The "S**t Driving Caught On Cam" Thread (Vol 5)

[Krikkit]

Ron240 said:

RipTrip1 said:

There's little need to even slow down for most crossings, they're not speedbumps. Infact some crossings are on 60mph roads.

Only a mindless imbecile would drive across a level crossing at anything even remotely close to 60mph.

Why? Depends entirely on how well kept the crossing is.

[Spleen]

Krikkit said:

Ron240 said:

RipTrip1 said:

There's little need to even slow down for most crossings, they're not speedbumps. Infact some crossings are on 60mph roads.

Only a mindless imbecile would drive across a level crossing at anything even remotely close to 60mph.

Why? Depends entirely on how well kept the crossing is.

He won't answer, he's too busy banging his swede on an inanimate object.

[eldar]

Bonefish Blues said:

I thought revenge horn was illegal now?

No, thats a drive by hooting.

[Muddle238]

carreauchompeur said:

Muddle238 said:

Question for you…
Hypothetical situation whereby an HGV is straddling both lanes to prevent any other road users from driving up to the merge point. Suppose the HGV driver is doing this 600/800 yards before a merge in crawling traffic, actively swerving to prevent traffic from coming past. Would this attract the attention of the BiB, if they happened to witness it? Doesn’t have to be an HGV, but they’re the main culprits I see pulling this “trick”…

Personally, I’d probably light up the HGV to make it move. In marked cars I make a point of merging at an appropriate point to demonstrate proper use of the road space

Nice one, cheers.

[Blakewater]

saaby93 said:

Filibuster said:

Seriously, you are wrong. Stop congesting the roads and drive up to the merging point and then do merge.

Both parties who do it wrong lead to congestion
Those merging too early and those skipping to the front causing the congested lane not to move

'in turn' is the important part of ' merge in turn'
Anyone jumping their turn isnt helping
The truck drivers have it right who hold station trying to make both lanes move at the same pace rather than one faster than the other.

Merge in turn like a zip
If someone in front merges too earlier dont skip ahead, wait your turn and merge at the merge point.
The people alongside will appreciate it too.

At what distance before the merge point and at what speed should I stop passing people and hold my place alongside a gap to my left?

Stop start traffic? Slow traffic? Free flowing traffic going at a moderate speed?

From the first sign warning of the lane ending or the first arrow painted on the road? As soon as traffic in the left lane starts to build up in comparison to the right lane?

What about scenarios such as the roundabout in the video? There's a similar one near to where I live.

People will stop on the roundabout clogging it up for people going in all directions because they want to merge in early on the roundabout rather than exiting into an empty outside lane and merging where it ends.

[saaby93]

Surely this isnt merge in turn - check the sign and the road markings

[Vipers]

saaby93 said:

Surely this isnt merge in turn - check the sign and the road markings

Lane ends merge left, that’s all I can find, but can’t actually find in the HC or anywhere, is it actually correct?

[meatballs]

Vipers said:

saaby93 said:

Surely this isnt merge in turn - check the sign and the road markings

Lane ends merge left, that’s all I can find, but can’t actually find in the HC or anywhere, is it actually correct?

It's a lane ends ahead sign, not a merge in turn sign. But as it's slow moving traffic approaching an obstruction (close of lane) then the practice is appropriate imo.

The traffic signs manual only has official merge in turn signs for roadworks and they are yellow and backed up with red signs saying merge in turn.

Edit - those yellow traffic signs might not even be current:

Edited by meatballs on Tuesday 22 June 01:33

[RipTrip1]

Vipers said:

Lane ends merge left, that’s all I can find, but can’t actually find in the HC or anywhere, is it actually correct?

In fairness, if you had to get the HC out and look it up to find out, how can you expect the general public to know proper practice? Most people will look at that sign and think, 'that's the wonker lane for people who want to cut in front, not on my watch'

[Bonefish Blues]

meatballs said:

It's a lane ends ahead sign, not a merge in turn sign. But as it's slow moving traffic approaching an obstruction (close of lane) then the practice is appropriate imo.

That's what happens in most instances tbh - as long as both lanes are full. Common sense prevails.

[InitialDave]

Merge in turn should really be the default when a lane ends like that, it shouldn't be necessary to explicitly tell people.

The main road by my house drops from two lanes down to one lane, and most people manage to navigate this smoothly, but if I'm out the front when it's busy, I'm almost guaranteed to see someone having an argument over one car length, shouted between open windows.

Funnily enough, in close to twenty years, I've never got into one myself.

[Krikkit]

InitialDave said:

Merge in turn should really be the default when a lane ends like that, it shouldn't be necessary to explicitly tell people.

We should just write it into law that all lane merges are merge-in-turn unless otherwise signposted, works well in Germany. No argy bargy queue fkwittery there.

[jamei303]

The only solution I can think of that would work is to use illuminated lane closure signs that switch off when the traffic is moving slowly. Then most people won't notice that they need to merge until the merge point, as is often seen when there is a broken-down vehicle.

[Garvin]

Using all the available tarmac and merging in turn is clearly the sensible, obvious and correct thing to do. In my experience I would say that, unfortunately, only ~20% of drivers understand this. I base this estimate on the technique I have developed which has served me well over the years - cruise ‘calmly’ up in the under utilised lane to the merge point and do not ‘push in’ aggressively but wait with indicator on. Sure, about four or five cars will close tanks to prevent you merging but after this you will get let in calmly without a problem. Having ‘overtaken’ about forty or fifty sheeple all queuing in the ‘open’ lane the loss of a handful of car lengths is still a ‘winning’ position. Sometimes you will be even be let in immediately but I have never had to wait more than six cars at most.

More often than not the car that will let you in is one that has followed you up the under utilised lane but ‘pushed in’ a bit further back! Others just realise that one more vehicle in front of them at this point is no great shakes. Some actually understand and agree with merge in turn but have succumbed to just going with the flow for an easy life and have merged further back. This just leaves the 80% of cretins but it’s not a big deal, they will be motored past and consigned to history once the obstruction has ended.

Try it, have faith and I guarantee you will be let in with no need for aggressive manoeuvres or exchanging angry verbals with other motorists through open windows!

[saaby93]

The trouble with that sign is it's the wrong way around - traffic in the right lane has to look for gaps in the left lane.
If you've a van or a truck that leaves you poorly sighted.
Roundabouts and slip roads you merge the other way around - give way or priority to the right.
If the Left lane had to merge into the right lane would that work better generally?

Some examples of sighted merge in turn signs






These the wrong way round

[saaby93]

Garvin said:

Using all the available tarmac and merging in turn is clearly the sensible, obvious and correct thing to do. In my experience I would say that, unfortunately, only ~20% of drivers understand this. I base this estimate on the technique I have developed which has served me well over the years - cruise ‘calmly’ up in the under utilised lane to the merge point and do not ‘push in’ aggressively but wait with indicator on. Sure, about four or five cars will close tanks to prevent you merging but after this you will get let in calmly without a problem. Having ‘overtaken’ about forty or fifty sheeple all queuing in the ‘open’ lane the loss of a handful of car lengths is still a ‘winning’ position. Sometimes you will be even be let in immediately but I have never had to wait more than six cars at most.

The trouble is although that works for the pusher in - it doesnt work for everyone else behind.
You can get so many people jumping the queue and merging in the last 100yards at the front that the back of the queue doesnt move.
The only way to get it working again is for people in the outside lane to hold station (no need to straddle) to turn the outside lane into a proper queue too , and both queues travel at the same pace to the merge point

[Laurel Green]

saaby93 said:

Some examples of sighted merge in turn signs.

It's disgraceful that such signs are needed.

[FWIW]

saaby93 said:

he trouble is although that works for the pusher in - it doesnt work for everyone else behind.
You can get so many people jumping the queue and merging in the last 100yards at the front that the back of the queue doesnt move.
The only way to get it working again is for people in the outside lane to hold station (no need to straddle) to turn the outside lane into a proper queue too , and both queues travel at the same pace to the merge point

I think my head is going to explode!

[saaby93]

This one quoted above has the same priority as other junction types with the vehicle in the left lane giving way and dropping behind the one to the right while merging in turn

[dxg]

FWIW said:

saaby93 said:

he trouble is although that works for the pusher in - it doesnt work for everyone else behind.
You can get so many people jumping the queue and merging in the last 100yards at the front that the back of the queue doesnt move.
The only way to get it working again is for people in the outside lane to hold station (no need to straddle) to turn the outside lane into a proper queue too , and both queues travel at the same pace to the merge point

I think my head is going to explode!

Actually, that is a sensible suggestion. It would move the bottleneck back to the intended location at the head of the queue.

However, it is entirely dependent on those in the ending lane to trust those in the unblocked lane to let them in when they get to the merge point. Because we're all a bunch of assholes behind the wheel, they can't place trust that to happen, so they will take their chances at some point ahead of the merge point and leap into any gap in the unblocked lane. And others will do so too and the actual merge point moves back down the road away from its intended location and we all stare at the empty chunk of unused road capacity...