More merging drama
Discussion
DeltaTango said:
Agree. I've been blocked from doing similar by Knight of the Road HGV drivers when the merge point is some 800 yards or more away. I wouldn't get as wound up at being impeded as the Merc driver though of course.
I hate these t*ssers. I did get my own back once - HGV driver trying to block me from using the 2nd lane heading towards roadworks so I cut back in behind him and then sat alongside his cab. In the end he got stuck in the outside lane with no-one letting him in!I agree with Mr Renault, but then merge in turn arguments on pistonhead are just legion, and I woudn't hazard my car to make a point.
People fall into one of two groups, and you can sort yourself out based on the following
1) You're comming up to a roundabout where there is a giant queue pulling left. You can jump the queue turn right on the roundabout and keep on going right until you join the left queue way up the pecking order. Why wouldn't you?
2) You're in a long queue at a supermarket check out. All of a sudden a second till opens up. Do you rush forward to get your trolly in first or do you wait for the people in front of you to decide whether they want to stick or change first.
3) Lastly do you ever break the posted speed limit.
There isn't a right answer no matter how much people think there is. Its part of how we individually make decisions.
People fall into one of two groups, and you can sort yourself out based on the following
1) You're comming up to a roundabout where there is a giant queue pulling left. You can jump the queue turn right on the roundabout and keep on going right until you join the left queue way up the pecking order. Why wouldn't you?
2) You're in a long queue at a supermarket check out. All of a sudden a second till opens up. Do you rush forward to get your trolly in first or do you wait for the people in front of you to decide whether they want to stick or change first.
3) Lastly do you ever break the posted speed limit.
There isn't a right answer no matter how much people think there is. Its part of how we individually make decisions.
I've noticed that people in the North tend to move over much, much earlier than those in the South when two carriageways merge into one, leaving a completely serviceable, yet empty lane for many hundreds of metres.
The Renault driver in that clip was being a self-righteous idiot and deserves a tug by plod for DWDCA
The Renault driver in that clip was being a self-righteous idiot and deserves a tug by plod for DWDCA
julian64 said:
I agree with Mr Renault,
And you're both wrong.Highway code Rules 288 & 134 : https://www.gov.uk/road-works-level-crossings-tram...
https://www.gov.uk/general-rules-all-drivers-rider...
Krikkit said:
We need a law introducing about zip merging like the Germans do. Suddenly you'd find all the 2-1 merge lanes fully occupied!
Utterly stupid behaviour.
There's a dual carriageway near Halifax which goes down to one lane. There are clear signs saying "Merge in Turn".Utterly stupid behaviour.
Doesn't make any difference.
One of the problems is the design of the road. It is clear the outside lane is closing, which gives people in the inside lane the feeling that they have the priority. It would be far better if both lanes merged into one in a "Y" shape and then neither lane has the priority over the other. Then you get the zip merge.
julian64 said:
I agree with Mr Renault, but then merge in turn arguments on pistonhead are just legion, and I woudn't hazard my car to make a point.
People fall into one of two groups, and you can sort yourself out based on the following
1) You're comming up to a roundabout where there is a giant queue pulling left. You can jump the queue turn right on the roundabout and keep on going right until you join the left queue way up the pecking order. Why wouldn't you?
2) You're in a long queue at a supermarket check out. All of a sudden a second till opens up. Do you rush forward to get your trolly in first or do you wait for the people in front of you to decide whether they want to stick or change first.
3) Lastly do you ever break the posted speed limit.
There isn't a right answer no matter how much people think there is. Its part of how we individually make decisions.
There is a right answer, and it's to use both lanes. It reduces tailback length and removes traffic speed differentials between the lanes increasing safety. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merge_%28traffic%29People fall into one of two groups, and you can sort yourself out based on the following
1) You're comming up to a roundabout where there is a giant queue pulling left. You can jump the queue turn right on the roundabout and keep on going right until you join the left queue way up the pecking order. Why wouldn't you?
2) You're in a long queue at a supermarket check out. All of a sudden a second till opens up. Do you rush forward to get your trolly in first or do you wait for the people in front of you to decide whether they want to stick or change first.
3) Lastly do you ever break the posted speed limit.
There isn't a right answer no matter how much people think there is. Its part of how we individually make decisions.
1) Spoke to a bobby about this- though strictly not an offence (because people do this by accident daily) then chances are you'd be pulled over and talked to if it was fairly obvious what you'd done. However you would not for using an empty lane as per the video.
2) This is not a fair analogy, volume of traffic through works will depend on how efficient the merging is. The most efficient merging happens when people can merge without braking. Supermarket check out speed is dependent on number of groceries and efficiency of till clerk. Also, in your analogy the other lane would suddenly become obstruction free which is rarely happens on the road.
3) Personally? Not in my commuting car, but the kit car, every now and then.
julian64 said:
I agree with Mr Renault, but then merge in turn arguments on pistonhead are just legion, and I woudn't hazard my car to make a point.
People fall into one of two groups, and you can sort yourself out based on the following
1) You're comming up to a roundabout where there is a giant queue pulling left. You can jump the queue turn right on the roundabout and keep on going right until you join the left queue way up the pecking order. Why wouldn't you?
2) You're in a long queue at a supermarket check out. All of a sudden a second till opens up. Do you rush forward to get your trolly in first or do you wait for the people in front of you to decide whether they want to stick or change first.
3) Lastly do you ever break the posted speed limit.
There isn't a right answer no matter how much people think there is. Its part of how we individually make decisions.
You're wrong. The Highway Code contains the right answer. It is kinda the rule book, and people are kinda supposed to read it, especially if they want to play at enforcing rules.People fall into one of two groups, and you can sort yourself out based on the following
1) You're comming up to a roundabout where there is a giant queue pulling left. You can jump the queue turn right on the roundabout and keep on going right until you join the left queue way up the pecking order. Why wouldn't you?
2) You're in a long queue at a supermarket check out. All of a sudden a second till opens up. Do you rush forward to get your trolly in first or do you wait for the people in front of you to decide whether they want to stick or change first.
3) Lastly do you ever break the posted speed limit.
There isn't a right answer no matter how much people think there is. Its part of how we individually make decisions.
I've seen this coning method proposed before, to improve the comprehension of "merge in turn", which so far is misunderstood by so many people. The current system is on the left of the diagram: though two lanes merge into one, it encourages the cars in the left lane to think they have priority, and are "letting" the others in (or not). The method on the right, effectively dissolves both existing lanes, without priority, and creates a new central lane (which falls back into the preferred lane soon after). This may get the message across better, that everybody should queue in any available lane, and each give way to one car from the other lane when they merge.
I think it seems like a good idea, has it been tried anywhere? Apologies for the hurried diagram, should be clear enough though.
The trouble is, when people think they're in the right, like the Renault driver, they're unstoppable...
I think it seems like a good idea, has it been tried anywhere? Apologies for the hurried diagram, should be clear enough though.
The trouble is, when people think they're in the right, like the Renault driver, they're unstoppable...
Freddy88FM said:
julian64 said:
I agree with Mr Renault, but then merge in turn arguments on pistonhead are just legion, and I woudn't hazard my car to make a point.
People fall into one of two groups, and you can sort yourself out based on the following
1) You're comming up to a roundabout where there is a giant queue pulling left. You can jump the queue turn right on the roundabout and keep on going right until you join the left queue way up the pecking order. Why wouldn't you?
2) You're in a long queue at a supermarket check out. All of a sudden a second till opens up. Do you rush forward to get your trolly in first or do you wait for the people in front of you to decide whether they want to stick or change first.
3) Lastly do you ever break the posted speed limit.
There isn't a right answer no matter how much people think there is. Its part of how we individually make decisions.
There is a right answer, and it's to use both lanes. It reduces tailback length and removes traffic speed differentials between the lanes increasing safety. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merge_%28traffic%29People fall into one of two groups, and you can sort yourself out based on the following
1) You're comming up to a roundabout where there is a giant queue pulling left. You can jump the queue turn right on the roundabout and keep on going right until you join the left queue way up the pecking order. Why wouldn't you?
2) You're in a long queue at a supermarket check out. All of a sudden a second till opens up. Do you rush forward to get your trolly in first or do you wait for the people in front of you to decide whether they want to stick or change first.
3) Lastly do you ever break the posted speed limit.
There isn't a right answer no matter how much people think there is. Its part of how we individually make decisions.
1) Spoke to a bobby about this- though strictly not an offence (because people do this by accident daily) then chances are you'd be pulled over and talked to if it was fairly obvious what you'd done. However you would not for using an empty lane as per the video.
2) This is not a fair analogy, volume of traffic through works will depend on how efficient the merging is. The most efficient merging happens when people can merge without braking. Supermarket check out speed is dependent on number of groceries and efficiency of till clerk. Also, in your analogy the other lane would suddenly become obstruction free which is rarely happens on the road.
3) Personally? Not in my commuting car, but the kit car, every now and then.
On another thread about merging-in-turn he admitted knowing that merging properly is beneficial to all, is the correct thing to do, improves traffic flow and yet still joins the back of the longest queue out of a sense of embarrassment at being perceived to have jumped the queue.
julian64 said:
Some factually incorrect bulls
t
Detest people who clearly wished they could be police but were too self-righteous and worst of all, wrong. You use both lanes up until they close. Red X is closed, white arrow is not. Cones are closed, sign saying it closes in 600 yards is not. If the HA wanted the road closed where you've blocked everybody in your dreary sttbox, they'd have closed it there.Wow, didn't expect that; I clearly had a few too many of these people this morning!
Edited to be a bit more family friendly. Sentiment stands, though.
Moderator edit: cut out the insults please.
