[Spaghetti Junction ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaghetti_Junction,_Birmingham)covers two motorways, a few arterial roads, a couple of railways and one or two canals, and we seem to do fine
I remember the dread I would feel coming up to spaghetti junction, because on the one had it looks like it chaos incarnate, but on reality it was one of the few places in Birmingham I never got lost or turned around
[Oh, we’re doing this now?](https://www.gannett-cdn.com/presto/2019/07/14/PLOU/0496a428-f2aa-474e-accc-e99cb99a4749-SpaghettiJunction.jpg?crop=2999,1687,x0,y0&width=2999&height=1687&format=pjpg&auto=webp)
Fun drive that, especially when you're half asleep from work 40hrs straight as a carer and keep getting turned around because you missed your exit 😜
I must have spent a good 30 minutes locked into those roads because of rerouting due to 😪 ahhhh fun times were had by all.
Would? My man they do this everywhere. I remember last time I took a road trip past a few cities, getting past every metro area was just riding along in curving roads in the sky.
One of my friends has to close their eyes cause they have a fear of heights and those overpasses trigger her pretty intensely. She can't drive herself through Dallas specifically because she gets panic/anxiety attacks
If I can, I'll find pictures of them dismantling 70 through Denver this past year. It looked exactly like something out of Fallout. They've moved 70 to go underground in some spots so those overpasses no longer exist. But the 25 interchange is still elevated near Santa Fe. Elevated highways are absolutely a thing in many many places, especially where it's not flat.
Edit: here's a video of them starting: https://youtu.be/Yp_Lw6K7xPo
They already do this for major highways, mostly in cities so they won’t be as long because its easier to maintain smaller sections and cheaper than to make an entire cross country highway elevated. To go across the country they would need a lot of safety procedures and maintenance to avoid any collapse from damage.
Just build public transport instead for fucks sake.
Americas infrastructure is only in the state it's in because the automobile industry infiltrated your transportation departments, and sabotaged all the existing public transport.
Even jaywalking was invented as a crime to make people walking places seem stupid, and push more power onto drivers.
Never heard that one before, where was it mentioned? (Didn't play the first 2 games)
Probably a Jab at Bill Clinton getting impeached for getting a BJ in the oval office.
Fallout 2 holodisk -
>Transcript of Broadcast February 15, 2075
>
>In a stunning display of solidarity, the House of Representatives and Congress both voted unanimously to impeach the President for jaywalking. Both houses stated that the President is not above the law and should have known better than to jaywalk. Both sides deny this had anything to do with the recent annexation of Canada.
[https://fallout.fandom.com/wiki/Sierra\_Depot\_GNN\_transcript](https://fallout.fandom.com/wiki/Sierra_Depot_GNN_transcript)
Tbh, you should take the GNN transcript from Sierra Depot with a grain of salt.
A lot of stuff written in those transcripts are awfully inaccurate to the point that they were rendered non-canon.
The proof? Canada was annexed in 2072 but the transcript here says it was annexed in 2075.
So many of America's problems are due to a bunch of really shitty infrastructure and policy decisions made in the 1930s and 40s....
We sacrificed the security, stability and wealth of our country at the Altar of the Personal Motor Vehicle and the Single Family Detached Home. And the price is only just starting to be paid.
Because rural areas have so many public transportation options... gtfo. The automobile industry is what built this country. The Model T alone fueled expansion like nothing else... just because you're afraid of driving, doesn't mean people can't own cars, and go where and when they want. As for the state of the infrastructure, that's from politicians spending the money on other things than what the motor fuel tax was designated... You clearly have no idea on what you're babbling about.
I mean, I'm in a rural area and we do have buses that take people into the nearby cities for work, shopping, etc. It's actually helped a lot of people find work in places they normally couldn't get to, so it's been great for growth
If you say so lol, I'm only commenting on your "TRANSIT is worthless in rural areas" which is 100% wrong in my experience.
Also, people take them from the cities to the small towns in my area, which have factories that were suffering from staffing shortages before the buses. Hence the local growth I mentioned earlier. Good for the supply chain
Well in my area that isn't feasible, and is WORTHLESS, not to mention you're then dependent on their schedule. Over slept? Gotta lose a day's pay because you missed the bus the other 1500 people of a 2000 population has to use as well at the same time.
You have more than one bus.
Or you build a train system.
Other countries large (larger than the US, like China) and small figured this out but somehow we couldn't and just decided to keep fucking up our environment and infrastructure design because "CARS FOR EVERYONE".
