Lorry drivers who think the are the Police
Discussion
mickmcpaddy said:
How is it possible to merge into the left lane without making the left lane slow down?
Quite easy really. Car in lane 1 travels at 50mph and doesn't change speed, car in lane 2 travels at 50mph but is 2 seconds behind car in lane 1, and merges into lane 1 at merge point, still traveling at 50mph. I fail to see the difficulty in that??Problems arise when cars in lane 1 block cars in lane 2 from merging.
Edited by Lopey on Tuesday 21st November 23:19
matjk said:
Its very antisocial, if you did it at a supermarket checkout (ran to the front and nipped in the queue) you would probably get a black eye.
The supermarket queue analogy is wrong and totally misses the point of what is happening on the roads. The reality is that there are 2 separate queues, 1 in each lane. At the merge point, the queues merge into a single lane.
The correct way of dealing with this is that all drivers should use both queues equally but the reality is that the stupid people choose to join the longer queue, leaving the shorter queue open for those that choose that lane instead.
There is no pushing is, just a group of drivers who understand how to use the available road space correctly.
I don't get how this is so controversial.
The road was designed with two lanes so two lanes could be used, if the road designers wanted only one lane queuing they would have only put one lane in. If it's a lane closure in 500 yards, then that means you can use that lane for another 500 yards and then merge in. Merging in turn isn't a social no-no, it's using the road how it was designed to be used to minimise congestion.
I use the merging lanes however personally don't force my way in, if a car accelerates to block me, I just hang back and normally the car behind will let me in, if they don't then I will start being forceful as a queue would start building behind.
One thing I do like doing if I'm queuing in the loser lane (there's one I use daily where I enter the road from the first exit so no point in me using lane 2) and the car behind me is nearly rear ending me so they don't have to let someone in, I'll wave that car in front of me, the anger on the idiot behinds face is priceless. I honestly have much better things to do and more important things to worry about than block someone merging.
The road was designed with two lanes so two lanes could be used, if the road designers wanted only one lane queuing they would have only put one lane in. If it's a lane closure in 500 yards, then that means you can use that lane for another 500 yards and then merge in. Merging in turn isn't a social no-no, it's using the road how it was designed to be used to minimise congestion.
I use the merging lanes however personally don't force my way in, if a car accelerates to block me, I just hang back and normally the car behind will let me in, if they don't then I will start being forceful as a queue would start building behind.
One thing I do like doing if I'm queuing in the loser lane (there's one I use daily where I enter the road from the first exit so no point in me using lane 2) and the car behind me is nearly rear ending me so they don't have to let someone in, I'll wave that car in front of me, the anger on the idiot behinds face is priceless. I honestly have much better things to do and more important things to worry about than block someone merging.
I know my supermarket analogy was wrong as I was still talking about my example of people using a lane clearly marked to be used to exit a motorway then cutting back in at the chevrons, it happens at ever motorway crossing junction on the M25 every day at rush hour. I agree the merge in lanes is a different scenario, so I should just STFU ,
Riley Blue said:
Yes please! That way the lemmings might actually do what they're supposed to do! I think I've only ever seen three or four 'merge in turn' signs in the UK.
You must have stumbled into Bracknell Forest BC at least once then - we have plenty of "merge in turn" signs, but sadly the locals apparently can't read them or if they can they can't understand them, or they choose to ignore them! 
It was tipping down last night so I drove to the station to pick O/H from her train. Lots of others had the same idea so after she got in it was stop-start-stop-start all the way to the main road. With a car park exit on the right and another in five yards on the left it could have been chaotic but, with no help from grown ups, drivers let cars out in turn: one from the right, one from the left etc. - I'm still reeling from the shock of seeing common sense in action.
In response to the supermarket analogies above, I actually saw such a thing in action in a café a few weeks ago.
They had put a barrier thing out to create 2 “lanes” of people, and without a single bit of direction the people at the front took it in turns to go to the next available till.
If we can manage it while queueing for tea and a biscuit, why on earth can we not manage it on the roads?
They had put a barrier thing out to create 2 “lanes” of people, and without a single bit of direction the people at the front took it in turns to go to the next available till.
If we can manage it while queueing for tea and a biscuit, why on earth can we not manage it on the roads?
carlove said:
The road was designed with two lanes so two lanes could be used, if the road designers wanted only one lane queuing they would have only put one lane in. If it's a lane closure in 500 yards, then that means you can use that lane for another 500 yards and then merge in. Merging in turn isn't a social no-no, it's using the road how it was designed to be used to minimise congestion.
Jbeale96 said:
In response to the supermarket analogies above, I actually saw such a thing in action in a café a few weeks ago.
They had put a barrier thing out to create 2 “lanes” of people, and without a single bit of direction the people at the front took it in turns to go to the next available till.
If we can manage it while queueing for tea and a biscuit, why on earth can we not manage it on the roads?
Was the queue served quicker than if there was only one queue? Or was it a bit slower because people were saying after you sir.They had put a barrier thing out to create 2 “lanes” of people, and without a single bit of direction the people at the front took it in turns to go to the next available till.
If we can manage it while queueing for tea and a biscuit, why on earth can we not manage it on the roads?
matjk said:
Actually I'm talking about something different,(my bad) what grinds my gears is when a motorway splits like say on the M25 , you get the idiots that effectively get off the blocked or heavy M25 use the new free flowing lane (lets say its going to the M4) to shot past all the traffic then try to squeeze back in right at the very last opportunity, often they cant get in right away as people sit tail to bumper to stop them, then they sit in a live motorway lane with hazards on waiting for someone to let them in and hopping an Artic doesn't wipe then out form behind at 60mph. The merge at point thing is still a bit annoying.
I have seen in the states 6 lanes go down to 2 in fairly moderate traffic and everyone manages to get over way before the merge and it all keeps flowing,(i was staggered) this will NEVER EVER happen here as a good 25% of cars will bomb up the empty lanes and nip in 10 ft before they hit the cones causing a big tail back until all the lanes are full. Its very antisocial, if you did it at a supermarket checkout (ran to the front and nipped in the queue) you would probably get a black eye. IMHO most UK drivers have good manners until they get behind a wheel, and then its f
k everyone 
matjkI have seen in the states 6 lanes go down to 2 in fairly moderate traffic and everyone manages to get over way before the merge and it all keeps flowing,(i was staggered) this will NEVER EVER happen here as a good 25% of cars will bomb up the empty lanes and nip in 10 ft before they hit the cones causing a big tail back until all the lanes are full. Its very antisocial, if you did it at a supermarket checkout (ran to the front and nipped in the queue) you would probably get a black eye. IMHO most UK drivers have good manners until they get behind a wheel, and then its f
k everyone Forget the States
Just remember that trucks over there drive at warp AND whatever the speed limit is 90% of everything drives at or above it. Unlike here where we have 56 limit on lorries, f
kwits on hype-rmiling trips and doing 40 on motorways,The words merge in turn mean just that ,esp when traffic is slow, and not at 70 mph,
put another way
you see a sign saying roadworks 3 miles ahead, at what point do you start to create the log jam????? £ miles ...2..1..800yds..400yds or at the frigging merge point where you should do it
FFS i despair sometimes on the mentality of some posters on here who allege to be drivers and road gods
mickmcpaddy said:
Was the queue served quicker than if there was only one queue? Or was it a bit slower because people were saying after you sir.
You're missing the point entirely about merge points.They're not about maximising traffic flow through the pinch point. They are about minimising the length of the queue so that it doesn't start affecting surrounding roads.
Basingstoke, as you may be aware, has a lot of roundabouts. Any time there is a lane closure, so a need for merging in turn, and some f
kwit decides to play Road Captain and block the closing lane, traffic builds up enough so it starts spilling out onto the previous roundabout thus blocking traffic that isn't even heading towards the lane closure.mickmcpaddy said:
Jbeale96 said:
In response to the supermarket analogies above, I actually saw such a thing in action in a café a few weeks ago.
They had put a barrier thing out to create 2 “lanes” of people, and without a single bit of direction the people at the front took it in turns to go to the next available till.
If we can manage it while queueing for tea and a biscuit, why on earth can we not manage it on the roads?
Was the queue served quicker than if there was only one queue? Or was it a bit slower because people were saying after you sir.They had put a barrier thing out to create 2 “lanes” of people, and without a single bit of direction the people at the front took it in turns to go to the next available till.
If we can manage it while queueing for tea and a biscuit, why on earth can we not manage it on the roads?
Back on the roads. Imagine the two lanes of cars are a zipper on your jeans. What happens when the zipper skips a tooth or a tooth tries to join with the teeth on the other side too early? It doesn't fasten properly!
More signs like this (reduced in scale as approopriate) might help.
For those who still don't get it.
Queue where the merge STARTS. If you see idiot being a 'traffic cop' and baulking the flow of traffic down the merge, then snap a picture, and send to the local cops.
Driving without reasonable consideration
The offence of driving without reasonable consideration under section 3 of the RTA 1988 is committed only when other persons are inconvenienced by the manner of the defendant's driving, see section 3ZA(4) RTA 1988.
The maximum penalty is a level 5 fine. The court must also either endorse the driver's licence with between 3 and 9 penalty points (unless there are "special reasons" not to do so), or impose disqualification for a fixed period and/or until a driving test has been passed. The penalty is the same as for driving without due care and attention.
A driving without due consideration charge is more appropriate where the inconvenience is aimed at and suffered by other road users.
Note the essential difference between the two offences under section 3 of the RTA 1988 is that in cases of careless driving the prosecution need not show that any other person was inconvenienced. In cases of inconsiderate driving, there must be evidence that some other user of the road or public place was actually inconvenienced; Dilks v Bowman-Shaw [1981] RTR 4 DC.
Driving without reasonable consideration
The offence of driving without reasonable consideration under section 3 of the RTA 1988 is committed only when other persons are inconvenienced by the manner of the defendant's driving, see section 3ZA(4) RTA 1988.
The maximum penalty is a level 5 fine. The court must also either endorse the driver's licence with between 3 and 9 penalty points (unless there are "special reasons" not to do so), or impose disqualification for a fixed period and/or until a driving test has been passed. The penalty is the same as for driving without due care and attention.
A driving without due consideration charge is more appropriate where the inconvenience is aimed at and suffered by other road users.
Note the essential difference between the two offences under section 3 of the RTA 1988 is that in cases of careless driving the prosecution need not show that any other person was inconvenienced. In cases of inconsiderate driving, there must be evidence that some other user of the road or public place was actually inconvenienced; Dilks v Bowman-Shaw [1981] RTR 4 DC.
Lopey said:
Quite easy really. Car in lane 1 travels at 50mph and doesn't change speed, car in lane 2 travels at 50mph but is 2 seconds behind car in lane 1, and merges into lane 1 at merge point, still traveling at 50mph. I fail to see the difficulty in that??
Problems arise when cars in lane 1 block cars in lane 2 from merging.
Errmm it’s not that easy. 2 lanes of traffic travelling 2 seconds apart at 50mph. Arriving at merge point 1st Car in lane 1 can carry on at 50mph, however second Car in lane 2 can’t, as they want to maintain a 2 second gap so they slow down, Car 2 in lane 1 also has to slow down etc. Generally speaking the cars continue to merge in turn but because they are slowing the merge point moves further and further back.Problems arise when cars in lane 1 block cars in lane 2 from merging.
Edited by Lopey on Tuesday 21st November 23:19
Not sure on the exact maths but you now have a queue of traffic in lane 1 travelling at 40mph 2 seconds apart with the traffic slowing from 50 joining at the back.
One of those at the back now decides to go down the empty lane 2 to the merge point and join there. As there is only a 2 second gap the traffic travelling at 40mph has to slow to let them in to maintain the 2 second gap.
Alternatively of course a lorry decides to block lane 2 and travels along with the other traffic at 40mph when they get to the merge point they merge in turn, and the result is traffic in both lanes has to slow down
Chrisgr31 said:
Lopey said:
Quite easy really. Car in lane 1 travels at 50mph and doesn't change speed, car in lane 2 travels at 50mph but is 2 seconds behind car in lane 1, and merges into lane 1 at merge point, still traveling at 50mph. I fail to see the difficulty in that??
Problems arise when cars in lane 1 block cars in lane 2 from merging.
Errmm it’s not that easy. 2 lanes of traffic travelling 2 seconds apart at 50mph. Arriving at merge point 1st Car in lane 1 can carry on at 50mph, however second Car in lane 2 can’t, as they want to maintain a 2 second gap so they slow down, Car 2 in lane 1 also has to slow down etc. Generally speaking the cars continue to merge in turn but because they are slowing the merge point moves further and further back.Problems arise when cars in lane 1 block cars in lane 2 from merging.
Edited by Lopey on Tuesday 21st November 23:19
Not sure on the exact maths but you now have a queue of traffic in lane 1 travelling at 40mph 2 seconds apart with the traffic slowing from 50 joining at the back.
One of those at the back now decides to go down the empty lane 2 to the merge point and join there. As there is only a 2 second gap the traffic travelling at 40mph has to slow to let them in to maintain the 2 second gap.
Alternatively of course a lorry decides to block lane 2 and travels along with the other traffic at 40mph when they get to the merge point they merge in turn, and the result is traffic in both lanes has to slow down
It would be interesting to hear from some actual HGV drivers as to why they do this, rather than just all the irate car/van drivers whose lives have been completely devastated by not being able to get past a truck prior to a lane restriction.
My suspicion is, the truck drivers start to straddle the white line early to block the outer lane off because, if they remain in the left hand lane until they reach the coned off section, as some on here are suggesting they should, they know that there will be a queue of cars/vans in the right hand lane, all driving nose to tail, refusing to let the truck in, because none of them want to be stuck behind it, resulting in the truck having to sit and wait in the left hand lane, causing a tailback in that lane.
Another issue is, if they stay in the left hand lane until the cones, if the traffic to their right isn't nose to tail, as they get to the coned off section and need to move across, they could have speeding cars/vans trying to dive down the outside of the truck/trailer, to "beat them into the roadworks", again so they don't get "stuck" behind the truck, risking an accident.
(I have actually witnessed this in the past on a motorway: A truck and trailer remained in the left hand lane until it reached the coned off section coming into some roadworks, and as it started to move across into the empty right hand lane, a speeding Transit/Sprinter van driver decided that, rather than simply slow down a bit and tuck in behind the truck, they'd try to get past it by "booting it" down the outside.
Halfway down the trailer, the van driver realised the gap was no longer there, and had to stand on their brakes to avoid going into the side of the truck. At the same time, the truck driver had spotted the van, braked hard and actually turned back to the left to try to avoid an accident, taking out a whole load of cones in the process. The motorway traffic had to come to a halt as the road was now completely blocked, and I sat there thinking to Myself: "Why the fk would you even try that?"
The truck driver got out, angrily flapped his arms at the van [whose driver didn't get out funnily enough!], dragged a couple of cones out from under his truck and then got going again, with the van following behind slowly through the road works. When the road works ended and the lanes opened up once more, the van passed the truck and was on the receiving end of the longest blast of air horns I have ever heard!)
By straddling the lanes earlier than the coned off section, the truck drivers make it far easier for themselves to get into the remaining open lane, they prevent car/van drivers from taking stupid chances trying to drive down the outside of them, and they reduce the risks of accidents being caused.
Everyone here so far seems to be more than happy to label the truck drivers as being selfish and inconsiderate because of their driving, but the fact is, plenty of the car/van drivers that are on the roads with them are just as selfish and inconsiderate, and are, at times, bloody dangerous!
My suspicion is, the truck drivers start to straddle the white line early to block the outer lane off because, if they remain in the left hand lane until they reach the coned off section, as some on here are suggesting they should, they know that there will be a queue of cars/vans in the right hand lane, all driving nose to tail, refusing to let the truck in, because none of them want to be stuck behind it, resulting in the truck having to sit and wait in the left hand lane, causing a tailback in that lane.
Another issue is, if they stay in the left hand lane until the cones, if the traffic to their right isn't nose to tail, as they get to the coned off section and need to move across, they could have speeding cars/vans trying to dive down the outside of the truck/trailer, to "beat them into the roadworks", again so they don't get "stuck" behind the truck, risking an accident.
(I have actually witnessed this in the past on a motorway: A truck and trailer remained in the left hand lane until it reached the coned off section coming into some roadworks, and as it started to move across into the empty right hand lane, a speeding Transit/Sprinter van driver decided that, rather than simply slow down a bit and tuck in behind the truck, they'd try to get past it by "booting it" down the outside.
Halfway down the trailer, the van driver realised the gap was no longer there, and had to stand on their brakes to avoid going into the side of the truck. At the same time, the truck driver had spotted the van, braked hard and actually turned back to the left to try to avoid an accident, taking out a whole load of cones in the process. The motorway traffic had to come to a halt as the road was now completely blocked, and I sat there thinking to Myself: "Why the f
k would you even try that?"The truck driver got out, angrily flapped his arms at the van [whose driver didn't get out funnily enough!], dragged a couple of cones out from under his truck and then got going again, with the van following behind slowly through the road works. When the road works ended and the lanes opened up once more, the van passed the truck and was on the receiving end of the longest blast of air horns I have ever heard!)
By straddling the lanes earlier than the coned off section, the truck drivers make it far easier for themselves to get into the remaining open lane, they prevent car/van drivers from taking stupid chances trying to drive down the outside of them, and they reduce the risks of accidents being caused.
Everyone here so far seems to be more than happy to label the truck drivers as being selfish and inconsiderate because of their driving, but the fact is, plenty of the car/van drivers that are on the roads with them are just as selfish and inconsiderate, and are, at times, bloody dangerous!
Jbeale96 said:
In response to the supermarket analogies above, I actually saw such a thing in action in a café a few weeks ago.
They had put a barrier thing out to create 2 “lanes” of people, and without a single bit of direction the people at the front took it in turns to go to the next available till.
If we can manage it while queueing for tea and a biscuit, why on earth can we not manage it on the roads?
Because when in your little metal bubble people turn into complete douchbags.They had put a barrier thing out to create 2 “lanes” of people, and without a single bit of direction the people at the front took it in turns to go to the next available till.
If we can manage it while queueing for tea and a biscuit, why on earth can we not manage it on the roads?
mickmcpaddy said:
Was the queue served quicker than if there was only one queue? Or was it a bit slower because people were saying after you sir.
As has been said, the queue moved at the same pace but didn’t spill out of the door getting in other people’s way. xjay1337 said:
Because when in your little metal bubble people turn into complete douchbags.
Unfortunately so, I think some offensive adverts after the watershed are needed: “don’t be a fking and learn how to drive properly you waste of fking skin” for example. Edited by Jbeale96 on Wednesday 22 November 11:57
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff