoting usasc to preview status.  I hope to run a site update shortly that will include it.

Offline si404

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 686
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 05:39:39 pm
Re: usasc: South Carolina State highways
« Reply #3 on: June 08, 2016, 08:23:27 am »
Having skimmed a few routes and getting frustrated by the 'show markers' function not working (hence why this isn't a more thorough review), they seem mostly fine.

One issue, however, is where (say State St on SC2) the road turns off a road onto another and you've labelled it with the road name that the highway was on, but turns off. Directional suffixes (ie StaSt_S) are surely needed as the state highway runs concurrent with the road of that name.

Offline Quidditch33

  • Milwaukeye
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:August 09, 2018, 12:14:08 am
  • I want to be the first one to collect them all!
    • Travel Mapping User Page
Re: usasc: South Carolina State highways
« Reply #4 on: June 08, 2016, 12:19:07 pm »
I agree with si404.

Thanks,
-The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step... on the gas.

Offline mapmikey

  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 279
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 06:43:34 pm
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: usasc: South Carolina State highways
« Reply #5 on: June 08, 2016, 08:16:56 pm »
A couple thoughts on this...

State St is the street SC 2 turns onto from Frink in the regular convention of directions.  Also, the amount of State St south of this intersection is 150 ft before the road is closed (i.e. it is not a real road).

There are, however, probably a few other examples like this in the SC set.  If what you are describing is what the policy is (best I can tell this is not covered in the CHM rules) then I will fix any that are pointed out to me...
Clinched:
I: 4 12 16 17 20 26 27 30 59 64 66 68 72 73 ew74 77 78 79 82 83 ew84 85 ew86 e88 97 99
US: 4 6N 9W 11E 11W 13 15 19W 21 44 46 48 58 72 92 113 117 123 130 158 163 176 178 192 206 209 211 219 220 221 222 258 264 276 290 311 319 322 340 360 378 401 ew422 501 521 522 601 701
PriSystems: VA, DE

Offline mapmikey

  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 279
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 06:43:34 pm
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: usasc: South Carolina State highways
« Reply #6 on: August 06, 2016, 02:57:07 pm »
The SC 5 CONNECTOR created by SC 5's reroute in Rock Hill a few years back is shown in GMSV to be fully posted at both SC 5/901 and SC 322.

A file was created for this and sent in for update...
Clinched:
I: 4 12 16 17 20 26 27 30 59 64 66 68 72 73 ew74 77 78 79 82 83 ew84 85 ew86 e88 97 99
US: 4 6N 9W 11E 11W 13 15 19W 21 44 46 48 58 72 92 113 117 123 130 158 163 176 178 192 206 209 211 219 220 221 222 258 264 276 290 311 319 322 340 360 378 401 ew422 501 521 522 601 701
PriSystems: VA, DE

Offline Jim

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1188
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 10:56:31 pm
Re: usasc: South Carolina State highways
« Reply #7 on: August 07, 2016, 02:17:03 pm »
The SC 5 CONNECTOR created by SC 5's reroute in Rock Hill a few years back is shown in GMSV to be fully posted at both SC 5/901 and SC 322.

A file was created for this and sent in for update...

Changes are now in.

Offline oscar

  • TM Collaborator
  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
  • Last Login:Today at 12:10:25 am
    • Hot Springs and Highways pages
Re: usasc: South Carolina State highways
« Reply #8 on: October 07, 2016, 10:55:29 pm »
For SC 19, SC118 => US1Trk/78Trk ?

SC118 would be OK if it weren't concurrent with the two US truck routes, which I think "outrank" the state route for waypoint labeling purposes. Also, when I edited my list file to add an SC 19 entry for my travels earlier today, I was initially thrown off by the current label.

Offline froggie

  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 303
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 08:16:21 pm
Re: usasc: South Carolina State highways
« Reply #9 on: October 09, 2016, 12:49:06 pm »
Given that, by and large, TRUCK US routes are not recognized by AASHTO, I feel that the state route would "outrank" the truck routes.

Offline mapmikey

  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 279
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 06:43:34 pm
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: usasc: South Carolina State highways
« Reply #10 on: October 09, 2016, 08:12:44 pm »
If I were to change it to a truck route it would be SC 19 TRUCK...

Note that none of the 3 truck routes that follow SC 118 are posted from SC 19 NB...only SC 118.

Clinched:
I: 4 12 16 17 20 26 27 30 59 64 66 68 72 73 ew74 77 78 79 82 83 ew84 85 ew86 e88 97 99
US: 4 6N 9W 11E 11W 13 15 19W 21 44 46 48 58 72 92 113 117 123 130 158 163 176 178 192 206 209 211 219 220 221 222 258 264 276 290 311 319 322 340 360 378 401 ew422 501 521 522 601 701
PriSystems: VA, DE

Offline theFXexpert

  • TM Collaborator
  • Jr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 88
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:February 22, 2017, 01:35:32 pm
Re: usasc: South Carolina State highways
« Reply #11 on: January 13, 2017, 10:02:26 am »
Other than copying over what's in usansf, Anything else needed to activate this?

Offline mapmikey

  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 279
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 06:43:34 pm
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: usasc: South Carolina State highways
« Reply #12 on: January 13, 2017, 03:20:40 pm »
Other than copying over what's in usansf, Anything else needed to activate this?

I don't know if anyone has done a complete review behind me...only a couple issues have been raised in this thread.

I was going to offer to review the Georgia set in exchange for a SC review, if nobody has committed to reviewing the Georgia routes...
Clinched:
I: 4 12 16 17 20 26 27 30 59 64 66 68 72 73 ew74 77 78 79 82 83 ew84 85 ew86 e88 97 99
US: 4 6N 9W 11E 11W 13 15 19W 21 44 46 48 58 72 92 113 117 123 130 158 163 176 178 192 206 209 211 219 220 221 222 258 264 276 290 311 319 322 340 360 378 401 ew422 501 521 522 601 701
PriSystems: VA, DE

Offline theFXexpert

  • TM Collaborator
  • Jr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 88
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:February 22, 2017, 01:35:32 pm
Re: usasc: South Carolina State highways
« Reply #13 on: January 17, 2017, 09:44:25 am »
I don't know if anyone has done a complete review behind me...only a couple issues have been raised in this thread.

I was going to offer to review the Georgia set in exchange for a SC review, if nobody has committed to reviewing the Georgia routes...
Nobody has yet. I can take a more thorough look at SC once I'm done getting the remaining GA routes uploaded unless someone wants to beat me to it. I assume review consists of making sure waypoint labels and locations are correct. Right?

Offline mapmikey

  • TM Collaborator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 279
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 06:43:34 pm
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: usasc: South Carolina State highways
« Reply #14 on: January 19, 2017, 09:15:10 pm »
Also checks for convention violations; doesn't need shaping points, etc.

When you complete the Georgia set I can look through it...
Clinched:
I: 4 12 16 17 20 26 27 30 59 64 66 68 72 73 ew74 77 78 79 82 83 ew84 85 ew86 e88 97 99
US: 4 6N 9W 11E 11W 13 15 19W 21 44 46 48 58 72 92 113 117 123 130 158 163 176 178 192 206 209 211 219 220 221 222 258 264 276 290 311 319 322 340 360 378 401 ew422 501 521 522 601 701
PriSystems: VA, DE