Discussion
Chrisgr31 said:
hman said:
The reduction in length of the queue reduces the congestion for other roads and junctions in its vicinty.
Thats why they lay the roads out like this - to keep traffic in surrounding areas moving and un-affected.
Arrogant selfish retards who lane block effectively cause congestion for others - just because they are in congestion.
I hope none of their family are affected by the ambulance/police/fire and rescue vehicle that cant get to its destination in time due to the additional congestion caused by their selfish idiotic actions.
In my mind lane blocking should be an offence dealt with by angry lynch mob and pitchforks.
Your theory assumes that the congestion expands to other roads, however if it doesnt then there is no problem. Indeed having one lane clear will in fact speed access for the emergency services!Thats why they lay the roads out like this - to keep traffic in surrounding areas moving and un-affected.
Arrogant selfish retards who lane block effectively cause congestion for others - just because they are in congestion.
I hope none of their family are affected by the ambulance/police/fire and rescue vehicle that cant get to its destination in time due to the additional congestion caused by their selfish idiotic actions.
In my mind lane blocking should be an offence dealt with by angry lynch mob and pitchforks.
Incidentially not saying that one lane should be left clear, but just that merge in turn only works properly where traffic flow means a traffic am will not build up
powerstroke said:
Good thanks I've learnt something, so now when there is a queue I'm doing my bit to save congestion if I use the closed off lane right up to the cones then merge and a can report anyone who is in the other lane who obstructs me joining that lane yes???
Spot onWhat matters is the MANNER in which that is done
hman said:
My theory is sound, do the maths.
The maths give the same answer as in mathematical terms it doesn't matter where the merge in turn point is, if the traffic flow is too great to get through the restriction without queueing. As Getit says if a laneblocker does block lane 2 then the queue in lane 1 quickly disappears because the traffic in lane 1 can flow through the restriction unimpeded.Lets assume traffic is totally stationary and 1 lane only. Car 1 moves, car 2 can immediately start moving,at which point car 3 can immediately move etc. The traffic therefore moves off steadily and swiftly with no obstruction assuming everrything else remains equal.
Lets assume you have 2 lanes of traffic stationary and 1 lane opens. Car 1 lane 1 moves, car 1 lane 2 cannot move until car 1 lane 1 has cleared its bonnet, car 2 lane 1 can then move once car 1 lane 2 has cleared in front of it, but the queue cannot move as quick as traffic in 1 lane only because of the need to merge and wait for the cars alongside to move.
In reality it is of course not so simple because the reality is that as they approach an obstruction people tend to slow and start merging. The fastest method through the obstruction actually rerquires the traffic approaching the restriction to slow and merge in turn at such a speed that neither needs to stop, but in reality it never works. Once one vehicle stops all theoretical maths go out the window.
Lets see the maths to demonstrate differently.
Chrisgr31 said:
The maths give the same answer as in mathematical terms it doesn't matter where the merge in turn point is, if the traffic flow is too great to get through the restriction without queueing. As Getit says if a laneblocker does block lane 2 then the queue in lane 1 quickly disappears because the traffic in lane 1 can flow through the restriction unimpeded.
Lets assume traffic is totally stationary and 1 lane only. Car 1 moves, car 2 can immediately start moving,at which point car 3 can immediately move etc. The traffic therefore moves off steadily and swiftly with no obstruction assuming everrything else remains equal.
Lets assume you have 2 lanes of traffic stationary and 1 lane opens. Car 1 lane 1 moves, car 1 lane 2 cannot move until car 1 lane 1 has cleared its bonnet, car 2 lane 1 can then move once car 1 lane 2 has cleared in front of it, but the queue cannot move as quick as traffic in 1 lane only because of the need to merge and wait for the cars alongside to move.
In reality it is of course not so simple because the reality is that as they approach an obstruction people tend to slow and start merging. The fastest method through the obstruction actually rerquires the traffic approaching the restriction to slow and merge in turn at such a speed that neither needs to stop, but in reality it never works. Once one vehicle stops all theoretical maths go out the window.
Lets see the maths to demonstrate differently.
Hman never made any reference to the speed at which x number of cars will pass through the obstruction, only to the length of the queue being longer than it needs to be, and, unless it's on a motorway, invariably any queue of a reasonable length will lead to other roads starting to snarl up.Lets assume traffic is totally stationary and 1 lane only. Car 1 moves, car 2 can immediately start moving,at which point car 3 can immediately move etc. The traffic therefore moves off steadily and swiftly with no obstruction assuming everrything else remains equal.
Lets assume you have 2 lanes of traffic stationary and 1 lane opens. Car 1 lane 1 moves, car 1 lane 2 cannot move until car 1 lane 1 has cleared its bonnet, car 2 lane 1 can then move once car 1 lane 2 has cleared in front of it, but the queue cannot move as quick as traffic in 1 lane only because of the need to merge and wait for the cars alongside to move.
In reality it is of course not so simple because the reality is that as they approach an obstruction people tend to slow and start merging. The fastest method through the obstruction actually rerquires the traffic approaching the restriction to slow and merge in turn at such a speed that neither needs to stop, but in reality it never works. Once one vehicle stops all theoretical maths go out the window.
Lets see the maths to demonstrate differently.
Centurion07 said:
Hman never made any reference to the speed at which x number of cars will pass through the obstruction, only to the length of the queue being longer than it needs to be, and, unless it's on a motorway, invariably any queue of a reasonable length will lead to other roads starting to snarl up.
Bingo! This, a million times over. Using both lanes is not about speeding things up, or reducing the time you spend in the queue. That is a simple factor of flow-rate through the restriction.It's about reducing the length of the queue and avoiding snarling up junctions behind. Simple as that. Sheeple queuing in Lane 1 where the trail of stationary cars is blocking a junction, are inconsiderate twunts.
There are giant yellow f
king signs on the M9 spur through the roadworks, "WHEN QUEUING USE BOTH LANES". Why? Because when the works started, people queued in one lane to the merge point and the lengthy tailback repeatedly ended up blocking the exit from the Forth Bridge, the roundabout above the junction, and the approach roads from the South Queensferry side. Result? Any traffic trying to get to Edinburgh from 3 different directions, had to needlessly sit in a queue full of traffic bound for Glasgow before they could split off and take their intended route. Madness. Yet still truckers in this section think they know better than the engineers who put the signs up, which, since people started following them, have eased the problem massively.
Chrisgr31 said:
Merge in turn causes no end of arguments on here! The reality is merge in turn works well as long as the traffic is flowing freely and the lanes that are left can handle the traffic through them. If they cant then the traffic through the lanes left will start to slow and queue. Those coming from behind will generally carry on merging in turn but of course the merge in turn point is continually moving up the carriageway, leaving one lane clear, until you get to the point where someone like the OP decides to go down the empty lane and create a new merge in turn point at the front of the queue. This then annoys those who have been merging in turn already.
I doubt that moving the merge in point back to the front of queue actually speeds up the average speed through the restriction but it does mean that the queue uses less of the road.
The non-selfish solution to this issue is to stay in the clear lane at your merge in turn point so that by the time you get to the restriction both lanes will be full of traffic and the merge in turn point is now back where it should be.
I doubt that moving the merge in point back to the front of queue actually speeds up the average speed through the restriction but it does mean that the queue uses less of the road.
The non-selfish solution to this issue is to stay in the clear lane at your merge in turn point so that by the time you get to the restriction both lanes will be full of traffic and the merge in turn point is now back where it should be.
Edited by Chrisgr31 on Tuesday 27th November 23:31
Great summary.
Particularly satisfying when you just know that you have a sensible neighbour in the other lane who helps to land this motoring nirvana.... Whichever lane you start out in.
N.
Upatdawn said:
I hate the "flybys" who cant wait like the rest of humanity and try to run up front and sneak in, please truckers, block the lane!
i miss my 7.5tonner if only for that
Great move: drag up an old thread to be a bell end. The lane ends when it ends, not when some road captain like you decides. i miss my 7.5tonner if only for that
Johnnytheboy said:
Great move: drag up an old thread to be a bell end. The lane ends when it ends, not when some road captain like you decides.
wasnt that old ya frigging knob jockeyI wasnt populare with the fat cow in a BMW who thought she could slide past my sprinter into a gap i was never gonna leave her, 15ft of BMW into a 3ft gap wont go, she ended up behind me waving.....pmsl
Edited by Upatdawn on Wednesday 20th March 10:05
Robb F said:
Happened across this thread too, full of people too dense to understand the highway code Why do we let bad drivers push in? (moaning thread)
Read one and a half pages of that before my wee boiled. Get so bored of thickies trying to box me out because they're too dim to use the great big empty bit of bloody road with the sodding massive merge arrow painted on it (what do they think this means???) but I'd never bothered to explore the mindset of these people before now and had just assumed they were gormless. Upatdawn said:
I hate the "flybys" who cant wait like the rest of humanity and try to run up front and sneak in, please truckers, block the lane!
I miss my 7.5tonner if only for that
The 'rest of humanity' are mindless cretins who have chosen to sit in a line of traffic for no reason. The fact you get annoyed other people actually think about what they're doing speaks more about you than them.I miss my 7.5tonner if only for that
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Upatdawn said:
Johnnytheboy said:
Great move: drag up an old thread to be a bell end. The lane ends when it ends, not when some road captain like you decides.
wasnt that old ya frigging knob jockeyI wasnt populare with the fat cow in a BMW who thought she could slide past my sprinter into a gap i was never gonna leave her, 15ft of BMW into a 3ft gap wont go, she ended up behind me waving.....pmsl
Edited by Upatdawn on Wednesday 20th March 10:05
Gassing Station | Commercial Break | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff