Well done to the self righteous truck driver this morning on the A1(M) northbound near Chester-le-street, who in his wisdom decided to block the outside lane in the queue caused by an accident.
The outside lane was blocked but he held back traffic leaving a gap of over 3 miles of empty outside lane before you reached the incident. Fortunately I was ahead of the fool but I could see what he was doing in my mirror.
Even the local traffic 'eye in the sky' broadcast was telling him to move as he was creating such a extra backlog.
I see this every time there is a lane closure - why do these morons think they are helping? Even plod reckon queuing in both lanes until the closure, then filtering in turn is the safest and fastest way to deal with the situation!
(Rant over)
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 12/12/2007 at 09:58
|
|
Probably got fed up with those BMWs who having been advised of lane closures persist in flying up the outside. I would have done the same
|
The merge point is just before the obstruction, not three miles back.
Why are there so many idiots who think everyone should queue in a single lane for miles?
geoffken, in this instance the BMW drivers are correct - check out your Highway Code or consult IAM, RoSPA or any traffic officer.
|
The question is ...... by how much did it increase your journey time? My guess is about 3 minutes.
--
L\'escargot.
|
It didn't increase me journey time at all - I was lucky enough to be past the idiot.
It did cause chaos at the intersections behind though - creating a much bigger tailback than necessary - all because of one drivers superior attitude.
|
|
|
|
geoffken in this instance the BMW drivers are correct - check out your Highway Code or consult IAM RoSPA or any traffic officer.
LOL.
I do like it when these sly little digs at stereotyped drivers of certain brands of cars rather backfires.
Anyway, if there was such a problem, why didn;t the traffic police sort it out (or aren't there any on the A1M? Or rather are there not enough to sort an accident and do patrol work?)
|
|
Now you mustn't criticise lorry drivers, they're professional drivers, knights of the road and we'd all starve without them ;-)
|
|
Funny, isn't it? Most of us dutifully (and, of course, incorrectly) won't merge; yet in other circs our lane discipline is poor.
|
|
|
I'm with Ruperts on this one.
And if lorry drivers are such professional drivers - (appreciate comment above may be tongue in cheek) - how come they drive along at 60 mph about an inch behind each other like a herd of elephants at a circus? No wonder we hear so many traffic reports where a lorry has managed to overturn in perfect conditions on a straight road.
Phew ... that's better!
|
|
|
|
Police were probably there dealing with the accident itself.
--
2007 Seat Altea XL 2.0 TDI (140) Stylance
2005 Skoda Fabia vrS
|
There was one police car at the accident scene along with the usual posse of highways agency bods standing about. To be fair, by the time I passed the scene it was more of a mop-up job and repairing the barrier.
Pity they didn't use the warning signs to notify drivers, I could have turned off at the prevous intersection and taken an alternative route - would have saved me an hour!
|
I don't think many drivers mind both lanes being used as long as those using the outside lane merge in sensibly and politely before the road narrows. What is annoying is when drivers blast down the outer lane and then cut in right at the 'pinch point'. I once saw an accident on the M1 that was caused by a driver doing this, he literally drove into thesteadily moving queue on his nearside expecting them to brake hard to let him in; they didn't!
The capacity of the road would be determined by the throughput of cars around the accident pinch point, so it is unlikely that the truck driver was actually reducing the traffic flow.
|
|
|
|
Quick straw poll here: which do drivers consider more important on the road - COURTESY (read "unlimited enthusiasm for queueing at any cost and hang anyone who dares to push in anywhere") or SAFETY? I'm referring to situations where the two concepts are not compatible. Possible situations that come to mind: (1) swarm of small kids playing in/near the road and probably about to cross (nowhere near a zebra) - do you toot the horn some distance back and assert priority, or slow down and prepare to stop? (2) lane closure ahead - choice is to join long queue or continue in lane and zip merge at end; (3) Uphill dual carriageway, lorry indicates to pull out into your lane to overtake, you have (just) space to ease off throttle and let him out. Or you could beep, flash and accelerate as YOU have PRIORITY. (There are two cars behind you, so your decision will affect and possibly enrage them
Don't have an 0900 or SMS to rip you off with, but contributions welcome.
|
My main problem with this mornings situation was the arrogance of the driver who decided he was responsible for how the traffic would flow/merge. I zip merged at the front of the queue along with everyone else and the people in the inside lane left gaps big enough for this to happen - nice and safely.
