Talk:Ring road

Interchanges

Actually, the beltway of Lawrence, Massachusetts is comparable to that of Harrisburg since the former consists of Interstates 93 and 495 and Massachusetts Route 213 with three interchanges necessary between them. 'Beltway' redirects to 'ring road' although not all beltways are ring roads. For that matter, Sheffield, England's ring road requires an actual 90-degree turn in each direction in addition to all the roundabouts. Heff01 (talk) 00:55, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

MA Route 213 is locally known as the Loop Connector. Heff01 (talk) 00:56, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Inconsistent naming

Why is the article called "Ring road" while the category is called "Orbital roads"? Surely we should pick one name or the other. --Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 16:03, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Good morning Philosopher,

My opinion on this is included within my posting – below – of todays' date.

Sincerely, -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (GG-J's Talk) 10:30, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Railway equivalents to ring roads

There is a point of view that the article should mention that the Circle line (London Underground), Kiev Urban Electric Train, Moscow Little Ring Railway are all railway lines built for a similar purpose to that of ring roads.--Toddy1 (talk) 14:08, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I can empathise with that. Are you suggesting a change to the article's title? The advantage/s of a 'circular' railway is/are not the same as a ring road's, however. -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (GG-J's Talk) 21:33, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

I think the present title is an excellent title.

I was merely wondering whether the article ought to mention that they exist and fulfill a similar purpose. I am not sure whether this is a good idea or not.

I did not know that the advantages (and disadvantages?) of a circular railway are not the same as a ring road. How do they differ?--Toddy1 (talk) 03:32, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello again. I shall take each point in turn:-

1. Concur. Article title is fine – "orbital" is less used and perhaps not known in some countries.

2. I believe their inclusion in this article confuses, rather than inform, because each has come into existance to satisfy entirely different requirements. In the case of the ancient Circle line (London Underground), for example, it evolved (rather than forming a circular route) by linking existing independent lines in order to ease operational requirements. Its purpose is the same as any of the other London lines: to afford swift transport under the congested road network and not to move passengers from one side of central London to another. All of the other lines do that quicker and more comfortably.

3. The ring road, on the other hand, serves the traveller in precisely the opposite manner. He will take a longer route in order to save time.

I hope this is useful.

Sincerely, -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (GG-J's Talk) 10:30, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks I did not know this.--Toddy1 (talk) 18:25, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I believe they don't differ at all. And NO, railway similarity doesn't warrant mentioning in the title.93.72.233.80 (talk) 21:03, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

And, don't forget the Moscow's Koltsevaya Line - a hyperbusy underground ring line. 93.72.233.80 (talk) 21:05, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

93.72.233.80 - do you have sources saying that the purpose of circular railways is the same as that of ring roads?--Toddy1 (talk) 22:16, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

My primary concerns here

Gentlemen, thank you for addressing the railway rings issue, which is useful to be mentioned somewhere.

However, my primary concern here is the introduction, which is not sufficiently explains the purpose of a ring road in general, and is also overloaded with synonyms. I insist on consensus that would include something like "purposely build to encircle (bypass) a town or city in order to relieve their streets of the transiting traffic. Therefore, a ring road is a bypass connection between several inter-city roads from different directions."

On a side note, I'm warning User:Gareth Griffith-Jones of imminent blocks and ban of them should they continue blatant deletions combined with clearly directed personal attacks like that one. Thank you, 93.72.233.80 (talk) 21:03, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I do not agree with the wording of his edit summary, but it was a criticism of what was written, and not a criticism of the writer. Since it did not criticise the writer, it could not have been a personal attack.--Toddy1 (talk) 22:13, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

The introduction

93.72.233.80 proposed that the introduction includes:

"a ring road is a bypass connection between several inter-city roads from different directions."

I do not think "inter-city roads" is the right phrase. Many of the big roads connected by a ring road are merely to towns, and so are not literally "inter-city".

Also, I think a key part of the definition of a ring road is that it is a ring (i.e. if you start at some point and keep on driving, you end up where you started). Many bypass roads have junctions with major roads from different directions, but are not ring roads.--Toddy1 (talk) 06:05, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

I agree entirely with you here, Toddy1, and can add merely that there are many differences between our calling a road a by-pass or a ring road, and that we are expecting each to be different. -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (GG-J's Talk) 10:42, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Capital Beltway map

To my eyes, the Maryland colour is not "blue" but lilac or mauve. The rivers and road numbers are blue. Davidships (talk) 16:09, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ring road. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140714221019/http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=7701 to http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=7701

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:23, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

"When referring to a road encircling a capital city, the term 'beltway' can also have a political connotation..."

Is this not confined strictly to the United States? I've never heard it used with reference to any other capital city, and speaking of references, this claim has none. 70.30.100.138 (talk) 11:53, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Cardinal direction changes on beltways

Hello, everyone!

I just had an idea on articles for beltways. As you may know, Wikipedia articles on highways display major intersections and freeway exits for a particular route on a table. Beltways are a special case because, depending on the exact routing, they will change direction as they encircle a city. Of course, one could always distinguish directions with the terms "clockwise" and "counterclockwise," but road signs often don't use those terms, and instead employ cardinal directions. My suggestion is that direction changes be indicated on the exit guides to avoid reader confusion. It could look something like this:

South ⇵ North ⟷ East ⇵ West; this reads, "southbound becomes eastbound, and northbound becomes westbound."

Notice the arrow symbols. The ⇵ symbol signifies the right-hand rule on roadways—for countries that observe the left-hand rule, the double arrow may be reversed ( ⇅ ). The ⟷ symbol accounts for the possibility that the viewer is reading the exit chart up or down.

Here are some real-life examples:

· Interstate 610 encircles Houston, TX, and ascribes all four cardinal directions, with the change happening at each of the four "corners" of the beltway.

· In Jacksonville, FL, the east and west "wings" of the Interstate 295 beltway are signed as North and South, with the direction changes occurring where it meets its parent route Interstate 95. Therefore, at those points, the changes would be written as; South ⇵ North ⟷ North ⇵ South; and vice versa.

· Loop 101, a semi-beltway in Phoenix, AZ, has two direction changes for its length. The first turn would be indicated as; South ⇵ North ⟷ West ⇵ East. And the second; East ⇵ West ⟷ South ⇵ North.

I was going to add the direction changes on the exit guide for the latter example, but found that editing the table was too difficult. So, I decided to post the suggestion here for the Wikipedia community to review. If anyone likes this, or wishes to suggest adjustments, please send a message to my Notifications Inbox.

Nebulous2357 (talk) 02:45, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Page Name/ Page Overhaul

Why is this article called ring road when that's not common US vernacular? I understand the author is under the impression that :"bypass" is incorrect usage but if it's so it's so commonly called a bypass then can we really label that incorrect? This page needs to be renamed and rewritten but I know that's a bold edit so I'm coming here first. 2601:140:8B80:5F50:5820:A801:F839:6EE5 (talk) 11:17, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

The article name doesn't necessarily have to be the US term. Do Americans call ring roads bypasses? In the United Kingdom we rarely use the phrase ring road (there are not many well-known examples), but a bypass does not mean the same as a ring road to me. To me at least, a bypass passes a settlement whereas a ring road circles it. A bypass may for a semi-circle around a settlement but it has a clear start and end point. NemesisAT (talk) 14:19, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Spurious examples

I've gone ahead and removed I-405 in L.A. from the list of examples. It looks like a user at IP 149.32.224.34 added a bunch of examples in November 2018. I suspect some of them are incorrect. 71.70.166.171 (talk) 04:00, 10 November 2023 (UTC)