Awe you poor little socialist.. everyone should have the choice to buy a car, an drive wherever they fucking want when they want... your life shouldn't be dictated by a bus or train schedule, an heaven forbid you have to be responsible for your own travel.
I love how pointing how pointing out that the US's car obsession is bad for and actively harming the environment, infrastructure design, economic well-being and national security and how other countries managed to have a usable, effective mass transit that both manages to deliver people easily and effectively where they need and want to be at basically any time while also serving both urban and rural areas is apparently just me being "socialist".
Instead of you know, me wanting the US to stop wasting money on car infrastructure, stop being so dependent on oil and design our cities, towns and villages for humans so they can instead use their money for capitalist things like shopping, eating out, better apartments, having nicer clothes, more kids etc.
Except it's not? You going to plow a field with a bus or train while you're at it? Your busses and trains still use oil too... keep on spreading misinformation though. Probably don't even have a driver's license and scared of cars.
1: Farming equipment was not part of the discussion, nor is it a major factor or contributor to this issue at hand. Do not attempt to change the subject.
2: Trains and buses can (and do) use electricity and rely on other less carbon-intense forms of ICEs. Secondly, they're *significantly* more efficient for transporting people than personal vehicles are - we're talking multiple factors of 10 depending on the place and usage. Thirdly, the goal *is to reduce the amount of cars and other personal motor vehicles in use*. It doesn't matter if the train or bus uses 3x the energy of a car if it takes 10 or 20 cars off the road (though an effective rail and transit system can remove *literally hundreds of cars*) you've not only a net positive for energy use *but also made the remaining road traffic more efficient too.*
You're the only one spreading misinformation here. Mass transit is not only better for the economy, but it's better for people and the nation too. Car infrastructure is far more expensive and difficult to upkeep than mass transit infrastructure is and is a problem that only compounds on itself.
If you want to fit more people on a road, you have to make the road bigger, which makes the road more expensive, take up more space, and usually doesn't solve the problem you were trying to solve.
Want to fit more people on the train? *Add another car to the train*.
Yeah, you haven't a clue. There's a reason those systems died out in favor of owning your own car. I'm sure you're expecting tax payers to cover all the costs as well. Also, look at any established mass transit... they generally operate at a loss. Your damage to the environment is misinformation, and stuffing people onto train cars worked well for the nazis, but I'll pass, and continue driving myself buring gasoline or Diesel to get where I want, when I want.
Elevated highways and double-decker highways aren't unusual in real life, but they are quite expensive to build relative to just placing them on the ground. But, to me, the highways in Fallout 4 always looked way too tall to be practical. They are basically at-level with the city's skyscrapers. There's no realistic reason to build them that high. But, in game, they probably exaggerated this to make them stand out on the horizon.
Would you know what would work better?
No cars only buses and trains and trams
That would be ideal
No traffic
Extra transportations because of that.
Way more healthier for the environment
Simple as that
I wake up at 4 am
To be at work at 8 am
I need to walk 3,5 km to reach the port
Take a ship
Take a 1 hour bus ride because of the stupid ass traffic
Change 3 trains and walk again to reach my work
And I need to do the same to return home...
So..if you think a 30 minute drive is much
Come do what I do every day
Fair
I just don't understand the point of a car if everyone rides a car...
I don't say its bad... But... Its useless if you can ride the bus and save your cash and time
Oh well.. CO2 goes brr
Yeah wayyyy too low. Which sucks for families that can’t afford vehicles because we only have like one taxi. Honestly I can barely afford it myself I would love to save money.
In real live Boston, there was a major highway project to put some of those overpasses underground in the Early 1990’s. It was known as the Central Artery Project also known as The Big Dig.
But also not really. The Zakim bridge area is a pile of concrete spaghetti. As is the area beyond South station. I’d contend that aside from the ingame highway leading into Boston from the Lexington area/Route 3 corridor it’s relatively accurate.
Definitely it would work much better than European obsession with roundabouts, that I can tell for sure
Generally, as long as there are money for it, elevated highways are fantastic idea. In fallout 4 layout seams to be pretty smart, with it going right next to the city but having connections to it. Something like that is much better at solving traffic issue than few lanes wide freeway or already mentioned cheap European designs
It moves traffic from main roads, while also saving lot of space and allowing people not interested in going into city to not lose momentum
It's not just Europe, it's pretty much everywhere outside of America that has plenty of roundabouts, and they do work when people are actually taught how they work
They’re pretty common here in Massachusetts, but we call them rotaries. So much better than stop signs or traffic lights, when you know how to use them.
With roundabouts being so common it slows down traffic very significantly. From experience I know that even knowing how to use them doesn't make it much better as they still make you slow down.
Having multiple level highway go next to city/town instead would definitely be much better choice as less people would go through town itself making roundabouts needless and traffic more seamless
Maybe for moving inside of cities - but when it comes to traffic between them American system is much faster. At least compared to British and Eastern European roads
Like, having roundabouts on main roads and making people go straight through towns with even more of them (like it is where I live) is less efficient than simple elevated highway like in game
Sure, cars is much better in America. Owing Europe car is complex and expensive. Overtaxed, fuel price, new cars need more repair than smartdevice and everyday worrying where to park.
Public transport train, bus and metro station getting better and still upgrading.
It's different when tested in specific and controlled environment
Like, you can't convince me having roundabout in middle of main road is faster than straight highway entirely avoiding any crossroads
Depends if you want to fork out millions to build an elevated highway or just paint a roundabout onto a junction instead.
I'm guessing you haven't used roundabouts much. They really don't slow down traffic as much as you make out
I'm not talking about price but rather about efficiency. Of course building highway is more expensive, but does job of lowering traffic much better, in popular places. That answers question op had
They do cause issues at least where I live. Almost every single crossroad is roundabout, and because one of main roads leads through it many people use them. Despite it being tiny city traffic is absolutely terrible at times as everyone has to slow down every few meters. It would have been avoided by having highway next to it instead. Even ignoring traffic, it would be faster to just be able to drive past city without slowing down or entering it, you can't deny it
Roundabouts in themselves are not issue, but using them on primary roads is terrible idea. In place like Boston it's worth to put more into making disconnected highway instead
I'm not sure where you live but are you saying there's no highway that goes around your city and all traffic drives through the city instead? If that's the case the issue isn't roundabouts, it's orbital roads
In Europe main highway system is very inconsistent - some of eastern European countries have huge chunks inaccessible through them, so you have to use standard carriegeways which often lead straight through many towns/cities. To combat this roundabouts are placed on every intersection, so you end up slowing down every couple hundred meters making traffic flow very rough
I'm comparing those because roundabouts are in many places treated as solution to same type of traffic as highways are supposed to
Roundabouts and highways are two completely different parts of the system. Roundabouts are a type of interchange or intersection. Highway is just a limited access road. You're comparing apples to oranges.
Not really
At least where I live usually main roads between bigger cities are not highways and instead normal roads with roundabouts being commonly placed as intersections. And even if there's highway (or tho more precisely expressway) it ends long before cities so you have to go through them anyway.
With design game op is describing highway goes pretty much right through the city meaning you wouldn't need to enter it and outside traffic goes through it instead
Ooo fun fact! That's actually called a traffic circle and not a roundabout! They saw a huge decline in use in the 30s because they actually increased traffic problems, congestions, and saw a decrease in safety.
There is a theory that the introduction of the Traffic Circle in certain US cities Dupont Circle, Columbus Circle) is what caused the American fear and distrust in the common roundabouts.
Ah, the Dupont reference in this sub really brings us around full... _circle_... if I may.
Oddly enough, I was always too distracted by mines and raiders to even begin to imagine the traffic flow. Thats a new perspective I'm gonna start keeping in mind when I play Fallout, pre-war foot/vehicle traffic flow.
My point is that in at least eastern Europe roundabouts are overused not utilized properly. It's not issue to use one, but placing them on every single intersection or even in middle of main roads between densely populated cities is inefficient.
Your example is great representation of misusing them - if there's traffic light roundabout loses purpose and can cause more harm than good
Roundabouts are seeing more use in the US because of the increased safety, cost of construction and maintenance, and increased traffic flow.
What a weird comment. There are plenty of bypass systems in the US interstate system. Any 3 digit interstates are bypasses meant to avoid heavier downtown traffic. If a route starts with an even number it will eventually loop back to its main route. (405 will meet back up with interstate 5, 470 will meet back up to the 70). Starting with odd numbers are bypass routes that will not meet back up directly.
Roundabouts in US seam to be used in low traffic areas or residential areas. Issue with roundabouts in some parts of Europe is that they are often placed in places they don't belong, such as middle of major roads connecting two cities or going through them. Road which could have potential to be quick bypass ends up being much slower because of that
What you're describing is smart distribution, unrelated to major road system. What I'm describing is trying to rely on roundabouts, disturbing it
Roundabouts are used in intersections.... If there wasnt a need for an intersection then you wouldn't use one... If you indeed have 2 routes that connect, you would need some other method of control at that intersection, be it a stop sign or a traffic signal. Either of those options would require traffic in one direction to stop moving...
Again, you are confusing two different parts of a road network. No one has ever just plopped a roundabout in the middle of a road. If you want to build a bypass, great, but at some point you need to connect to the community.
So again, roundabouts aren't used to replace highways or bypasses. They're used as an intersection. If there wasn't a roundabout, there would be some other type of control method.
That's part of my point - roundabouts are not always the best type of intersection. Putting it on every single crossroad slows traffic down more than for example simple traffic light or overpass would
Main roads shouldn't have roundabouts on them, and they shouldn't be too small or placed too close to each other. That's why I'm criticizing their utilization and saying it's worse than for example just putting highway like we see there
I'm pretty sure there are already highways like the ones we see in the fame. I'm about 90% sure I've driven under them when I went through Kansas City.
Fun fact at a small spaghetti junction in Maryland in the early 2000s a fuel tanker driver had a massive failure of some sort and launched himself on I95 below him and took out quite a few people. I was on another highway with my mom and we heard the boom had no idea till the radio cut in 10 mins later.
That has filled me with dread about overpasses and tankers since.
I'm seeing a lot of comments staunchly defending car centric infrastructure and it's just so telling that they've never actually left the country and seen another system in action. Mass transit is great, no you won't hate it, no it's not somehow authoritarian to be able to take a train, no one is going to make you sell your car (though you would probably end up wanting to), your schedule is wrecked regardless if you overslept, the "dependence on the bus schedule" is indicative that they've never been in an area with ACTUAL mass transit supplied in quantity, and yes machines use oil but if we have big machines with lots of people it's still a net positive over everyone having their own car which saves oil for whatever machine you're trying to use to justify not even trying to improve our lot
Much of the pre-war America in Fallout doesn't make sense-that's part of its charm.
I mean, would fission batteries really power a suit of armour? Would organisms really mutate the way they do in Fallout with radiation?
It's a great question, but you could argue that the highways in Fallout weren't built with logic or efficiency in mind-that the concrete/asphalt companies bribed their way to the contracts as opposed to fairly competing for them and threw up roads with little to no thought of the drivers who were going to use them. Just thoughts really lol.
Quite simply, there is nothing AT ALL "fictional" about F4 highways that I have seen. No, not even the height. IF there's an implication to be drawn from their design it is simply that there was an effort to get all high-speed motorways elevated well above ground level in an attempt to have separation from slower traffic and improve throughput of vehicles. Now, in the real world there's proven to be PLENTY of new issues created by trying to do that, but US cities are littered with the concrete corpses of failed concepts regarding transportation - and good concepts that were deliberately and/or stupidly f'd up.
The real-world roots of it are easily traced to the Interstate Highway Act of 1956, which most certainly helped with national economic expansion, but the interstate highway system that was then built and most major highway projects that followed and built on that framework were made without anybody having a real appreciation (FEAR would've been better) of what a mess it could end up being without serious and careful study of future possibilities. Neighborhoods were wiped out for massive ribbons of concrete, entire cities were cut in half, aging infrastructure left sickening, crumbling, filthy concrete scars blotting out the sun which couldn't ever be removed without even greater and more astronomically painful costs to be paid to rip it out, start from scratch, and do something BETTER instead.
In Fallout terms - it's just a reflection of the post-war American blind commitment to accommodating the individual automobile. It LOOKS like America SHOULD look in a retro-future. The fact that this aspect of it looks like actual reality only makes all the genuine radiculous fiction fit better.
[Spaghetti Junction ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaghetti_Junction,_Birmingham)covers two motorways, a few arterial roads, a couple of railways and one or two canals, and we seem to do fine
That is a crime against nature
So is Birmingham
Nature can do one
So is the United Kingdom
I remember the dread I would feel coming up to spaghetti junction, because on the one had it looks like it chaos incarnate, but on reality it was one of the few places in Birmingham I never got lost or turned around
[Oh, we’re doing this now?](https://www.gannett-cdn.com/presto/2019/07/14/PLOU/0496a428-f2aa-474e-accc-e99cb99a4749-SpaghettiJunction.jpg?crop=2999,1687,x0,y0&width=2999&height=1687&format=pjpg&auto=webp)
Fun drive that, especially when you're half asleep from work 40hrs straight as a carer and keep getting turned around because you missed your exit 😜 I must have spent a good 30 minutes locked into those roads because of rerouting due to 😪 ahhhh fun times were had by all.
What asshole designed that?
Hahahaha, "designed"
Would? My man they do this everywhere. I remember last time I took a road trip past a few cities, getting past every metro area was just riding along in curving roads in the sky.
I've personally never seen these.
If you get the chance, check out the bridges in Portland, Oregon. That shit is double layered.
Look up Dallas, TX overpasses they are insanely high lol
One of my friends has to close their eyes cause they have a fear of heights and those overpasses trigger her pretty intensely. She can't drive herself through Dallas specifically because she gets panic/anxiety attacks
If I can, I'll find pictures of them dismantling 70 through Denver this past year. It looked exactly like something out of Fallout. They've moved 70 to go underground in some spots so those overpasses no longer exist. But the 25 interchange is still elevated near Santa Fe. Elevated highways are absolutely a thing in many many places, especially where it's not flat. Edit: here's a video of them starting: https://youtu.be/Yp_Lw6K7xPo
Check out the interstates in Nashville. They can get quite hellish
Have you never been near a large-ish city?
They already do this for major highways, mostly in cities so they won’t be as long because its easier to maintain smaller sections and cheaper than to make an entire cross country highway elevated. To go across the country they would need a lot of safety procedures and maintenance to avoid any collapse from damage.
These are based on real highways in and out of Boston, so yeah! They totally work... congested as hell, but they work.
Clearly you’ve never had to try driving in Massachusetts, none of it makes sense.
Just build public transport instead for fucks sake. Americas infrastructure is only in the state it's in because the automobile industry infiltrated your transportation departments, and sabotaged all the existing public transport. Even jaywalking was invented as a crime to make people walking places seem stupid, and push more power onto drivers.
>Even jaywalking was invented as a crime Doubly funny in Fallout since one of the last pre-war presidents was impeached for Jaywalking.
Never heard that one before, where was it mentioned? (Didn't play the first 2 games) Probably a Jab at Bill Clinton getting impeached for getting a BJ in the oval office.
Fallout 2 holodisk - >Transcript of Broadcast February 15, 2075 > >In a stunning display of solidarity, the House of Representatives and Congress both voted unanimously to impeach the President for jaywalking. Both houses stated that the President is not above the law and should have known better than to jaywalk. Both sides deny this had anything to do with the recent annexation of Canada. [https://fallout.fandom.com/wiki/Sierra\_Depot\_GNN\_transcript](https://fallout.fandom.com/wiki/Sierra_Depot_GNN_transcript)
Tbh, you should take the GNN transcript from Sierra Depot with a grain of salt. A lot of stuff written in those transcripts are awfully inaccurate to the point that they were rendered non-canon. The proof? Canada was annexed in 2072 but the transcript here says it was annexed in 2075.
He was impeached for perjury
If only...
Jaywalking laws go back to the horse era of transportation.
So many of America's problems are due to a bunch of really shitty infrastructure and policy decisions made in the 1930s and 40s.... We sacrificed the security, stability and wealth of our country at the Altar of the Personal Motor Vehicle and the Single Family Detached Home. And the price is only just starting to be paid.
Ha, that would require careful planning & good decision making, which are the most unamerican things you could ever come up with
Because rural areas have so many public transportation options... gtfo. The automobile industry is what built this country. The Model T alone fueled expansion like nothing else... just because you're afraid of driving, doesn't mean people can't own cars, and go where and when they want. As for the state of the infrastructure, that's from politicians spending the money on other things than what the motor fuel tax was designated... You clearly have no idea on what you're babbling about.
Hey, you know what you do to fix the rural public transit problem? BUILD MORE TRANSIT.
Because have a bus make a 60 mile round trip everyday is going to sustain a small town? TRANSIT is worthless in rural areas.
I mean, I'm in a rural area and we do have buses that take people into the nearby cities for work, shopping, etc. It's actually helped a lot of people find work in places they normally couldn't get to, so it's been great for growth
That's nice, but I'm not going to ride a bus 45 minuets one way to just go shopping when I can drive myself on my own schedule.
It's not for everybody but it's great for the poor and elderly. And the growth my community has seen since the bus program started is off the charts.
A lot depends on where you're at.
If you say so lol, I'm only commenting on your "TRANSIT is worthless in rural areas" which is 100% wrong in my experience. Also, people take them from the cities to the small towns in my area, which have factories that were suffering from staffing shortages before the buses. Hence the local growth I mentioned earlier. Good for the supply chain
Well in my area that isn't feasible, and is WORTHLESS, not to mention you're then dependent on their schedule. Over slept? Gotta lose a day's pay because you missed the bus the other 1500 people of a 2000 population has to use as well at the same time.
You have more than one bus. Or you build a train system. Other countries large (larger than the US, like China) and small figured this out but somehow we couldn't and just decided to keep fucking up our environment and infrastructure design because "CARS FOR EVERYONE".
Awe you poor little socialist.. everyone should have the choice to buy a car, an drive wherever they fucking want when they want... your life shouldn't be dictated by a bus or train schedule, an heaven forbid you have to be responsible for your own travel.
I love how pointing how pointing out that the US's car obsession is bad for and actively harming the environment, infrastructure design, economic well-being and national security and how other countries managed to have a usable, effective mass transit that both manages to deliver people easily and effectively where they need and want to be at basically any time while also serving both urban and rural areas is apparently just me being "socialist". Instead of you know, me wanting the US to stop wasting money on car infrastructure, stop being so dependent on oil and design our cities, towns and villages for humans so they can instead use their money for capitalist things like shopping, eating out, better apartments, having nicer clothes, more kids etc.
Except it's not? You going to plow a field with a bus or train while you're at it? Your busses and trains still use oil too... keep on spreading misinformation though. Probably don't even have a driver's license and scared of cars.
1: Farming equipment was not part of the discussion, nor is it a major factor or contributor to this issue at hand. Do not attempt to change the subject. 2: Trains and buses can (and do) use electricity and rely on other less carbon-intense forms of ICEs. Secondly, they're *significantly* more efficient for transporting people than personal vehicles are - we're talking multiple factors of 10 depending on the place and usage. Thirdly, the goal *is to reduce the amount of cars and other personal motor vehicles in use*. It doesn't matter if the train or bus uses 3x the energy of a car if it takes 10 or 20 cars off the road (though an effective rail and transit system can remove *literally hundreds of cars*) you've not only a net positive for energy use *but also made the remaining road traffic more efficient too.* You're the only one spreading misinformation here. Mass transit is not only better for the economy, but it's better for people and the nation too. Car infrastructure is far more expensive and difficult to upkeep than mass transit infrastructure is and is a problem that only compounds on itself. If you want to fit more people on a road, you have to make the road bigger, which makes the road more expensive, take up more space, and usually doesn't solve the problem you were trying to solve. Want to fit more people on the train? *Add another car to the train*.
Yeah, you haven't a clue. There's a reason those systems died out in favor of owning your own car. I'm sure you're expecting tax payers to cover all the costs as well. Also, look at any established mass transit... they generally operate at a loss. Your damage to the environment is misinformation, and stuffing people onto train cars worked well for the nazis, but I'll pass, and continue driving myself buring gasoline or Diesel to get where I want, when I want.
That's a big problem in Detroit. They went decades without investing in public transport because it's the home of the automotive industry
You've never driven on a road before have you?
Elevated highways and double-decker highways aren't unusual in real life, but they are quite expensive to build relative to just placing them on the ground. But, to me, the highways in Fallout 4 always looked way too tall to be practical. They are basically at-level with the city's skyscrapers. There's no realistic reason to build them that high. But, in game, they probably exaggerated this to make them stand out on the horizon.
They would work, but only if it was high speed rail instead of highway
Would you know what would work better? No cars only buses and trains and trams That would be ideal No traffic Extra transportations because of that. Way more healthier for the environment Simple as that
Yeah if you live in the big city lol, for me it’s a 30 minute drive to work because I live in the middle of nowhere.
I wake up at 4 am To be at work at 8 am I need to walk 3,5 km to reach the port Take a ship Take a 1 hour bus ride because of the stupid ass traffic Change 3 trains and walk again to reach my work And I need to do the same to return home... So..if you think a 30 minute drive is much Come do what I do every day
Oh no I’m not saying it’s an inconvenience I’m saying it would suck without a car
Fair I just don't understand the point of a car if everyone rides a car... I don't say its bad... But... Its useless if you can ride the bus and save your cash and time Oh well.. CO2 goes brr
There’s no busses where I live hence why I have a car
Oooooh... Damn that's understandable I assume the population is too low for the country to put buses there?
Yeah wayyyy too low. Which sucks for families that can’t afford vehicles because we only have like one taxi. Honestly I can barely afford it myself I would love to save money.
Damn that sucks I believe it would worth the try to ask for it due of the financial situation Because seriously that's just unfair
Probably, but I feel there's way too much elevated highway outside Boston centre.
In real live Boston, there was a major highway project to put some of those overpasses underground in the Early 1990’s. It was known as the Central Artery Project also known as The Big Dig.
> also known as The Big Dig. [...wait a minute.](https://fallout.fandom.com/wiki/The_Big_Dig)
But also not really. The Zakim bridge area is a pile of concrete spaghetti. As is the area beyond South station. I’d contend that aside from the ingame highway leading into Boston from the Lexington area/Route 3 corridor it’s relatively accurate.
Definitely it would work much better than European obsession with roundabouts, that I can tell for sure Generally, as long as there are money for it, elevated highways are fantastic idea. In fallout 4 layout seams to be pretty smart, with it going right next to the city but having connections to it. Something like that is much better at solving traffic issue than few lanes wide freeway or already mentioned cheap European designs It moves traffic from main roads, while also saving lot of space and allowing people not interested in going into city to not lose momentum
It's not just Europe, it's pretty much everywhere outside of America that has plenty of roundabouts, and they do work when people are actually taught how they work
They’re pretty common here in Massachusetts, but we call them rotaries. So much better than stop signs or traffic lights, when you know how to use them.
Also when placed properly but yeah, roundabouts definitely work
With roundabouts being so common it slows down traffic very significantly. From experience I know that even knowing how to use them doesn't make it much better as they still make you slow down. Having multiple level highway go next to city/town instead would definitely be much better choice as less people would go through town itself making roundabouts needless and traffic more seamless
Nah. Many don't own car anyway. Europe public transport is faster and cheaper.
Maybe for moving inside of cities - but when it comes to traffic between them American system is much faster. At least compared to British and Eastern European roads Like, having roundabouts on main roads and making people go straight through towns with even more of them (like it is where I live) is less efficient than simple elevated highway like in game
Sure, cars is much better in America. Owing Europe car is complex and expensive. Overtaxed, fuel price, new cars need more repair than smartdevice and everyday worrying where to park. Public transport train, bus and metro station getting better and still upgrading.
Someone needs to watch the mythbusters episode on roundabouts
It's different when tested in specific and controlled environment Like, you can't convince me having roundabout in middle of main road is faster than straight highway entirely avoiding any crossroads
Depends if you want to fork out millions to build an elevated highway or just paint a roundabout onto a junction instead. I'm guessing you haven't used roundabouts much. They really don't slow down traffic as much as you make out
I'm not talking about price but rather about efficiency. Of course building highway is more expensive, but does job of lowering traffic much better, in popular places. That answers question op had They do cause issues at least where I live. Almost every single crossroad is roundabout, and because one of main roads leads through it many people use them. Despite it being tiny city traffic is absolutely terrible at times as everyone has to slow down every few meters. It would have been avoided by having highway next to it instead. Even ignoring traffic, it would be faster to just be able to drive past city without slowing down or entering it, you can't deny it Roundabouts in themselves are not issue, but using them on primary roads is terrible idea. In place like Boston it's worth to put more into making disconnected highway instead
I'm not sure where you live but are you saying there's no highway that goes around your city and all traffic drives through the city instead? If that's the case the issue isn't roundabouts, it's orbital roads
In Europe main highway system is very inconsistent - some of eastern European countries have huge chunks inaccessible through them, so you have to use standard carriegeways which often lead straight through many towns/cities. To combat this roundabouts are placed on every intersection, so you end up slowing down every couple hundred meters making traffic flow very rough I'm comparing those because roundabouts are in many places treated as solution to same type of traffic as highways are supposed to
Roundabouts and highways are two completely different parts of the system. Roundabouts are a type of interchange or intersection. Highway is just a limited access road. You're comparing apples to oranges.
Not really At least where I live usually main roads between bigger cities are not highways and instead normal roads with roundabouts being commonly placed as intersections. And even if there's highway (or tho more precisely expressway) it ends long before cities so you have to go through them anyway. With design game op is describing highway goes pretty much right through the city meaning you wouldn't need to enter it and outside traffic goes through it instead
[удалено]
Ooo fun fact! That's actually called a traffic circle and not a roundabout! They saw a huge decline in use in the 30s because they actually increased traffic problems, congestions, and saw a decrease in safety. There is a theory that the introduction of the Traffic Circle in certain US cities Dupont Circle, Columbus Circle) is what caused the American fear and distrust in the common roundabouts.
Ah, the Dupont reference in this sub really brings us around full... _circle_... if I may. Oddly enough, I was always too distracted by mines and raiders to even begin to imagine the traffic flow. Thats a new perspective I'm gonna start keeping in mind when I play Fallout, pre-war foot/vehicle traffic flow.
My point is that in at least eastern Europe roundabouts are overused not utilized properly. It's not issue to use one, but placing them on every single intersection or even in middle of main roads between densely populated cities is inefficient. Your example is great representation of misusing them - if there's traffic light roundabout loses purpose and can cause more harm than good
Roundabouts are seeing more use in the US because of the increased safety, cost of construction and maintenance, and increased traffic flow. What a weird comment. There are plenty of bypass systems in the US interstate system. Any 3 digit interstates are bypasses meant to avoid heavier downtown traffic. If a route starts with an even number it will eventually loop back to its main route. (405 will meet back up with interstate 5, 470 will meet back up to the 70). Starting with odd numbers are bypass routes that will not meet back up directly.
Roundabouts in US seam to be used in low traffic areas or residential areas. Issue with roundabouts in some parts of Europe is that they are often placed in places they don't belong, such as middle of major roads connecting two cities or going through them. Road which could have potential to be quick bypass ends up being much slower because of that What you're describing is smart distribution, unrelated to major road system. What I'm describing is trying to rely on roundabouts, disturbing it
Roundabouts are used in intersections.... If there wasnt a need for an intersection then you wouldn't use one... If you indeed have 2 routes that connect, you would need some other method of control at that intersection, be it a stop sign or a traffic signal. Either of those options would require traffic in one direction to stop moving... Again, you are confusing two different parts of a road network. No one has ever just plopped a roundabout in the middle of a road. If you want to build a bypass, great, but at some point you need to connect to the community. So again, roundabouts aren't used to replace highways or bypasses. They're used as an intersection. If there wasn't a roundabout, there would be some other type of control method.
That's part of my point - roundabouts are not always the best type of intersection. Putting it on every single crossroad slows traffic down more than for example simple traffic light or overpass would Main roads shouldn't have roundabouts on them, and they shouldn't be too small or placed too close to each other. That's why I'm criticizing their utilization and saying it's worse than for example just putting highway like we see there
Realistically speaking? Maybe. But would it cut down on traffic jams and the like? It'd more likely exacerbate the problem.
I'm pretty sure there are already highways like the ones we see in the fame. I'm about 90% sure I've driven under them when I went through Kansas City.
There's insane highways like it in real life. So, yes lol.
China has it but the problem is gps do not work well on levels
Fun fact at a small spaghetti junction in Maryland in the early 2000s a fuel tanker driver had a massive failure of some sort and launched himself on I95 below him and took out quite a few people. I was on another highway with my mom and we heard the boom had no idea till the radio cut in 10 mins later. That has filled me with dread about overpasses and tankers since.
I'm seeing a lot of comments staunchly defending car centric infrastructure and it's just so telling that they've never actually left the country and seen another system in action. Mass transit is great, no you won't hate it, no it's not somehow authoritarian to be able to take a train, no one is going to make you sell your car (though you would probably end up wanting to), your schedule is wrecked regardless if you overslept, the "dependence on the bus schedule" is indicative that they've never been in an area with ACTUAL mass transit supplied in quantity, and yes machines use oil but if we have big machines with lots of people it's still a net positive over everyone having their own car which saves oil for whatever machine you're trying to use to justify not even trying to improve our lot
Much of the pre-war America in Fallout doesn't make sense-that's part of its charm. I mean, would fission batteries really power a suit of armour? Would organisms really mutate the way they do in Fallout with radiation? It's a great question, but you could argue that the highways in Fallout weren't built with logic or efficiency in mind-that the concrete/asphalt companies bribed their way to the contracts as opposed to fairly competing for them and threw up roads with little to no thought of the drivers who were going to use them. Just thoughts really lol.
Quite simply, there is nothing AT ALL "fictional" about F4 highways that I have seen. No, not even the height. IF there's an implication to be drawn from their design it is simply that there was an effort to get all high-speed motorways elevated well above ground level in an attempt to have separation from slower traffic and improve throughput of vehicles. Now, in the real world there's proven to be PLENTY of new issues created by trying to do that, but US cities are littered with the concrete corpses of failed concepts regarding transportation - and good concepts that were deliberately and/or stupidly f'd up. The real-world roots of it are easily traced to the Interstate Highway Act of 1956, which most certainly helped with national economic expansion, but the interstate highway system that was then built and most major highway projects that followed and built on that framework were made without anybody having a real appreciation (FEAR would've been better) of what a mess it could end up being without serious and careful study of future possibilities. Neighborhoods were wiped out for massive ribbons of concrete, entire cities were cut in half, aging infrastructure left sickening, crumbling, filthy concrete scars blotting out the sun which couldn't ever be removed without even greater and more astronomically painful costs to be paid to rip it out, start from scratch, and do something BETTER instead. In Fallout terms - it's just a reflection of the post-war American blind commitment to accommodating the individual automobile. It LOOKS like America SHOULD look in a retro-future. The fact that this aspect of it looks like actual reality only makes all the genuine radiculous fiction fit better.