Solution to 'merge in turn' ****wittery
Discussion
Make the actual choke point straddle both lanes. Both L1 and L2 users have to merge into a new lane - comprised of 50% of each lane.
L2 cars are now not having to filter into L1 ( which seems to confuse and upset some people who joined L1 2 miles back ).
Both lines of cars are truely filtering into eachother - they have an equal need to alter their course and accomodate other road users.
Would it work ?
L2 cars are now not having to filter into L1 ( which seems to confuse and upset some people who joined L1 2 miles back ).
Both lines of cars are truely filtering into eachother - they have an equal need to alter their course and accomodate other road users.
Would it work ?
Probably not, and on most roads you'd probably need to change the physical design rather than just repainting lines in order to make it properly 50/50.
I wonder if painting chevrons in the 'primary' lane on the approach to the merge might help. Something like "keep two chevrons apart to allow for mege in turn". Sure some c*nts would ignore it, but those who vaguely follow road signs might leave the gap?
I wonder if painting chevrons in the 'primary' lane on the approach to the merge might help. Something like "keep two chevrons apart to allow for mege in turn". Sure some c*nts would ignore it, but those who vaguely follow road signs might leave the gap?
Edited by jimxms on Friday 4th January 11:19
Could work well, as you're effectively making two queues to merge at a single point like a zip, rather than the current chaos and bumper-to-bumper-selfishness.
The the two queues were separated by a solid white line, line of cones, and had signs forbidding lane swapping until the choke / zip point, then this could work well potentially.
Actually sounds like an excellent idea.
But can you imagine the confusion it would cause when 'outraged merge blocker' comes across one the first time? :laugh;
Those moments of blind panic and confusion as his 'right' to block people coming in from the right is removed as he is forced to move over towards the middle.
But.. given a bit of practise and education this would work very well!
But can you imagine the confusion it would cause when 'outraged merge blocker' comes across one the first time? :laugh;
Those moments of blind panic and confusion as his 'right' to block people coming in from the right is removed as he is forced to move over towards the middle.
But.. given a bit of practise and education this would work very well!
barker22 said:
grayze said:
Good idea. With a road sign like the below (without the tree covering) at the merge point.
I don't know if that sign will alter anything, perhaps give lane 2 the argument that 'their arrow' is shown as being first in line. People are idiots.Captain Muppet said:
Merge in turn works better when the two lanes have to merge in to the lane on the right.
I'm not sure why, but it's something to do with people being idiots.
Not in my experience with bus lanes either side of roundabouts on 2 lane dual carriageways (Calder Road, Edinburgh A71)I'm not sure why, but it's something to do with people being idiots.
People try desperately to get into L2 as soon as possible, meaning queues form on the roundabouts before and the whole area snarls up.
Unfortunately, the power of ignorant people in large numbers is strong.
I have to be honest I like the way it works now. The Guardian reading, Kia Pimento driving morons can all crawl along in lane 1 having merged when they heard about the lane closure on twitter three weeks ago, and then get all angsty when I might happen to overtake them in lane 2 and merge in at the merge point. It means less mongs in front of you when you get past the bottleneck and you've upset a few yoghurt knitters for good measure.
I like it because it means that if someone decides to start blocking, they can instantly themselves be blocked too and forced into a stalemate. In other words, you can't block from a superior tactical position. Awesome, because that's exactly what you shouldn't be doing in the first place.
I wonder if it will have a problem though in that you are asking both drivers to perform similar, coordinated moves? Merging into one lane gives each driver a clear role. The one in the closing lane has to perform a lane change, the one in the open lane has to leave some room. If you merge into a new, common middle lane, then both drivers have to perform both roles. It shouldn't be difficult, but then to be honest it shouldn't be complicated the way it is either. It just gets complicated when we all start adding what we think is common sense to a situation that doesn't actually need any because the rules and directions are sufficient in themselves.
The more I read about these things, the more I'm getting convinced that common sense is a myth, it's actually personal sense and there's nothing common about it or the conclusions anyone draws from it. This makes common sense unreliable IMO. It should be used as a last resort when the shared, common rules don't give the answer.
I wonder if it will have a problem though in that you are asking both drivers to perform similar, coordinated moves? Merging into one lane gives each driver a clear role. The one in the closing lane has to perform a lane change, the one in the open lane has to leave some room. If you merge into a new, common middle lane, then both drivers have to perform both roles. It shouldn't be difficult, but then to be honest it shouldn't be complicated the way it is either. It just gets complicated when we all start adding what we think is common sense to a situation that doesn't actually need any because the rules and directions are sufficient in themselves.
The more I read about these things, the more I'm getting convinced that common sense is a myth, it's actually personal sense and there's nothing common about it or the conclusions anyone draws from it. This makes common sense unreliable IMO. It should be used as a last resort when the shared, common rules don't give the answer.
Raddors said:
We're gonna need more cones.
This. While its undoubtedly a great idea, when its a temporary measure it would require twice the amount of cones and twice the amount of time to lay them out and pick them up. So it won't happen.A lot of the problem could be overcome by stopping lorry drivers behaving like
s and blocking the lanes to stop people using both and merging in turn.I'm a peaceful man but truck drivers doing this makes me want to drag them from their cab and beat them to death with the 'merge in turn' sign.
Chimune said:
Make the actual choke point straddle both lanes. Both L1 and L2 users have to merge into a new lane - comprised of 50% of each lane.
L2 cars are now not having to filter into L1 ( which seems to confuse and upset some people who joined L1 2 miles back ).
Both lines of cars are truely filtering into eachother - they have an equal need to alter their course and accomodate other road users.
Would it work ?
In some places it would yes. But youre up against human nature here...L2 cars are now not having to filter into L1 ( which seems to confuse and upset some people who joined L1 2 miles back ).
Both lines of cars are truely filtering into eachother - they have an equal need to alter their course and accomodate other road users.
Would it work ?
On the A21 near Tonbridge there is a merge excatly as you describe. It merges into the middle, 50/50. There are signs stating to use both lanes, there are signs saying merge in turn. But people will still not let you in, even to the point of vehicles physically touching each other. People will also pull out and block any vehicle they see coming down the outside lane. Ive seen a serious smash where someone pulled out on a van and got hit up the back so hard it flipped it onto its roof.
When busy its quicker (by about 10-15 minutes) to come off the junction and back on by the sliproad.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff