|
Probably been covered loads of times in the past but I'm sure the practice of straddling two lanes sefveral hundred yards before they merge is on the increase. Has happened to me several times now in the last couple of weeks, both times by extremely aggressive drivers who were determined to ensure that no-one overtook them. Pity the lady in the red car near Filton in Bristol who accelerated to fill a gap of at least 30 yards that I tried to slot into nearly stuffing her car into me in the process, all horns and lights blazing. All in the aid of ensuring that her spot in the queue was kept. Shame she lost it 50 yards later to a bloke in a silver focus who shot around the outside of both of us and and squeezed in front of her - evidently a far braver driver than me. I eventually drew along side at the traffic lights on the roundabout at the end of the road, grinned at her then drive off. I think she gained all of about an inch.
|
|
It's of course best to move over in good time when traffic is moving freely, but when queued, all roadspace should be used and merging in turn, otherwise, it is bound to raise tensions as some do and some don't and also causes the queue to be twice as long which means it may end up blocking roundabouts and junctions and impeding progress for others who want to turn off before the blockage and have to queue because it is twice as long as it should be.
|
Lorry drivers wife probably.
|
Sorry!
|
|
We sorted out the current (new) thinking on this a few weeks back.
|
"We sorted out the current (new) thinking on this a few weeks back. "
I must have missed this but I hope it suggested that the Highways Agency use a bit of imagination (difficult, i admit) and make up some signs saying politely 'Please merge in turn'. Most people will, including professional drivers.
Edited by Avant on 31/12/2007 at 20:34
|
|
|
|
|
These people are clearly illiterate morons with no concept of the highway code. If they wish to spend half an hour sitting on the inside of an open, perfectly legal lane thats their problem, but they must not then be suprised when a silver 5 Series uses the available road space and follows the highway code.
|
when a silver 5 Series uses the available road space and follows the highway code.
Together with other drivers who've read the 2007 Highway Code, regardless of car they drive.
Edited by Ruperts Trooper on 31/12/2007 at 20:47
|
|
|
Actually, they're doing everybody a favour. An orderly single line of cars slides through a choke-point much faster that two lines trying to merge immediately before it.
This used to be very obvious on the A23 on summer Sunday evenings many years ago. A near-solid single line of cars travelling north at about 40 would encounter a short length of dual carriageway just south of Bolney. [Site of the world's first petrol station; incidentally.]
By the time that they'd got themselves back into single-file; the speed of the line was down to 10mph - roughly half the number of cars-per-hour passed the end of the DC than entered it. This caused huge tailbacks of near-stationary traffic - which cleared in only 15 minutes when the outside lane was blocked off and a steady speed was maintained.
|
And I can give you a direct opposite view where a choke point on the A1 near St Neots doubled in speed when "merge in turn" boards were put up.
They are doing no-one a favour.
|
Surely that's the same thing? An orderly line is being formed increasing the net flow though the restriction?
It's the antagonistic battle as the queue-jumpers force their way in that's slowing the whole flow down for everybody. What matters is the per-hour flow through the slowest part.
|
Yes very true, the trouble is the "outside lane" blocker starts tempers boiling fairly early on in the whole q process. Everyone is therefore "up for it" when the agro comes at the choke point and it gets stoppy starty as battles ensue.
The key is good signage. Merge in 3 hundred yards, 2, 1 "MERGE NOW" kind of thing.
|
|
So if the highway authority doesn't put the signs up, no-one knows how to drive properly - you'll be advocating arbitary speed limits and automatic speed cameras next.
|
|
tempers only flare for the complete and total idiots who's path to the front of the queue is blocked - the rest of us who queue patiently are quite happy for the truckers to stop these brain deads - my best moment was on M6 when a XR2 racing up outside tried to dive in and was head and tailed by car in front and behind - his head banging up and down on his steering wheel made my night - the signs say for a good 600 yds or more- lane closed but your idiot always ignores them
Edited by dxp55 on 31/12/2007 at 23:39
|
so you think its bright to block 600 yards of motorway do you?
I wonder who the total idiot is?
|
.*******
(Sensible observations without swear words removed by the software - I cannot be bothered to re-type.)
Of course properly signed and coned "merge in turn" takes a bit more imagination...
Edited by SlidingPillar on 01/01/2008 at 07:59
|
(Sensible observations without swear words removed by the software
If they weren't swearwords, then the software wouldn't have censored them. DD.
|
tempers only flare for the complete and total idiots who's path to the front of the queue is blocked
I find tempers only flare for the complete and total idiots who block half a mile of perfectly useful road, and adopt the "merge in turn" used so successfully in many other countries where I drive.
(I notice it tends to be UK truckers who adopt the roadblock mentality - perhaps other drivers have see the "merge in turn" approach work!)
Edited by Marlot on 01/01/2008 at 08:23
|
Perhaps the "Brain Deads" have read the highway code:
134
You should follow the signs and road markings and get into the lane as directed. In congested road conditions do not change lanes unnecessarily. Merging in turn is recommended but only if safe and appropriate when vehicles are travelling at a very low speed, e.g. when approaching road works or a road traffic incident. It is not recommended at high speed.
Edited by Marlot on 01/01/2008 at 08:28
|
This is one of those unfortunate paradoxes where the better the signage, the more potential for aggravation.
If there are signs warning of lanes merging in say 600 yards, then a lot of people move over into lane one, and some feel that they have thereby "booked" their space. This sets up the seeds of conflict between the sensible people with foresight in lane 1, and the smart alec lane-bargers in lane 2. Both are doing what the HC advises, but neither conceeds the other's point of view.
So it divides people into those who don't like fighting for a space and play safe, and those who would rather gain 600 yards and then possibly fight it out at the end. It only takes one rogue in either lane to mess up what could have been a smooth merger.
|
There's a roundabout in Bracknell which used to cause immense problems - a long line of traffic approaching in lane 1 - half turning left, and half going straight on.
The people going straight on would 'defend' that exit from people who used lane 2 then tried to merge in, despite the fact that it was obvious that using both lanes would reduce the queue into the roundabout (and prevent it fouling up the one behind).
There's now a 'merge in turn' sign, and a little more two-lane exit to help the merging, and the bottleneck has almost disappeared.
|
When i went to school.... 2 into 1 did not go...
i have spent time getting into the correct lane for an idiot like u to come up over the rest of everybody else and jump in...i think not
but i dont think its your fault..as i said,,2 into 1 dont go..i call it bad town planners
.
|
In my world, you're not in "the" correct lane - you're in one of the two correct lanes (which are both equally valid right up until we reach the merge point).
I'm not trying to jump in or claim advantage - I'm trying to use the road space more effectively. And I don't mind which approach is used - I'd like to see one or the other signposted so we all know where we stand!
|
|
PS. Can we take care on the language? I don't like being called an idiot, just because I'm expressing an alternative view, and one which is entirely in line with the highway code at that!
Edited by Marlot on 01/01/2008 at 09:27
|
i have spent time getting into the correct lane
Your inability to read the highway code and your obsession with sitting in a blocked lane when a clear one sits beside you is your problem, not ours.
for an idiot like u to come up over the rest of everybody else and jump in...i think not
It's not jumping in. It's how it should be done.
|
A couple of main roads leading into Auckland have overtaking lanes on the uphill to allow traffic to overtake trucks caravans, etc. During holiday times [ like now ] the Police shut off the overtaking lane because of the troubles listed above. Much muttering from the "Get-ahead-at-any-cost" brigade, but the actual total flow rate over the hills is improved by preventing the squabbling over who gets in front at the choke point at the top of the hill.
|
|
These people are clearly illiterate ............. ......... thats .......... suprised
!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
I know well the roundabout in Bracknell that Marlot mentions - I agree totally. I think that what the sign dos is make people THINK instead of automatically pushing for 'me first'.
It should at least be tried when a lane is closed on a motorway - better still if the powers that be also managed to THINK before unnecessarily closing lanes (time and again no work is being done).
|
|
If you are an outside lane driver coming up to coned area and with a 100 or so yrds to go you slow down to the speed of nearside lane - indicate that you would like to merge - keep checking your mirrors for a suitable gap or for someone to let you in then I apologise unreservedly for the name calling.
|
A study of the methods from the USA...
Abstract
A research study was performed to develop, field test and evaluate a trial mergewarning sign to be used for merging at some signalized intersections. At the present time, the ?Lane Ends? sign (W4-2) is commonly used in the United States to alert
drivers that a merge ahead is required. One location where this sign is used is after
signalized intersections where an additional through-lane ends. To encourage an
alternating merge pattern, a trial sign was developed and field tested at two
intersections in Connecticut. Merging patterns were monitored via video cameras before
and after the sign was installed. An evaluation was completed to determine the
effectiveness of this experimental sign, in accordance with Section 1A.10 of MUTCD 2000.
The experimental merge sign was successful in improving the traffic flow and safety of
the merges. After placement of this sign, the number of desirable merges, with no
visible change in speed from any of the merging vehicles, increased by 10 percent.
The number of undesirable merges, with excessive visible change in speed, decreased by 4 percent.
docs.trb.org/01011177.pdf#search=%22zipper%20sign%...2
|
This topic is a great one for polarising drivers into the early mergers and the late ones.
Merge in turn means that the lanes should make way for one another but in practice the British obsession with queueing and haters of queue-jumpers leads to the early birds - usually the left lane - closing up gaps. On the continent, everything seems to work a lot smoother but then over there people don't take being overtaken as an insult.
|
I agree, it was the same in the USSR.
I hope they introduce signs to help people who don't read the HWC, but I suspect they won't read these signs, just as they don't read the blue ones which display which hour of the day a bus lane is in operation and would rather have a collision than be in their correct lane.
|
Having read this thread and previous ones, I can only offer this analogy.
If you were in the queue at Tesco's, or the bank, or whatever, and someone came barging down to the front, elbowing everyone else in the ribs as they passed, you'd be a little bit upset, yes?
So why is it that some of you think it's fine and dandy to hightail it down to the bottleneck where traffic's merging, and then stop the flow by using your car as a battering ram and shoving your way in at the front, when the rest of us are moving along quite steadily by merging in turn?
Those of you who adopt such tactics are not smarter, cleverer or quicker. You are just pig ignorant, selfish and rude.
|
I think harleyman uses a good analogy.
With merging, a lot depends on where the attempted merge takes place. If the outside lane is full of traffic and halted the same as the inner lane(s) then a polite merge can be helpful to all.
If however the outside lane is empty and people use this to accelerate right to the last few inches before barging in (rather than merging) then I am quite happy for the inside lane to impede their arrogance.
Manners cost nothing, that includes road manners.
My own driving style has a bit of both approaches in it.
There are 2 types of hold ups casuing this problem too. 1 is a regular town hold up (usually due to bad design of 2 into 1). the 2nd is a temporary or accident caused holdup on motorway etc where road manners are needed for all to proceed without more delay.
|
|
|
Harleyman, I'm afraid your analogy doesn't work! In your "Tesco" scenario there is a demon shopper who is in no queue at all and pushes to the front. On the road there are initially two lanes with equal priority and some from one queue try to muscle ahead of others in the other queue.
Near where I live in Spain, there is a long uphill two lane road which merges to one, but lines of yellow paint provide the cue: Coming up the right hand lane (the lane which finally "dies") there is a double solid line which becomes dotted for the last 50 metres, meaning "merge here, stoopid!" Almost perfect zip-merging ensues, a concept not even known here(!) mostly because a collision in these circumstances would mean both drivers losing their NCBs. (Unfortunately, this being Spain, there are always some who ignore the double line and cross anyway if they can get away with it; less likely to happen in Britan...)
|
The tesco scenario rewritten (but not quite perfect) ...
There is a queue in front of each of two tills.
One till closes.
What should the shop manager to do? Serve the people at the front of each queue, alternating between them? Or make all the people who were queuing for the closed till join the end of the queue to the one remaining open?
Either might work, but mixing the two creates chaos, like it does on the road!
Edited by Marlot on 02/01/2008 at 07:17
|
That's not a good analogy either! It undoubtedly happens - the PO were famous for doing that, before they introduced the common queuing system.
But on the roads the difference is that there are notices warning of the lane merger/closure. It's not like a roadworker suddenly popping out and putting up a lane closed barrier.
A better analogy might be what happens at a large car-boot or jumble while waiting for the opening time. Various queues of pedestrians snake their way from the different car parks, some merging on the way, some that have arrived from different directions only merging at the entrance gate. Just try walking straight up to the gate and forming your own queue of one, and see how the other people respond!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps the Highways Agency could do a bit of lateral thinking and 'choke' both lanes down to a single central one straddling both LH and RH lanes slightly ahead of the restriction. This lane could then be 'flicked' left or right as required for the obstruction ahead.
In this way, no-one could claim to be in the 'correct' lane - promoting early and smooth merging-in-turn.
|
I believe that the reason this subject is so often argued is that there is a big difference between merging and agressively jumping the queue, yet many people think they are one and the same.
I don't think anyone objects to a polite merge, i.e. at a sensible distance before the choke point match your speed to that of the other lane, indicate and change lanes.
What is not ok, is when someone races up the lane, right up to the choke point and forces their way in.
It's very easy to spot the two different types of drivers, and I treat them both differently, I'm always happy to let someone in the space in front of me if they are 'merging'. However, if they have raced up to the front of the queue and try to force their way in then I tend to take a different view.
|
|
Echo that. It's all about 'body language'.
|
|
I agree, but unfortunately the other camp can gain some support from the HC advice to "use both lanes".
|
By all means use both lanes, but use your noddle as well - but I guess they can't really put that in the HC!
That might make an amusing thread about translating what the HC really means in practice...
|
As well as body language there is the cultural element here in that Britain is a country obsessed with queueing - the old saying that when two Englishmen meet abroad the first thing they do is form a queue. Courtesy wins over pragmatism and written rules time and time again "After you." - "No, after you!" Second flash of lights means thank you, third flash of lights means "Not at all". Anyone attempting to break this centuries old etiquette is seen as a bounder (Egad, that's worse than not walking after an LBW! Shame on you, Sir!), and we inevitably enter the class war here as bounders are graded according to the car they drive...
Am I right in thinking there was a change to traffic law some time ago whereby someone attempting to block a queue-jumper (or "dynamic lane-merger") would actually be guilty of a traffic offence? Where will this Cold War end?
|
|
The 'Merge in Turn' signs don't seem to have the desired effect. Perhaps if they were changed to 'Form Equal Queues in Merge' it would take away the sense of hard done-by-ness by left lane queuers & encourage them to right lane queue.
|
|
|
Am I right in thinking there was a change to traffic law some time ago whereby someone attempting to block a queue-jumper (or "dynamic lane-merger") would actually be guilty of a traffic offence?
It could come within "inconsiderate driving", but I've never seen it done.
|
|
|
|
|
