It looks like US-42 was missed in the unlocks, it remains locked at 5

The following are done and ready to be relocked at 5 (currently locked at 3)
Hilliard-Rome Rd
US-29
Rest Area
SR-54

Done with US-42 also. One node only had 16 reverse connections.

jondrush wrote:I think you will find it much worse in areas where freeways curve hard. Thus the ramp is actually a shorter route.

Out of curiosity I went looking for an example on the map. I followed I-70 all the way to Kansas before being able to find something close to this scenario. What I came across was this. Even with a pretty good curve in the freeway and a fairly straight set of ramps, the freeway is still 5 meters shorter. I don't see there being much a problem of sharper curves/shorter ramps on the interstate as they're handling semis travelling at high speeds.

Obviously there could be scenarios where there are backups on the freeway and the ramps coming up as faster, but those would tend to be in more urban areas. The exits at US-29, US-42 & SR-54 are rural areas and the average speed on those segments exceeds the speed limit by about 5 mph.

(Also, my initial intent was just to clean up some of the artifacts from cartouche that could cause routing inefficiencies.)

unlocked.

jhfrontz wrote: On the ramp-to-ramp "turn" restriction-- does that really still happen? I find those particular artificial restrictions to be jarring -- when I'm making scans across areas and see them I have to zoom in and check each segment to make sure that they're correct. The faux restrictions have been absent from central Ohio Interstate (and other) ramps for at least a year (if not longer) and I've never seen a misroute (or any URs regarding same).

Perhaps it only happens in places where there are perennial/predictable traffic jams (with average speeds slower than the ramps) on the adjacent freeways? If that's the case, I'd rather see the restrictions added as-needed rather than across the board.


Jeff

The first place I saw such complaints was in the middle of nowhere in Wyoming!
And, they were RECENT complaints, at the time, much less than a year ago.
I still run across 'recent' reports by users as I hunt for 'old ballons' to pop.

jhfrontz wrote:
Average speeds on the segments, turn restrictions, hidden restrictions/connectivity, device GPS tracking, etc. all checked out and supported the proper routing? If this is still happening, it'd be really good to have folks look closely at them. Every time we've run across strange things like that in our area, someone was able to find something obscure causing the issue.

Interesting.
I will look more carefully next time. At that time, I was informed by another CM that such intersections should ALWAYS be set so 'straight through' traffic was forbidden (if it was possible to do so without effecting other traffic).
The wiki still indicates this:
http://www.waze.com/wiki/index.php/Limi ... utor_Lanes

Unlocked and locked as requested.

I'm not so sure that level 5 locks were necessary, as 3 should have been sufficient, but I locked them anyway.

Thanks for being to thorough with your request too.

It makes our lives easier.

I have been wondering about the false restrictions too. Never experienced an issue or handled a related UR where the restriction did not exist.

Do we need to revisit this, or is it the issue as Jeff described?
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

There is really no need for the split road over the highway, but it should be OK. Make sure you restrict the straight across movement from off-ramp to on-ramp so Waze doesn't route people off the highway, as it sometimes does.