One single thing that makes you think "knob" Vol 4

[nonsequitur]

mhurley said:

Driver infront of me:
1) Pulls over without indicating
2) Parks up on pavement
3) Has a dog sitting on parcel shelf

Was the car a Rover?

[Deranged Rover]

nonsequitur said:

Was the car a Rover?

Or the dog?

[yellowjack]

People who don't play nice with you when you are playing nice with them.

Last night, dark, absolutely lashing it down with rain, and I'm cycling home. The cycle lane on the carriageway is full of water, deep continuous puddle for about 30 meters. I have a choice to make. Either a) ride much further out into the carriageway to avoid the puddle, or b) ride on the empty footway to get beyond this low point in the road and get back into the cycle lane where the puddle ends.

So I weighed up the pros and cons. There were so many pros to riding briefly on the footway for both me, and for drivers, that I chose that option. There were no practical cons, as there were zero pedestrians around and the likelihood of getting stopped by plod for driving a carriage upon the footway were so low as to be negligible. There weren't that many cars about either, to be fair, but as I approached the start point of this puddle and rolled up a dropped kerb I became aware of a vehicle behind me. A glance back got my spidey-senses tingling, so I braked to a halt.

As predicted by my sixth sense, the Shogun, instead of drifting right, away from the puddle, actually accelerated and drove closer to the kerb, causing a tsunami of rainwater to wash over the footway. My suspicions were confirmed when the driver slowed down to check his handiwork in the mirror.

So next time, I won't break the law, however briefly, but instead I shall ride well into the traffic lane, somewhere near the centreline of the carriageway so that no wkspangle drivers can get to the puddle to soak me, deliberately or otherwise.

[Hackney]

nonsequitur said:

Hackney said:

This baffles me. Fair enough if he doesn't want to use it, but to label someone a queue jumper for using a pump no-one else is using is ridiculous.

Us British and queuing ! Madness.

For it to be queue jumping there'd have to be a queue to jump.
People queuing at other pumps leaving one unused and driving to that lonely, unloved pump is not queue jumping.

[yellowjack]

Hackney said:

For it to be queue jumping there'd have to be a queue to jump.
People queuing at other pumps leaving one unused and driving to that lonely, unloved pump is not queue jumping.

Same with merge in turn.

People queuing in other lanes leaving one unused, and then you driving along in that lonely, unloved lane is NOT queue jumping.

Specifically aimed at the chump in the white VW Polo at Castle Point Shopping Centre yesterday. The exit ramp from the top deck of the car park is lined with little signs instructing drivers clearly and obviously to "Use Both Lanes". Yet driver after driver positions centrally on the ramp, or stays left and makes one long snake out of the car park. Yet there are two lanes at the traffic light controlled roundabout, so forming a queue in one lane only serves to double the time it takes for anyone to get out of there.

Being a Sunday afternoon, pretty much all the shops close within a half-hour window, and being the season of Christmas Shopping, it was packed. I'd rather not have gone, but we were on our way home from a day out and passing when my wife wanted to go to Boots to pick up some body-lotion or other. As I got to the top of the exit ramp after not moving for what seemed like a lifetime, I became aware that the right hand lane on the ramp was empty, so I checked my mirrors, signalled, and moved from left lane to right lane. Straight from the top of the ramp to the bottom. This mightily upset the Polo-driving dweeb, who got his toot on. And to make matters worse, at the roundabout the Polo-driving dweeb needed to turn west along Castle Lane, yet was in the eastbound lane, so they further held up traffic trying to get through a green light as they tried to force their way across two lanes of traffic to get in the correct lane...

[RazerSauber]

yellowjack said:

Same with merge in turn.

People queuing in other lanes leaving one unused, and then you driving along in that lonely, unloved lane is NOT queue jumping.

Specifically aimed at the chump in the white VW Polo at Castle Point Shopping Centre yesterday. The exit ramp from the top deck of the car park is lined with little signs instructing drivers clearly and obviously to "Use Both Lanes". Yet driver after driver positions centrally on the ramp, or stays left and makes one long snake out of the car park. Yet there are two lanes at the traffic light controlled roundabout, so forming a queue in one lane only serves to double the time it takes for anyone to get out of there.

