Merge in turn - a forgotten rule.
Discussion
tyranical said:
I am surprised by the views in this thread tbh.
I always refuse to let people in to the point where they'll have to hit me if they continue because at the end of the day, if everyone got over well in advance then you wouldn't get the issue, the traffic slows down so much because of all the people forcing themselves in at the end if you just got over in good time when there is a gap that you don't have to ram yourself into to fit then it would surely ease the congestion somewhat.
I'll be honest and say i'm unaware of who's right of way it is according to the law, but people who get in the outside lane, go flying down, then try and squash in again at the end proper piss me off as its just slowing everyone else down.
If everybody merged at the cones and not half a mile back, the queue would be a lot shorter, and would be less likely to interfere with other road junctions.I always refuse to let people in to the point where they'll have to hit me if they continue because at the end of the day, if everyone got over well in advance then you wouldn't get the issue, the traffic slows down so much because of all the people forcing themselves in at the end if you just got over in good time when there is a gap that you don't have to ram yourself into to fit then it would surely ease the congestion somewhat.
I'll be honest and say i'm unaware of who's right of way it is according to the law, but people who get in the outside lane, go flying down, then try and squash in again at the end proper piss me off as its just slowing everyone else down.
So you stay in your unnecessarily-long queue, meanwhile I'll use the available road space to progress. Oh, and one day you'll come across someone who won't bat an eyelid at driving into your car. Still, a scraped wing and 20 minutes ranting at the roadside is better than allowing someone to legally use the road, eh?
tyranical said:
I am surprised by the views in this thread tbh.
I always refuse to let people in to the point where they'll have to hit me if they continue because at the end of the day, if everyone got over well in advance then you wouldn't get the issue, the traffic slows down so much because of all the people forcing themselves in at the end if you just got over in good time when there is a gap that you don't have to ram yourself into to fit then it would surely ease the congestion somewhat.
I'll be honest and say i'm unaware of who's right of way it is according to the law, but people who get in the outside lane, go flying down, then try and squash in again at the end proper piss me off as its just slowing everyone else down.
Ok so if they all merge at the same point but one mile earlier what's the benefit compared to merging at one point one mile later like they should be?I always refuse to let people in to the point where they'll have to hit me if they continue because at the end of the day, if everyone got over well in advance then you wouldn't get the issue, the traffic slows down so much because of all the people forcing themselves in at the end if you just got over in good time when there is a gap that you don't have to ram yourself into to fit then it would surely ease the congestion somewhat.
I'll be honest and say i'm unaware of who's right of way it is according to the law, but people who get in the outside lane, go flying down, then try and squash in again at the end proper piss me off as its just slowing everyone else down.
The negative is the queue is longer and potentially affects other junctions, and some d
heads get upset if someone passes them in all the spare road capacity. But what's the benefit?I just do what the highway code and road signs say - MERGE IN TURN.
It's really not difficult and if those in lane 1 reduced to a sensible pace and left a sensible gap it would all work like, ooh let me think, a zip!
Oh and when I'm on a blood run there's no way I'm losing half an hour because everyone wants to sit 2 miles from the merge. The blood will get warm and be bugger all use to anyone, except maybe a thirsty vampire, and they don't actually exist.
It's really not difficult and if those in lane 1 reduced to a sensible pace and left a sensible gap it would all work like, ooh let me think, a zip!
Oh and when I'm on a blood run there's no way I'm losing half an hour because everyone wants to sit 2 miles from the merge. The blood will get warm and be bugger all use to anyone, except maybe a thirsty vampire, and they don't actually exist.
Edited by Six Fiend on Sunday 28th March 15:39
tyranical said:
So are you proposing that as soon as you see a lane is closing everyone piles over into the outside lane and then all merge in together at the cones?
Oh do stop being such a raging spaz.Three lanes, even gaps, gentle merge near the closure, everyone happy.
Except there appear to be a number of little Englanders who want to spoil the flow.
Edited by Six Fiend on Sunday 28th March 15:41
Parrot of Doom said:
If everybody merged at the cones and not half a mile back, the queue would be a lot shorter, and would be less likely to interfere with other road junctions.
Depending on the traffic density merging at the cones usually requires a slower "merge speed". This has the domino effect of causing everybody in L2 to slow down causing the queue to get longer. So if everybody merged at the cones you would quite quickly have 2 queues of equal length meging at 5mphIn my view there is a difference between "zip merging" / "merge in turn" and what is demonstrated on most occasions which is "merge as late as you can and sod the risks".
Six Fiend said:
tyranical said:
So are you proposing that as soon as you see a lane is closing everyone piles over into the outside lane and then all merge in together at the cones?
Oh do stop being such a raging spaz.Three lanes, even gaps, gentle merge near the closure, everyone happy.
Except there appear to be a number of little Englanders who want to spoil the flow.
Edited by Six Fiend on Sunday 28th March 15:41
berg1 said:
Six Fiend said:
tyranical said:
So are you proposing that as soon as you see a lane is closing everyone piles over into the outside lane and then all merge in together at the cones?
Oh do stop being such a raging spaz.Three lanes, even gaps, gentle merge near the closure, everyone happy.
Except there appear to be a number of little Englanders who want to spoil the flow.
Edited by Six Fiend on Sunday 28th March 15:41
berg1 said:
The key word is flow, everyone wins, but then that pesky doomed parrot zooms down the outside causing everyone else to brake.
If there is a bottleneck ahead - like say 2 lanes into 1 - then you actually get better flow if everyone stays in one lane instead of trying to merge.SmoothRB said:
berg1 said:
The key word is flow, everyone wins, but then that pesky doomed parrot zooms down the outside causing everyone else to brake.
