Stephen Pope

Having a wee bit of a debate in the office here........

Picture the scene, 3 lane motorway, cutting into say 1 lane. Usual scenario, people waiting till the last minute, then cutting in.

I say it causes holdbacks, however others say that it is the lorries who sit out in the fast lane who cause that. I say that the lorries are regulating the speed thereby reducing the likliehood of a traffic jam.

I am not saying I do one or another, however just want clarification on whether or not late cutting in adds to congestion or not.

Your thoughts.......

thomsop

Trying to cut in at the last minute definitely causes hold ups

GazTheHat

I'd agree. Everyone has to watch and make room for the numpties who miss the signs or deliberately decide to cut in at the last minute.

fivetide

iTrader: (1)

yep hold ups. the idea is to merge and keep the whole thing moving. be easier if everyone used the mile run up to get into one lane doing 20mph than cause a 5mph crawl.

That and it annoys the hell out of me.

5t.

weemac2000

most efficient way to keep the traffic flowing is for there to be two full lanes travelling at say,40mph right up to the restriction and then interleaving one-by-one into one lane at 20mph . The stop-go is caused by drivers chickening into the inner lane far too early. Then when another car comes down the empty outer lane i (usually a diesel passat.....)t brakes to cut in, and the driver in the inner lane (usually a laguna.....or a diesel passat) accelerates to cut off the 'queue-jumper', only to have to brake again.
If everyone kept calm and sensible there would be no problem. Unfortunately, this is Britain..............

Daveo

Boll*x.

As soon as you see the sign saying merge from 3 into 1, or two into one or whatever, obey the sign.

It's not a case of chickening out early, it's a case of reading the signs and obeying them.

abc

I agree -- definitely causes/increases delays. Dept of Transport has computer modelled this, I believe, which would explain signs starting to appear saying "Merge in turn".

pjhsid

It doesn't cause MORE congestion... Cars will still move thru the single carriage way, once merged, at the same speed...

But it means that some cars will wait longer than others. To give everyone a fair waiting time then you should merge in turn.

94legturbo

iTrader: (6)

as above, its best for two lanes right until the restriction and if everyone merged in turn it would work out.

i think if im not mistaken this is what the police suggest too?

however you do get some drivers who take it a bit far.

im not usually a really late cutter who forces my way in and annoys people, but at the same time, i wont get into a stationery inside lane a mile or two in advance just because everyone else has.

si97

use the lanes and merge one by one at the restriction. its what they are there for.

chrisgreenall

In Germany its the law to use all lanes up to the restriction and then merge in turn!!! Don't know if it helps or not...

Simon 69

It causes massive extra congestion, but the hard-of-thinking in the NSR thread cant see it.....

This is the reason that HGV drivers block the 'closing' lane, to stop these arrogant knobbers whose behaviour, along with that of others, is largely responsible for the queues that they are trying to avoid...

Im all in favour of making progress and taking advantage of opportunities but anyone who sees this behaviour as such is kidding themselves.

johnnyroper

they cause conjestion and can cause accidents in my opinion

ricardo

Yes, forming a single queue causes massive extra congestion, but the hard-of-thinking in the NSR thread cant see it.....

Merging at the point where it narrows is definitely the way to cut congestion. Unfortunately there's usually a group of people who form a queue leaving a lane empty, then they get upset when people following the 'use two lanes' instructions use the empty road to get to the merge point.

Unfortunately the lorry drivers who deliberately block both lanes don't get prosecuted for obstructing the traffic.

amego

im atrucker u do get the odd muppit trucker most of usdrive by the book iv seen many bad drivers mostley peaple in cars

Scoobyfirsttime

And in English..............

Simon 69

The hard-of-thinking have joined this thread now too. When people form a timely and orderly queue and you drive down the empty dead lane and try to get in at the front you arent relieving traffic pressure, you are a **** who is tryin to push in, stop kidding yourselves. HGV drivers pull into the dead line to try to prevent this as it causes the head of the queue to stop and start making everyone else wait for much longer. Perhaps the 'merge in turn' signs will prevent this problem, but until theyre more common people pushing in at the last minute are selfish knobbers .

GeeDee

iTrader: (2)

...and they say we are expert at queuing

This is what I tend to do although, if the traffic is free flowing, I do not wait until the last minute but merge when the opportunity presents itself. What I do not do is to jump at the first opportunity.

From what I understand from my IAM magazine article I read a while back, this is the most efficient method and the key is the alternate interleaving.

The French method was also mentioned where, apparently, they set up the merge between the two lanes so both lanes have to merge effectively over the white line.

Steve Whitehorn

iTrader: (13)

You are totally right.
Its called Merge in Turn.
For the people calling his post rubbish
Cut in early!

It has been proved that to keep traffic flowing in those situations where everything is doing say 40ish in all three lanes (the usual slowing of things due to volume of traffic)
1. Keep your distance say a 3-4 second gap to the car in front to try and maintain a constant speed.
2. Stay in lane where ever possible.

Now if everbody did this we would all get to our destinations not as quickly as we would like - but a hell of a lot quicker than we do at the moment.

3. Unfortunately a high percentage of ****wits have never bothered to find the above out, change lane like an epileptic and dont merge and turn and therefore will add two hours on to your journey time.

As some have pointed out - the me me me now now now culture doesnt help things!

bluepolarbear

As quoted "merge in turn" or "zip filling" is the most efficient way for two queues to merge into one. The point of merge / zip is at the point where the two lanes move into one. For the avoidance of doubt one car goes from lane 1 then one from lane 2.

There is no if's and buts on this one it is mathematically the most efficient way. It is law in many countries unfortently not in this country, where a sign giving advance warning of a lane closure one mile ahead is taken as a sign to change lanes at that point and giving the same meaning as a red cross above the lane despite the fact that most the drivers don't know what a red cross means.

Ste_TYPE-R

THe problem isnt caused by the people "cutting in late" its the ***** who have already merged who get the "OMG HES GOING PAST ME, WTF DOES HE THINK HE IS, I WONT LET HIM MERGE IN" mentality.

ricardo

It's a religious thing.

The Church of Getting in a Queue at the First Opportunity people like to form an orderly queue so that they don't have to contend with anything stressful when they get to the merge point. If everybody was in their Church there'd be no problems and the world would tick along nicely. Probably in one lane.

Meanwhile, the empty lane is wasted, but the people who belong to the Church of Merge In Turn see that as pointless, they'll drive up to the merge point and take turns to merge in. They can't see why people are joining a long queue for something that is miles ahead.

The CGQFO people don't like the people who don't do it their way, since it is very annoying for them to form a queue (the English way) and have other people driving past.

The CMIT people regard the long queue with puzzlement, how long can it be, 10 cars, 100 cars, 10 miles before the merge point ? How much wasted road ? Do the CGQFO people queue all the way back to Bristol ?

There are always a few that belong to neither Church and are simply pushing in because of selfishness or stupidness. That's not the same thing as what the CMIT people believe in.

Perhaps if the merging was neutral about which lane was which it would work better, so instead of having 1 and 2 where 2 is coned off it would encourage proper merging if 1 and 2 were equally coned down to make a new lane favouring neither side. It could use the existing lane soon after the restriction, but the restriction itself could narrow both lanes.

Anyway, religious disputes can never be solved, as this thread illustrates.

mwilliams

Its a difficult one on 3 lane motorways as the merge point can end up a bit chaotic. But, on two lane roads like say the A1, people should definitely merge in turn at the merge point. People only look like they are cutting in and being pushy when too many plonkers have dived in to the inside lane way early leaving a big stretch of lane two empty. The police signs say 'merge in turn' for a reason. If everyone plays nicely, each person in lane one lets one person in lane two merge in front of them once everyone's queued in TWO lanes up to the cones which obviously makes the queue HALF the length - no problem.
In these instances, when lorries do their blocking the outside lane routine it just causes huge unnecessary tailbacks. Proffesional drivers should have the common sense to work that out and, to be fair, most do. But there's always one!
While I'm on the subject of the two lane A1, is anyone else bemused by lorries that decide to overtake other lorries but it takes them 20 mins as they can only manage a fraction of an mph more than the one they're passing!Causes huge queues and surely they must use a s**tload of diesel trying to edge past. Madness

Sonic'

These arrogant knobber HGV drivers that 'block' the closing lane is a reason police should carry guns

fl6

not all hgv driver's are like that !! i now i drive one

JPF

iTrader: (1)

Whenever I come to a lane merge I indicate and wait for some one to let me in, then when in I allow enough room for another car to merge.....isn't it just common sense to do this as it keeps the traffic flowing.....saying that if some t**t decides to push in last minute I usually don't let them in, let the t****rs wait like the t**ts they are, its bl**dy dangerous what some people do,they don't just leave it to the last minute to get in, no they leave it until the last minute to slow down too, again isn't it common sense to slow down when you see traffic ahead? rather than gunning it to the last minute so you then have to put the breaks on.

Oh and a big to those HGV drivers that stop people pushing in last minute....I have to ask though, why do you guys insist on taking all day to overtake each other? you only seem to slow each other down as well as the rest of us.

Sonic'

I know they aren't all like that, I was referring to the ones who are

I have driven HGV's myself many years ago

kingofturds

iTrader: (1)

If you all have to merge into one lane at one point, surely the laws of physics dictate the flow of traffic is only going to travel at one speed and pushing in like a **** to get 5 cars ahead is not going to increase the flow of traffic just p iss everyone off that is queuing up .

Simon 69

I disagree Steve. I wouldnt ever do it myself, but by stopping the selfish minority trying to avoid the queue, they make the delay shorter for everyone.

Simon

monkeyboy840

just returned from new zealand on a four week holiday and they merge no problems. never got stuck in traffic once..................

I accept there are less cars there but even in a big city like auckland they merge one after another and theres never any hold ups.

the slowest i went was 15kph in auckland at 5.00pm on a weekday in rushhour traffic.

cant wait to go back there so much so i'm emigrating there.


this country is going to the dogs