This guy is qualified to deliver fruit and veg - thats all. Whats even funnier is there was a bloke in a white van doing a half-hearted version by sitting in the middle of the two lanes, but everyone drove past him anyway.
|
|
|
I think courtesy and safety are always compatible.
Your examples are about asserting priority.
I would not attempt to assert priority over a group of small children who looked as if they were about to cross a road. Children can be unpredicatable and poor at judging speed and distance.
I would drive down the out lane of a two-lane queue, but I'd slow down and signal left to merge well before the pinch point. In my experience if you do this other drivers are much more likely to be cooperative.
On your third example it would depend upon my speed and power. If I would be past the truck in a matter of a few tens of seconds then I would keep on going. If I was likely to be slow in passing him (causing him to have to brake, drop gears) I would let him out.
|
Typical bullying lorry driver behaviour. Knights of the road? Nope they are the modern equivaent of highwaymen.
Now if the stupid trucker had let the cars through, the outside lane would soon fill up and the Q would be three miles shorter. Did he consider his trucker mates sitting in the inside lane that was three miles longer than it should have been? Hmm thought, not their strongest attribute that.
To be fair however, it all depends on zipping in turn at the scene of the pinch point. People wont do it. Instead you get "you aint coming in here" and " I am coming in there or you are on the shoulder" type argie bargy at the zip point.
Do police cars (or highways agency) have a merge in turn signs on board? No they dont. Should be put up and anyone who doesnt should be given a hefty fine. All roadworks that restrict a lane should have merge in turn signs. And a camera to enforce it.
Grrrrrrrrrrr
------
< Ulla>
|
Any method of dealing with lane closures suffers from practical problems.
The 'getting in open lane early' approach would work very well if traffic was able to enter the 'pinch point' at the speed limit (if any) set down by the roadwaorks. All to frequently, though, drivers will slow to well below the limit - either through timidity or being forced to do so by last-minute 'zippers'. Once this slowing occurs, everything falls apart....
Trying to implement 'merge in turn' whilst still maintaining the 'pinch entry' speed would require drivers 'zipping' at 40 or so mph. Not practical, really.
So i guess that ideally, 'merge early' is preferred, but 'merge in turn' works best as a fall-back should traffic come to a standstill.
Of course, if the road is already running near its full capacity prior to the restriction, then nowt is going to work!
|
I have seen zipping working well at 5ish mph at the pinch point. It does make a real difference to the q length.
------
< Ulla>
|
|
Works well when I've seen it in Germany. Training on this should be in the driving test.
|
I saw similar incidents numerous times during my 12 year daily commute on the A1 and M62 and I always just took it in my stride. I just assumed that the trucker knew from past experience that it would get him to his destination sooner than by letting all lanes get clogged up. And if he got there sooner then so would I. Because of the number of hours they're on the road truckers must have much more experience then the average commuting car driver of what works and what doesn't work. Perhaps we have some truckers and white van men in the Backroom who can tell us if they do it and if so their reason for doing so?
--
L\'escargot.
|
Don't the police and Highways Agency say that zipped merging is the fastest (and safest way) to deal with queues such as this?
God forbid I question the knowledge of the cabbage delivery man!
|
God forbid I question the knowledge of the cabbage delivery man!
It's probably more down to practical experience than knowledge of the theoretical recommendations.
--
L\'escargot.
|
Perhaps we have some truckers and white van men in the Backroom who can tell us if they do it and if so their reason for doing so?
Not that I'm either, but perhaps something to do with (..in the case of pantechnicon drivers anyway..) not having to slow-down/stop/accelerate/repeat all the time if the last minute zippers had their way? It must be tons more work in a big truck & maybe would slow the ambient queue speed even more with their poorer dynamic performance.
|
Oh dear no, that would mean leaving more than three inches between your wiper blade and the TIR label on the truck in front.