If there is a bottleneck ahead - like say 2 lanes into 1 - then you actually get better flow if everyone stays in one lane instead of trying to merge.Anyone who has passed into Lowestoft via the new relief (haha) road will know the very heated arguments that have been happening at the bridge.
Main problem being is that its not that obvious and people HAVE been queuing for ages (when bridge is up) and then feel cut-up or 'cheated' out of their space by people coming up on the outside.
So much so now that they are trying to change the approach signage.
http://www.lowestoftjournal.co.uk/content/lowestof...
"With drivers being warned that they may face being issued with a fixed penalty ticket, a £30 or £60 fine, three points on their licence or possible prosecution at court if they did not use the system correctly"
http://www.edp24.co.uk/content/edp24/news/story.as...
I will get this right in a minute!
Main problem being is that its not that obvious and people HAVE been queuing for ages (when bridge is up) and then feel cut-up or 'cheated' out of their space by people coming up on the outside.
So much so now that they are trying to change the approach signage.
http://www.lowestoftjournal.co.uk/content/lowestof...
"With drivers being warned that they may face being issued with a fixed penalty ticket, a £30 or £60 fine, three points on their licence or possible prosecution at court if they did not use the system correctly"
http://www.edp24.co.uk/content/edp24/news/story.as...
I will get this right in a minute!
Edited by Morningside on Sunday 28th March 16:42
Edited by Morningside on Sunday 28th March 19:15
Munter said:
SmoothRB said:
berg1 said:
The key word is flow, everyone wins, but then that pesky doomed parrot zooms down the outside causing everyone else to brake.
If there is a bottleneck ahead - like say 2 lanes into 1 - then you actually get better flow if everyone stays in one lane instead of trying to merge.The opposite would be blindly charging ahead on the soon to be closed lane, and everyone then needing to 'merge' in a panic = people braking hard and screws up he 'flow'.
Mr Gear said:
If you want to know WHY, I think a big part of the problem is the signage. Instead of the signage showing two lanes MERGING, it shows the right-hand lane CLOSING.
Now, the reality is that it amounts to the same thing, but what it shows to the people queueing in the left lane is that the people zooming down the right lane and then squeezing in are deliberately ignoring the signage. Which they are not, but the signage is confusing.
A good merge sign (American I think):
A bad (British) merge sign:
This.Now, the reality is that it amounts to the same thing, but what it shows to the people queueing in the left lane is that the people zooming down the right lane and then squeezing in are deliberately ignoring the signage. Which they are not, but the signage is confusing.
A good merge sign (American I think):
A bad (British) merge sign:
FFS, I see the morons are out in force as usual.
Really it is very simple. It is a matter of four zones:
1) Fast zone, normal multi-lane operation with free-flowing traffic, moving fast and widely spaced.
2) Merging zone where people slow down and get into one lane.
3) Slow zone, single file traffic moving slowly and closely spaced.
4) Second fast zone once you're past the obstruction and it all goes back to normal.
The amount of time lost is determined by the length of zone 3, the slow zone. To minimise the amount of time lost means to make zone 3 as short as possible. This is achieved by merging at the pinch point.
And that is all about it.
Merging before it is necessary simply extends the length of the slow zone and makes the whole business take longer, it has the same effect as if the roadworks or whatever were longer. It's simply morons making a rod for their own back.
Really it is very simple. It is a matter of four zones:
1) Fast zone, normal multi-lane operation with free-flowing traffic, moving fast and widely spaced.
2) Merging zone where people slow down and get into one lane.
3) Slow zone, single file traffic moving slowly and closely spaced.
4) Second fast zone once you're past the obstruction and it all goes back to normal.
The amount of time lost is determined by the length of zone 3, the slow zone. To minimise the amount of time lost means to make zone 3 as short as possible. This is achieved by merging at the pinch point.
And that is all about it.
Merging before it is necessary simply extends the length of the slow zone and makes the whole business take longer, it has the same effect as if the roadworks or whatever were longer. It's simply morons making a rod for their own back.
I don't mind those who blast down L2, and try to pull in at the last minute to L1, its the buggers who think they have the gods gift to be let in, rather than what I do, indicate, and wait until either a gap comes up, or someone lets me in.
For years I was one of the guys who got in L1 at the end of the queu, but after seeing so many just plod along in L2, and get in either a gap, or some kind motorist, I am afraid I joined the club.
And of course we all hate the bloody HGV drivers who take it upon their selves to be Mr Plod, and police the traffic, "You cant pass me" attitude.
For years I was one of the guys who got in L1 at the end of the queu, but after seeing so many just plod along in L2, and get in either a gap, or some kind motorist, I am afraid I joined the club.
And of course we all hate the bloody HGV drivers who take it upon their selves to be Mr Plod, and police the traffic, "You cant pass me" attitude.
Vipers said:
And of course we all hate the bloody HGV drivers who take it upon their selves to be Mr Plod, and police the traffic, "You cant pass me" attitude.
...the irony here being that the real Mr Plod will pull them for it, should there miraculously happen to be one about. There was a thread on here a while back about a set of roadworks (in Scotland maybe?) where the police had arranged to have a presence to pull them 
they should do this more often...Pigeon said:
Merging before it is necessary simply extends the length of the slow zone and makes the whole business take longer, it has the same effect as if the roadworks or whatever were longer. It's simply morons making a rod for their own back.
Merging early would allow it all to happen at higher speeds, and it is what the signage tells people to do. But, as some won't, we get the pinch point at the cones anyway, and the feeling that some are queue jumping thus the lane straddling and games of chicken.We should lose the early warnings, replace them with 50, 40, 30 signs, and 'pinch' the American style 'Merge' signs.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff