2 into 1 feeding in after traffic lights

[anonymous-user]

Bit of incident this morning going to work that I hope someone can clarify for me. Basically queuing at a set of traffic lights in the right hand lane of the two lanes, on the other side of the junction the road narrows to one lane with the feed in arrow in the right lane.

I make room for the car on the left who is ahead of me and plan to feed in behind him but the driver behind in the left lane effectively tailgates so I have no room to feed in.

The options as I see it are a) carry on at risk of ending up in on coming traffic b) stop and wait for a gap or c) barge in and to hell with the consequences.

I did have a look in the highway on the gov.UK site which useless.

Thanks

[73mark]

B
Why do people find 20ft of road so hard to give up,I always use the zip method.

[NH1]

I think the arrows are for the benefit of you, not the left lane, its you that runs out of road. Although its courteous to let people in I don't think they have any obligation to do so.

I was first at a set of lights in this scenario a couple of weeks ago and a car pulls along side. I set off sharpish and so did he, he pulled in behind and spent the next five minutes giving me the beans for doing exactly the same thing he had just done.

[mph1977]

signage and road marking

google maps link?

photos with Paint crayoning over them ?

[WoodsterT]

Always hate coming to these, I just wish people would treat it in a "like a zip" matter (1 by 1) when it's busy, but there's always some numpty that decides to tailgate the car in front. I can understand why they'd try and progress if the next car was already at a clear distance behind them and was obvious they'd have a better clearance just pulling in behind, but when I see those drivers that decide to tailgate the car in front to close the gap when the one from the right lane already had more than enough clearance for a bloody jumbo jet to park in, I'll never understand it... what could one car space possibly do to damage their journey time?

It all adds to that "ME FIRST!" mentality of driving society that seems to be festering in this country more and more, and that's very unfortunate. In answer to your question though, always B. Don't cause yourself any grief, just let them go off into the distance and keep yourself, and others, safe. I've seen plenty of people that try A or C and it either ends horrifically or they've just caused themselves a stressful drive for the next X miles by having an angry driver behind them. Whenever it happens to me I just let them go past, pull in behind (usally while me and the person behind both acknowledge and agree on the fact the guy in front is obviously a bit of a bellend) and I just laugh it off - one space isn't going to cause me any heartache in my life.

Edited by WoodsterT on Thursday 24th April 21:06

[HertsBiker]

I thought 'give way to the right' applied, so the one that tailgated is in the wrong and should have let you in legally.

[anonymous-user]

A bit googling implies that both parties should give way but in reality it depends upon who is ahead of who, I was working on the feed in one by one zipper like but he obviously didn't like it.

The other thing I don't understand is why people do not want to use the right hand lane, its there and empty with no potholes so why not use it.

Maybe I am making sweeping generalisations but the other party to this was driving a BMW 1 Series..

[WoodsterT]

I'm not sure about the right of way thing, I've always been under the impression that these were designed to be treated with the 'zip' method, since it's a merge, so people are supposed to progress one at a time.

I guess the ones that close the gap deliberately aren't aware of that fact, they're also probably the same people that think they have right of way on the slip road while travelling at their comfortable 20MPH

[Moonhawk]

IMO - these should be treated as a merge in turn. The car behind should yield to the car who is ahead.

Far too many people seem to see this as an affront to their grandmothers however......

[NH1]

From what I can see the arrows tell the right lane to move over as the lane ceases to exist, there are no road markings to tell the left lane to do anything.

[SK425]

If the arrows are in your lane and by the road markings it's your lane that's ending, then I think that means the traffic in the other lane has priority and you merge only with their co-operation (or a big enough gap that you don't need their co-operation). A and C are the actions of a bellend, so the answer is B. In my experience, if you look like you're waiting for co-operation, it is usually forthcoming. Perhaps not from the first driver behind - they may be a bellend too - but almost always from the second. Trying to remember whether I've ever been trying to change lanes, needing co-operation from the lane I want to join, and had to wait for as many as three bellends in a row, but I don't think it's ever happened...

[anonymous-user]

I can understand B being the preferred option but the road these traffic lights are on is a national speed limit road, in a 30 zone stopping is less risky but does this change anyones opinion?

[vonhosen]

Where's the pics?

[Rubin215]

I drive a battered and dented £500 car; I don't give a monkeys if the guy on the inside doesn't want to make space; he will eventually...

(I'm also a 6'4" powerfully built goatee'd company director who knows how to handle himself. )

[7db]

Left lane is established and is stand-on. Right lane is merging and yields.

Well behaved traffic merges like a zip. Well behaved traffic doesn't need rules about priority: it's there for the times when traffic doesn't behave.

Option B is the right one. Most traffic is sympathetic to a merge from in front -- you indicate left and let the car pass and the next one will likely let you in. In this case he didn't -- so you wait for the next one.

This works much better if you do it early and have room for the car to wake up to your intentions. Also showing positive chassis motion helps emphasise the indication.

[Zeeky]

gottans said:

..., on the other side of the junction the road narrows to one lane with the feed in arrow in the right lane.

Do you mean the right hand side of the single lane or on the right hand lane before the change to one lane?

Once the lane markings cease no driver is changing lanes and as a consequence, no driver is required to cede priority to another unless there are give way markings at the end of one of the lanes.

The deflection arrow is there to warn all drivers to keep left to avoid oncoming traffic.

The fact that road planners throw cars together in this way suggests that they believe we are sensible enough to merge safely and considerately.

The comments above show the common misunderstanding of deflection arrows in this context.

Edited by Zeeky on Thursday 24th April 22:04

[TREMAiNE]

73mark said:

B
Why do people find 20ft of road so hard to give up,I always use the zip method.

This.

People are fking stupid.

[Martin4x4]

The arrow indicates who has priority but common sense indicates traffic should merge in turn.

[Toltec]

If at the front as the lights change the way I do it is to see if the car next to me pulls away smartly, if so this normally leaves room to pull in behind, if they just pootle off the line I accelerate and pull in front. Sometimes a glance over your shoulder or in the mirrors to look at the other drivers face before moving off can give you an idea what you might have to deal with.

[NH1]

Toltec said:

If at the front as the lights change the way I do it is to see if the car next to me pulls away smartly, if so this normally leaves room to pull in behind, if they just pootle off the line I accelerate and pull in front. Sometimes a glance over your shoulder or in the mirrors to look at the other drivers face before moving off can give you an idea what you might have to deal with.

What I cant work out is usually the car next to you creeps forward on red, sometimes with all 4 wheels over the line by the time they change, and when they do change the car stays still.