Mile-based exit numbers are better because numbering sequentially causes problems whenever they wanted to build a new exit between existing ones 'cause you can’t just go around renumbering them all the time. Even resorting to adding letters (e.g. having exit 42A, 42B, etc.) only gets you so far (although they still do that with mile-based numbering, for multiple exits within the same mile).
The Interstates in my state used mile-based exit numbers but state routes do not, and I remember when GA 400 got renumbered because they added an extension with four extra exits on to the beginning of it.
One thing I love about lemmy (and I promise there’s no sarcasm here) is that I can post about numbers being used and someone will respond “here’s why numbers are better!” I genuinely enjoyed and appreciate your post.
They should switch to kilometer-based exit numbers, so they could stack more exit per mile without needing to add letters!
Thank you for coming to my ted talk.
Mile-based exit numbers are better because numbering sequentially causes problems whenever they wanted to build a new exit between existing ones 'cause you can’t just go around renumbering them all the time. Even resorting to adding letters (e.g. having exit 42A, 42B, etc.) only gets you so far (although they still do that with mile-based numbering, for multiple exits within the same mile).
The Interstates in my state used mile-based exit numbers but state routes do not, and I remember when GA 400 got renumbered because they added an extension with four extra exits on to the beginning of it.
One thing I love about lemmy (and I promise there’s no sarcasm here) is that I can post about numbers being used and someone will respond “here’s why numbers are better!” I genuinely enjoyed and appreciate your post.
They should switch to kilometer-based exit numbers, so they could stack more exit per mile without needing to add letters!
Thank you for coming to my ted talk.