Being a Sunday afternoon, pretty much all the shops close within a half-hour window, and being the season of Christmas Shopping, it was packed. I'd rather not have gone, but we were on our way home from a day out and passing when my wife wanted to go to Boots to pick up some body-lotion or other. As I got to the top of the exit ramp after not moving for what seemed like a lifetime, I became aware that the right hand lane on the ramp was empty, so I checked my mirrors, signalled, and moved from left lane to right lane. Straight from the top of the ramp to the bottom. This mightily upset the Polo-driving dweeb, who got his toot on. And to make matters worse, at the roundabout the Polo-driving dweeb needed to turn west along Castle Lane, yet was in the eastbound lane, so they further held up traffic trying to get through a green light as they tried to force their way across two lanes of traffic to get in the correct lane...

This winds me up. It's the same in roadworks when one bell end who's determined to get into Highways England always pull out into the completely empty lane but then don't drive any faster so nobody can get past. Why?? It only effectively makes the roadworks longer and slower to get through! I had a Renault Scenic or some other such crap wagon do it to me once while I was "road testing" my mothers Mini after some repairs. I managed to sneak into the gap this mouth breather had left then stayed level with them until they had to stop for the cones. Probably not the best idea but they ended up a few cars back so everyone's a winner.

[Hackney]

The Costa delivery driver who drove into a parked car funnel before I'd exited and caused a stand-off.

It was a row of about 10 cars with, I'd say a 2 car gap between car 8 and 9 all on my side of the road.
I was third in line (there may have been more cars ahead, unsure) and I'd left a couple of car lengths to the car I was following in case they decided to jump into a gap.

The cars in front of me cleared the gap and progressed past the two remaining cars. As they tucked in left and I was clearing the gap Costa van driver who presumbaly had been waiting, pulled away forcing me to stop. We endured a brief stand off as he refused to back up claiming "right of way" and telling me to "read the highway code".
He / she* then got sweary about it so I backed up.

Stupid situation entirely created by their lack of patience. Knob. Took a photo of the van and reported via Twitter, for the language more than the driving. No response.

• I am not entirely sure in all honesty. A woman who used to be a man is my best guess.

[Countdown]

RazerSauber said:

This winds me up. It's the same in roadworks when one bell end who's determined to get into Highways England always pull out into the completely empty lane but then don't drive any faster so nobody can get past. Why?? It only effectively makes the roadworks longer and slower to get through! I had a Renault Scenic or some other such crap wagon do it to me once while I was "road testing" my mothers Mini after some repairs. I managed to sneak into the gap this mouth breather had left then stayed level with them until they had to stop for the cones. Probably not the best idea but they ended up a few cars back so everyone's a winner.

Devil's advocate....

When "Mr Wannabe HE Guy" reaches the merge point there will be two lanes of traffic behind him which will all "merge in turn". Isn't that the objective? (And he'll probably reach the merge point fairly quickly because the inside lane will start moving much more freely due to the absence of people merging late/staccato braking/acceleration/rinse and repeat).

[AstonZagato]

Countdown said:

RazerSauber said:

This winds me up. It's the same in roadworks when one bell end who's determined to get into Highways England always pull out into the completely empty lane but then don't drive any faster so nobody can get past. Why?? It only effectively makes the roadworks longer and slower to get through! I had a Renault Scenic or some other such crap wagon do it to me once while I was "road testing" my mothers Mini after some repairs. I managed to sneak into the gap this mouth breather had left then stayed level with them until they had to stop for the cones. Probably not the best idea but they ended up a few cars back so everyone's a winner.

Devil's advocate....

When "Mr Wannabe HE Guy" reaches the merge point there will be two lanes of traffic behind him which will all "merge in turn". Isn't that the objective? (And he'll probably reach the merge point fairly quickly because the inside lane will start moving much more freely due to the absence of people merging late/staccato braking/acceleration/rinse and repeat).

I think the person who hammers down the empty lane before braking hard enough to trigger the ABS and then swerves into the merge lane is probably worse than the self appointed womble, TBH.
I try to be in between: drive in the empty lane but only moderately faster than the queuing lane - hopefully this will encourage those behind to join me, is safe, won't overly enrage those who wrongly decided to queue a mile back.

[Hackney]

A near neighbour owns a V10 RS6. I've considered making him an offer if he ever decides to sell but given how often I hear him booting it up the before its warmed up, then return at similar speeds a couple of minutes later I think I'll pass.

[James_33]

Hackney said:

A near neighbour owns a V10 RS6. I've considered making him an offer if he ever decides to sell but given how often I hear him booting it up the before its warmed up, then return at similar speeds a couple of minutes later I think I'll pass.

One of LLF's relatives?

[nonsequitur]

AstonZagato said:

I think the person who hammers down the empty lane before braking hard enough to trigger the ABS and then swerves into the merge lane is probably worse than the self appointed womble, TBH.
I try to be in between: drive in the empty lane but only moderately faster than the queuing lane - hopefully this will encourage those behind to join me, is safe, won't overly enrage those who wrongly decided to queue a mile back.

Yes. Rightly or wrongly, the driver speeding down the 'empty' lane usually, on reaching the 'merge point', has to brake sharply and force his way in before he misses his turn.

As you describe, the softly softly way is best with a gentle merge way before the actual point. This tends to relay the message to the drivers in the queue that you are not foolhardy.

As posted before, the British and queing, madness!

[PF62]

yellowjack said:

Same with merge in turn.

People queuing in other lanes leaving one unused, and then you driving along in that lonely, unloved lane is NOT queue jumping.

Clearly it is queue jumping unless you park up at the merge point of the empty lane and wait until the car the queue of cars you passed has gone through and then you merge in behind them.

Merge in turn just doesn't work.

If you have two lanes equally full, then unless you create a new lane rather than merge one into the other, then those in the continuing lane have to cooperate and allow the disappearing lane to merge. They don't. Result is traffic slowing down as people try to merge and people won't let them.

Hence people move into the continuing lane earlier than necessary, so creating the empty lane.

But this empty lane then brings out the self-righteous 'merge in turn' brigade, who tear down the empty lane and then try to merge at that speed, so causing people in the continuing lane to brake, creating a ripple down the line and making the delay worse.

So whatever you do, merge in turn makes traffic jams worse.

[djc206]

PF62 said:

Clearly it is queue jumping unless you park up at the merge point of the empty lane and wait until the car the queue of cars you passed has gone through and then you merge in behind them.

Merge in turn just doesn't work.

If you have two lanes equally full, then unless you create a new lane rather than merge one into the other, then those in the continuing lane have to cooperate and allow the disappearing lane to merge. They don't. Result is traffic slowing down as people try to merge and people won't let them.

Hence people move into the continuing lane earlier than necessary, so creating the empty lane.

But this empty lane then brings out the self-righteous 'merge in turn' brigade, who tear down the empty lane and then try to merge at that speed, so causing people in the continuing lane to brake, creating a ripple down the line and making the delay worse.

So whatever you do, merge in turn makes traffic jams worse.

Utter utter tripe. If everyone used both lanes as intended the queue would extend the same distance in both and then they would merge at the same slow speed into the one. The fact that a good portion of the population are thick as mince and don’t understand merge in turn is the problem not the concept itself

[donkmeister]

lost in espace said:

Here in Welwyn the traffic northbound on the A1 frequently grinds to a halt in the evening, and people jump around the queue by coming off at J6 which runs along the A1 for about a mile and back on again. I saw an artic owned by a local company jump the queue in just this fashion today, bullying around the local roads and then getting back on the A1. These roads are busy enough for local traffic as it is, but he did nothing illegal. It will all stop for the next 2 years while we get a smart motorway built and the traffic won't move through the village or the A1.

If it's the rat run I know, before it was the A1000 it actually used to be the A1 until the new A1 was built.
It a gamble that rarely pays off in the last few years. I blame Google maps and Waze for revealing local tricks to all, and simultaneously removing the advantage and jamming local roads.

[PF62]

djc206 said:

PF62 said:

Clearly it is queue jumping unless you park up at the merge point of the empty lane and wait until the car the queue of cars you passed has gone through and then you merge in behind them.

Merge in turn just doesn't work.

If you have two lanes equally full, then unless you create a new lane rather than merge one into the other, then those in the continuing lane have to cooperate and allow the disappearing lane to merge. They don't. Result is traffic slowing down as people try to merge and people won't let them.

Hence people move into the continuing lane earlier than necessary, so creating the empty lane.

But this empty lane then brings out the self-righteous 'merge in turn' brigade, who tear down the empty lane and then try to merge at that speed, so causing people in the continuing lane to brake, creating a ripple down the line and making the delay worse.

So whatever you do, merge in turn makes traffic jams worse.

Utter utter tripe. If everyone used both lanes as intended the queue would extend the same distance in both and then they would merge at the same slow speed into the one.

You just don't get it do you.

You really think that encouraging everyone to merge at the last moment before one lane ceases will speed up traffic, rather than cars merging over the length of the open lane?

Jesus, there is thick and there is thick.

djc206 said:

The fact that a good portion of the population are thick as mince

Have you been looking in the mirror?

[Flibble]

PF62 said:

You really think that encouraging everyone to merge at the last moment before one lane ceases will speed up traffic, rather than cars merging over the length of the open lane?

Yes because it does. A single merge point is better than a mad free for all down the length of the lane.

I wouldn't start too much of a witch hunt for thickos of I were you.

[djc206]

PF62 said:

djc206 said:

PF62 said:

Clearly it is queue jumping unless you park up at the merge point of the empty lane and wait until the car the queue of cars you passed has gone through and then you merge in behind them.

Merge in turn just doesn't work.

If you have two lanes equally full, then unless you create a new lane rather than merge one into the other, then those in the continuing lane have to cooperate and allow the disappearing lane to merge. They don't. Result is traffic slowing down as people try to merge and people won't let them.

Hence people move into the continuing lane earlier than necessary, so creating the empty lane.

But this empty lane then brings out the self-righteous 'merge in turn' brigade, who tear down the empty lane and then try to merge at that speed, so causing people in the continuing lane to brake, creating a ripple down the line and making the delay worse.

So whatever you do, merge in turn makes traffic jams worse.

Utter utter tripe. If everyone used both lanes as intended the queue would extend the same distance in both and then they would merge at the same slow speed into the one.

You just don't get it do you.

You really think that encouraging everyone to merge at the last moment before one lane ceases will speed up traffic, rather than cars merging over the length of the open lane?

Jesus, there is thick and there is thick.

djc206 said:

The fact that a good portion of the population are thick as mince

Have you been looking in the mirror?

Nice try. The length of the lane back to the last junction or roundabout or other choke point? You create one very long line rather than a shorter two/three or even four lane one. The fact is if you try to merge two lanes into one you are going to create a bottleneck and at peak times a tailback. Merge in turn simply shortens said tail back at peak times and if used correctly during quiet periods wouldn’t make any meaningful difference to the flow of traffic. That’s what they exist for, to shorten the length of the queue not the length of the wait. I don’t really mind because I’ll keep driving to the front in the empty lane there shortening my wait and using the empty lane as the Highway Code explicitly states it should be used much to the ire of all the other idiots who seemingly can’t read or understand the reason why said rule exists. It’s a win win for me.

[Graveworm]

djc206 said:

Nice try. The length of the lane back to the last junction or roundabout or other choke point? You create one very long line rather than a shorter two/three or even four lane one. The fact is if you try to merge two lanes into one you are going to create a bottleneck and at peak times a tailback. Merge in turn simply shortens said tail back at peak times and if used correctly during quiet periods wouldn’t make any meaningful difference to the flow of traffic. That’s what they exist for, to shorten the length of the queue not the length of the wait. I don’t really mind because I’ll keep driving to the front in the empty lane there shortening my wait and using the empty lane as the Highway Code explicitly states it should be used much to the ire of all the other idiots who seemingly can’t read or understand the reason why said rule exists. It’s a win win for me.

Not getting too deep into the war that is the benefits, rights and wrongs of merge in turn. It is better for everyone, if many do it. If a few do, it's better for them worse for everyone else. Even then sometimes it can be big help, if queuing traffic is blocking junctions etc. Once it gets to a stage where there are two crawling lanes going into one it does seem to happen anyway. It's getting to that point that seems to cause trouble.

But it's a stretch to say the Highway code is explicit. It's talks about a fairly tight set of circumstances, only when appropriate and has examples. What is does also explicitly say is not to change lanes unnecessarily, where merge in turn is appropriate. So the "Sheep" in lane 1 are also following the same rule in the highway code.

Highways England have said that's it not appropriate when one lane has a "1014" end of lane arrow. The Traffic signs manual says it's never appropriate when going 3 to 2 and only appropriate for temporary restrictions where tailbacks could cause problems.

I hope we get a law and at least some clarification but like red "X"s & keep left no matter what the law says, few motorists will change their ways, and they will argue around it.

Edited by Graveworm on Wednesday 18th December 23:37

[nonsequitur]

PF62 said:

Clearly it is queue jumping unless you park up at the merge point of the empty lane and wait until the car the queue of cars you passed has gone through and then you merge in behind them.

Merge in turn just doesn't work.

If you have two lanes equally full, then unless you create a new lane rather than merge one into the other, then those in the continuing lane have to cooperate and allow the disappearing lane to merge. They don't. Result is traffic slowing down as people try to merge and people won't let them.

Hence people move into the continuing lane earlier than necessary, so creating the empty lane.

But this empty lane then brings out the self-righteous 'merge in turn' brigade, who tear down the empty lane and then try to merge at that speed, so causing people in the continuing lane to brake, creating a ripple down the line and making the delay worse.

So whatever you do, merge in turn makes traffic jams worse.

It makes it so clear in the Highway Code. Number 134 / 288.