ATS 1.39 Speculation Thread

Locked
User avatar
Bedavd
Posts: 590
Joined: 31 May 2018 15:09
Location: Michigan -> Washington

Re: ATS 1.39 Speculation Thread

#301 Post by Bedavd » 28 Jul 2020 00:41

I found some quotes from different state DOT manuals:

An MDOT manual about clearance signs in Michigan says. "Clearance signs are to be present for vehicular structures with an underclearance of 16’-0” or less. The sign will indicate a dimension 2” less than actual to allow for live load deflections."

WSDOT for the state of Washington says "Low-clearance warning signs are necessary when the vertical clearance of an existing bridge is less than 15 feet 3 inches."

TxDOT states "All overhead obstructions, except overhead sign structures, that have a minimum measured clearance of 20 feet or less require both advance CLEARANCE (W12-2) and structure mounted ( ) FT ( ) IN clearance (W12-2a) signs".

VDOT manual has this manual that shows some sort of signs are required at all bridges under 14' 5"
Image

I've edited and re-edited this post so much as I found more and more information. I'm going to go make a public research thread of SCS and try and find all the minimum requirements in various DOT manuals. I love researching stuff like this and, seeing as I'm in between work and law school, I've got nothing better to do!
Check out my Michigan research map!

Check out my ATS IRL map!
*IDAHO ADDED, LA, SF, and San Diego are unmapped out of protest for their future rework*

User avatar
supersobes
Global moderator
Posts: 10651
Joined: 07 Dec 2016 21:53
Location: Northern Virginia, USA
Contact:

Re: ATS 1.39 Speculation Thread

#302 Post by supersobes » 28 Jul 2020 02:40

@Bedavd Ah, that explains it! Almost all the bridges in Texas have a signed height becasue the minimum height to require a sign is very high in Texas, while it's more rare here because the minimum height to require a sign is rather low (less than a foot above the height of a standard tractor trailer too). Unsurprisingly, it seems that VDOT isn't following the standards at a lot of locations. In that example with the 14 foot bridge on I-66 West I showed earlier, there is no sign 1,500 feet in advance of that bridge. The only signs there are the ones at the bridge itself.

User avatar
Bedavd
Posts: 590
Joined: 31 May 2018 15:09
Location: Michigan -> Washington

Re: ATS 1.39 Speculation Thread

#303 Post by Bedavd » 28 Jul 2020 02:58

@supersobes From my research so far, most states just go by the MUTCD's recommendation of "clearances less than 12 inches above the maximum vehicle height", thought texas is 4 feet above maximum vehicle height.

It's really interesting how some states have the information available in the first google search, but others are hidden deep in documents if posted anywhere at all.
Check out my Michigan research map!

Check out my ATS IRL map!
*IDAHO ADDED, LA, SF, and San Diego are unmapped out of protest for their future rework*

dondouglas
Posts: 20
Joined: 05 Sep 2019 19:38
Location: Araraquara, Brazil
Contact:

Re: ATS 1.39 Speculation Thread

#304 Post by dondouglas » 28 Jul 2020 19:05

flight50 wrote:
27 Jul 2020 20:02
@dondouglas hmmm. Not a bad idea. It belongs in the wishlist thread though to get it noticed. As much as I was against buying food and all, I think as a popup menu it could work. We need more ways to spend money, that's for sure. Perhaps buying food adds to the stamina bar. Once we hit our 12hr max driving, that stamina bar kicks in and gives us just a little longer before the screen starts fading out. I'd rather see this than getting sleep fines. Or at least the stamina bar has to deplete first before getting fines. I love the new waypoint feature and it helps a ton with planning.
Exactly @flight50 , more ways to spend money and more variables to make the job more difficulty, that demands more accuracy on the planning to hit success on the delivery. I hope that ideas like these can arrive until the development team at SCS, at least for them have a idea about some things that we hope to see in the game. These kind of difficulty can be optional, as the fatigue, air brakes and traffic fines are today.

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 16345
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: ATS 1.39 Speculation Thread

#305 Post by flight50 » 28 Jul 2020 19:32

That's why I always look forward to updates. You just never know what cool things the devs hid from us until open beta or public release. 1.38 brought waypoint adjustments. Something we have been asking for in the past a lot. They never hinted at it but threw it at us and mannnnn what a difference. There are a lot of little things like this that can go so far for some of us. The color picker for many was big. Raised windows, lift axles, owned trailers, doubles, cables.....there is always something that is cool and it just keeps making our gaming experience better and better.

User avatar
Knightrider
Posts: 924
Joined: 14 May 2018 07:25

Re: ATS 1.39 Speculation Thread

#306 Post by Knightrider » 28 Jul 2020 19:54

I hope we can get our trucks with dirt lol, DX11 will hopefully bring the results SCS needs.

User avatar
Rockatansky6
Posts: 122
Joined: 29 Oct 2018 22:41
Location: Rio Grande do Sul - Brazil
Contact:

Re: ATS 1.39 Speculation Thread

#307 Post by Rockatansky6 » 29 Jul 2020 00:51

1.39 I expect some more reconstruction in Nevada. I would also like to see I-80 renewed from Utah to Reno. This road became very beautiful after Wells, and deserved more love for SCS. And please extend route 95 from Tonopah to I-80 and Fallon! Yes, I am dreaming.

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 16345
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: ATS 1.39 Speculation Thread

#308 Post by flight50 » 29 Jul 2020 02:21

I am with ya @Knightrider. It would be cool if dirt got rolled into action. That means that trucks stops have to activated. Which means that both games had to make them operable. Which could be why we saw a minor portion of a graphics update in 1.38.

User avatar
TomDooley
Posts: 1604
Joined: 01 Feb 2016 09:42

Re: ATS 1.39 Speculation Thread

#309 Post by TomDooley » 29 Jul 2020 09:53

I don't seriously believe that this will be an option in the (near) future, but it would be great if SCS could implement "moveable" accessories (maybe with some on-the-go menu as a further F4-page), where after initial purchase, we could add HeavyHaul Flags and Banners (On/Off), or foldable roof deflectors (up/downfolded) without going to a repair station first.

More seriously - 1.39 might indeed prepare for the WS truck release (rebranding/adding more dealers on the older States), add a small amount of AI objects, rework a few roads here and there. If we are lucky, maybe we'll finally get the long-demanded ownable fuel petro-/chemical tankers. I don't dare to hope that Colorado is already advanced enough for release before late fall/early winter.

User avatar
flight50
Posts: 16345
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: ATS 1.39 Speculation Thread

#310 Post by flight50 » 29 Jul 2020 15:07

Yeah many people have requested re-movable flags. I see it requested as often as the waypoint markers was and we finally got that. Its only a matter of time for banners/flags. If we ever get more customization for our garage and they allow stuff to happen that the service shops do, flags could be there. But I'd honestly think flags is as simple as a binary 0 or 1 and could happen at anytime, just like in real life.

If 1.39 gave us a reworked city, added road or tweaked road, that would be nice. I have a hopes for each.
city - LA or the bay area
added road - OR-126 or OR-38, US-12 to US-93, OR-82/OR-3/WA-129 to US-12, UT-95 to Hanksville or Caineville (map Hanksville), US-70 from US-191 to US-60, AZ-264, US-60 from I-25 to Vaughn, US-50 from Carson City to Sacramento, US-2 from Sandpoint to Spokane or Colville
tweaked road - US-60 in Phoenix moved to where it should be, both big interchanges in Phoenix more accurate, I-40 @ I-15 interchange, if no bay area rebuild US-101 to I-80

If we got a rebuilt Vegas, I have high hopes for more to come. A year or two ago, Pavel and a couple others hinted that the base maps for both game will be brought up to par with current dlc's. I recall Pavel saying that they can't make new dlc's still using old assets. This I am sure is part of dx11 as well as the current ongoing graphic's overhaul. This is an overhaul that could last a while as things slowly get updated.

Locked

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Graf_Boinenn, Impaler, Knightrider, MadPeterbilt, overfloater, Trucker_Tommy and 16 guests