06 March 2008

The interstate highway system simplified


An interesting graphic which schematically portrays the interstate highway system. The image will be too small here in the blog; the original is easier to view and can be enlarged. It's not perfect, especially re Wisconsin, which appears to have been eliminated from the map; I43 and I39 are missing and I94 ends in Chicago without continuing to Madison and Mpls.

The graphic did remind me of something I had forgotten (or never learned). Everyone knows that even-numbered highways run east-west and odd-numbered ones run north-south. But I was surprised to note that the numbering system is also patterned with numbers increasing as one moves from south to north (10,20,40,70,80,90) and from west to east (5, 15, 25, 35... 95).

The schematic doesn't show the NAFTA superhighway, but that's another story... Those interested in conspiracy theory and corporate malfeasance might be interested in this link to a story about how the "highway lobby" systematically killed off passenger rail and urban commuter systems.

1 comment:

  1. Stan -

    I am enjoying your blog. Nice going.

    This particular blog story/post has an error in the image of the interstate system:
    Look at Chicago.
    Note that it shows I-65 coming from the south, WHICH IT DOES. BUT IT DOES NOT COME INTO CHICAGO - IT ESSENTIALLY ENDS AT I-94 ABOUT 20 MILES EAST OF CHICAGO. I-65 never even enters Illinois.
    Note also that it shows I-65 continuing on to the north, WHICH IT DOES NOT DO.
    Note that it shows I-65 continuing on to the north of Chicago and on up to Grand Rapids. This is simply WRONG. I-196 goes in this direction and up to Grand Rapids, but it comes off I-94, connecting there with I-96.
    These people did not do their homework.

    I haven't even looked at the rest of the schematic "map"... I don't think it is necessary to do so. At this point I wouldn't trust it to get any specific route correct, though most probably are. But having seen 2 out of 2 wrong, tsk, tsk, tsk...

    ReplyDelete