------
< Ulla>
|
....... perhaps something to do with (..in the case of pantechnicon drivers anyway..) not having to slow-down/stop/accelerate/repeat all the time .......
That sounds like a reasonable theory, in which case it can be beneficial. I must admit that I'd rather be in a slowly (but continuously) moving queue rather than one which is starting and stopping. If the speed is right, in a modern fuel-injected electronic ignition vehicle you can do it without touching the accelerator. Couldn't do it in an old fashioned carburettored car though.
--
L\'escargot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ZZZZzzzzzzz, It must be that time of year again!!!!!
Not that I have ever done what the OP is describing, but I can understand it.
1. It is far easier to keep the vehicle moving at a steady pace rather then stop starting.
2. If cars actually knew how to merge in turn then maybe less trucks would adopt this practice!!! But unfortunately they see a tuck in front of them and suddenly they become Nigel Mansell with a need to get in front at all costs!!!
As for Knights of the road, cant be bothered to answer to that one, as for needing their services or you would all starve, well thats not too far from the truth - There have been a number of detailed study's into what would happen if the logistics of the country stopped. I think the last one came to the conclusion of about 4 days before shops would shut due to lack of stock - and that was a conservative estimate - so depending on how good your hunter gatherer skills are would quite likely play an important role in how long it would be until you starved.
|
TU's point is valid. Two lanes merging into one approach at half the speed they are doing once they have merged. Car drivers are spectacularly awful, en masse, at finding a correct rhythm. The tendency is to shunt like an old goods train in a marshalling yard with a half-asleep driver. Of course they don't care about their clutches - half of them don't know what a clutch is - and they drive in a constant state of tense anxiety anyway, so stop-start may seem more restful than cruising at the limit. Trouble is, the roads are clotted with unashamed carp.
That said, I see the point others are making too. It always annoys me to see a huge gap in front of the car or truck I am tailgating in the outside lane.
|
|
|
ZZZZzzzzzzz, It must be that time of year again!!!!!
Careful don't fall asleep now! I think you'll find TU, at least 2 posters do understand your position & ventured to suggest the 'momentum' theory previously. Tar & brush and all that..
|
Snakey. We dont all drive like that. Just the same as not all irish are navvies, not all bmw drivers are amoeba`s, not all sales rep`s drive like there arse is on fire.
You should try a little less of the stereotyping.
|
it's fairly simple really........some of those who 'book early' and go for the inside lane early (for whatever reason e.g. timidity, not in a hurry, less stressful etc)... resent those that carry on down the o/s lane and 'gain and advantage over them'....so a few block the o/s lane
the quickest way by far to get through a blockage, once the traffic flow has dropped significantly, is to zip merge
which means the o/s lane blocker commits an offence of 'obstructing the highway' and actually makes the jam worse
|
|
|
Snakey ... You should try a little less of the stereotyping.
To be fair, he was criticising one lorry driver, in one situation, not all of them generally.
|
|
|
|
|
TU
If we got back to the business of localy sourced food, we wouldnt need you or starve. TBH if all truck drivers got blown up by a motorists Jihad it might be just the incentive we need to stop hauling stuff around the country for no good reason other than its cheap and building millions of acres of warehouses to store the stuff we haul around the country for no good reason.
Truckers, love em or hate em, my preference is the latter. {SNIP - last sentence removed following a complaint}.
------
< Ulla>
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 12/12/2007 at 20:02
|
Apparently the reason the lorries sit up each others backsides is to slip stream. Lorries are not particularly aerodynamic and therefore sitting close behind improves performance. I can never understand it though, as they can't see in front and if the lorry they are tailing brakes hard they have no chance.
As for blocking the outside lane, I can see why they do it as it is annoying if you are queuing for ages and others steam up and cut in last minute. I'm not saying they are right for doing it and who knows if it actually helps the situation.
By the way, not all BMW drivers are the same, some ARE courteous drivers. Not good to tar everyone with the same brush, be it BM drivers or lorry drivers. There is good and bad in ALL !!!!
Thats me done.
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 12/12/2007 at 18:39
|
Altea ego, Nice of you to wish all lorry drivers be blown up in a motorist jihad. Especially in the season of "goodwill"..
I`m recovering from cancer, it makes you look at whats really important.
Being held up by other types of vehicle really isn`t all that you know.
|
|
|
|
Of course Altea Ego if you went back to local produce (in fact you could even now if you look hard enough) you could get rid of all the trucks, but then you would be cultivating the land by hand or horse, would be be sitting on hand made wooden furniture from a wood from a local copse, crafted by a highly skilled carpenter who lives next to you in your thatched cottages with wattle and daub walls.
You would get to eat the finest produce you could find within walking distance, as there would be no cars as no raw materials would be moved around to produce them.
In fact you would go back to how we were well over a hundred years ago - progress huh!
If there was a viable alternative to road transport do you not think it would have happened? There is not, and I do not believe in my lifetime there ever will be a better, quicker & cheaper way of moving large quantities of goods around.
Thinking about it A E, I have a sneaking suspicion that you are really Janey Lee Grace from Radio 2, she has some silly idilic ideas as well!!!
|
Yes thats another problem. I cant walk to my local shop. Its closed down. Replaced by the big supermarket I have to drive to. Right next to those warehouses.
But al this does not alter the fact, in my opinion and experience truck drivers abuse other road users and for the most part are the most selfish drivers around
Its a fairly recent but growing trend I fear
------
< Ulla>
|
|
|
|
TU If we got back to the business of localy sourced food we wouldnt need you or starve.
But how would you get a locally sourced computer?
|
|
|
|
|
Is there any point to this thread? I see poor driving by car drivers every day. No, the driver mentioned should not have being doing what he did, but I see car and van drivers doing the same regularly.
For anyone who dislikes trucks and would like to be rid of them, the answer is very simple- don't buy anything.
|
> I see car and van drivers doing the same regularly.
really? I never see car drivers blocking the outside lane for 3 miles. Van drivers? the ones trying to force themselves round the blocking trucker?
I dont think so
------
< Ulla>
|
An occasional truck driver writes ?..
Merging in turn is just fine and dandy, until someone ? not always but frequently at the wheel of a cheaper BMW ? decides that his/her turn should come first. Irritating all around, I grant you.
Why do we follow each other at 60 mph? We don?t; legislation limits us to 56 mph on the motorway, and that same legislation is enforced courtesy of a physical vehicle speed limiter. A splendid example of entirely counter-productive legislative tomfoolery that has probably caused more accidents than it has prevented.
Are we qualified to deliver fruit and vegetables? Most certainly, and one or two other things as well. It?s just possible that you would miss us if we weren?t keeping your shops stocked and your economy moving. And assuming that Altea Ego does get his wish and a motorists? jihad is visited upon the haulage industry ? presumably after he/she has finished his homework ? then the ingredients for our collective fiery death will probably be delivered by those same trucks for which you express nothing but ill-informed and misplaced derision. Go ? as the Americans say ? figure.
So there you have it. We may not be the brightest folk around; it took me a while to get through Ulysses ? the Butler didn?t do it ? and my degree is merely an upper second - but was awarded by a proper university. That aside, we do perform a fairly valuable task, and have to put up with a fair bit of unpleasantness whilst doing so.
And you ? why you could always take a train.
|
|
|
|
To clarify, I was commenting on one particular truck drivers actions (although many do the same thing)
I don't have an axe to grind with truck drivers in general. Idiotic behaviour comes in many forms - be it BMW driver (woops, there I go again! ;-) ) or truck!
I still don't see how keeping 3 miles of lane empty is helping the situation, and justifying it with the stop/start argument doesn't work, as they stop/start in line with the truck in the inside lane - thereby keeping their roadblock going.
|
|
This thread is obviously attracting posters from other sites now. I think the argument has run its course now. Thread locked. As the OP said in hos closing words - "Rant Over"
Edited by Pugugly {P} on 12/12/2007 at 19:17
|
|
|
|
|