Edited by jeremyc on Tuesday 21st April 16:08
Jodyone said:
I've seen this coning method proposed before, to improve the comprehension of "merge in turn", which so far is misunderstood by so many people. The current system is on the left of the diagram: though two lanes merge into one, it encourages the cars in the left lane to think they have priority, and are "letting" the others in (or not). The method on the right, effectively dissolves both existing lanes, without priority, and creates a new central lane (which falls back into the preferred lane soon after). This may get the message across better, that everybody should queue in any available lane, and each give way to one car from the other lane when they merge.
I think it seems like a good idea, has it been tried anywhere? Apologies for the hurried diagram, should be clear enough though.
The trouble is, when people think they're in the right, like the Renault driver, they're unstoppable...
I agree. See my post a few up from yours. The closure of a lane makes the other lanes "feel" they have priority.I think it seems like a good idea, has it been tried anywhere? Apologies for the hurried diagram, should be clear enough though.
The trouble is, when people think they're in the right, like the Renault driver, they're unstoppable...
The merging or combining of lanes - effectively closing both - should equal things out.
julian64 said:
2) You're in a long queue at a supermarket check out. All of a sudden a second till opens up. Do you rush forward to get your trolly in first or do you wait for the people in front of you to decide whether they want to stick or change first.
I've only just noticed this little gem...1. That isn't the correct supermarket analogy to be applying to a merge-in-turn discussion.
2. In the analogy you've given, your first choice is to rush forward & get to the new till first. I think I'm correct in saying you think this is not the polite thing to be doing. Your other choice is to wait & see whether the people in front of you WANT TO CHANGE OR STICK IN THEIR CURRENT LANE implying that their choice will affect what YOU do?
If some of them change lanes then both queues will end up the same length, so as I keep telling you time and time again, NO-ONE joining at the back now has any advantage of over anyone else. If none of them change lanes, are you seriously trying to suggest you would stay behind them all, even though the new cashier is asking for people to come over?
Of course you wouldn't. There is a new till sat there, waiting to be used and yet you're going to stand there like a lemming because all the other lemmings have chosen to stay where they are?Freddy88FM said:
julian64 said:
I agree with Mr Renault, but then merge in turn arguments on pistonhead are just legion, and I woudn't hazard my car to make a point.
People fall into one of two groups, and you can sort yourself out based on the following
1) You're comming up to a roundabout where there is a giant queue pulling left. You can jump the queue turn right on the roundabout and keep on going right until you join the left queue way up the pecking order. Why wouldn't you?
2) You're in a long queue at a supermarket check out. All of a sudden a second till opens up. Do you rush forward to get your trolly in first or do you wait for the people in front of you to decide whether they want to stick or change first.
3) Lastly do you ever break the posted speed limit.
There isn't a right answer no matter how much people think there is. Its part of how we individually make decisions.
There is a right answer, and it's to use both lanes. It reduces tailback length and removes traffic speed differentials between the lanes increasing safety. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merge_%28traffic%29People fall into one of two groups, and you can sort yourself out based on the following
1) You're comming up to a roundabout where there is a giant queue pulling left. You can jump the queue turn right on the roundabout and keep on going right until you join the left queue way up the pecking order. Why wouldn't you?
2) You're in a long queue at a supermarket check out. All of a sudden a second till opens up. Do you rush forward to get your trolly in first or do you wait for the people in front of you to decide whether they want to stick or change first.
3) Lastly do you ever break the posted speed limit.
There isn't a right answer no matter how much people think there is. Its part of how we individually make decisions.
1) Spoke to a bobby about this- though strictly not an offence (because people do this by accident daily) then chances are you'd be pulled over and talked to if it was fairly obvious what you'd done. However you would not for using an empty lane as per the video.
2) This is not a fair analogy, volume of traffic through works will depend on how efficient the merging is. The most efficient merging happens when people can merge without braking. Supermarket check out speed is dependent on number of groceries and efficiency of till clerk. Also, in your analogy the other lane would suddenly become obstruction free which is rarely happens on the road.
3) Personally? Not in my commuting car, but the kit car, every now and then.
The answer to one shows the bobby has no reason to stop someone who is obeying the law, but does so anyway as he understands the disregard this person is showing his fellow driver.
Two demonstrates whether you think about others before you act. Whether you see people on the road as 'more entitled' than you.
The most efficient flow through a restriction is laminar, that means all the merging must be done well before the pinch point so that through the actual restriction cars are nose to tail at a constant maximum speed and not negotiating with each other. The idea of an extended queue is only worth mentioning if it is indeed choking an entrance somewhere back in the distance.
My personal opinion is that the problem is caused time and time again by the idiots that organise the road markings. They ask one flow of traffic to merge into another, which causes problems with people with a sense of entitlement. If they actually simply organised the roads so that two roads equally merged into another I think it would all improve. The idiots doing the road markings seem to assume the highway code is the answer to all problems, and take no responsibility for why some markings are obeyed and some aren't, they just leave the police to sort it out.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff