Forum menu
Why are the advanced driving forum having the same debate then and making the same points ?
Presumably there are other people who share your comprehension problems that happen to post on advanced driving forums.
I've lost track with all your jibba jabba, but lets assume that people are merging in turn, just not necessarily at the point where two lanes go into one:
1) This merging is happening miles back. 5 miles from the where the two lanes converge. Someone has decided that this in the point where the "que" starts and everyone must merge in turn from this point.
2) Someone else has decided that traffic in the left hand lane is just going slower and they aren't in a que at all, just overtaking slower moving traffic. This happens 3 miles from the point where the two lanes merge.
3) Someone else is 10 miles away, hears the traffic report on the news and decides thats the point that traffic has to merge, drives down, stradling 2 lanes like some sort of hero and post about his exploits on some obscure message board somewhere, sparking a massive debate.
4) Another chap, decides that the point that the 2 lanes merge, is a good point to merge.
Now, which one of those points is an actual point that we can all agree exists? Which point is objective and which subjective? Is it all the random ones that people have just decided based on **** knows what? Or is it the point where the two lanes become one?
Well, I'll give you a clue. We can all agree that there is a point where two lanes become one. And because we can all agree this point exist, it makes the most sense to all agree to merge at this point. That way we don't all have to try and second guess each other as to which arbitrary point in the last 10 miles was the correct point to merge.
And low and behold, this very simple piece of logical thinking is supported (if not explicitly stated, because most people are capable of critical thought it is assumed) by the Highway Code.
Why are the advanced driving forum having the same debate then and making the same points ?
Because. As I'm sure you are aware....
There are always people who will argue the far end of a fart, even when they know they are wrong.
As you are currently doing.
Hats off for persistance, but you admitted the right way to do it multiple pages ago.
This topic was done very recently - there was a thread about this exact scenario just a couple days ago. I remember reading it, it was two or three pages worth. A chap was late for a film because of it, and didn't get any popcorn.
advanced driving forum
I bet there is a good bit of sport to be had on there 🙂
Alternate merging - should be used every time two lanes become one.
I regularly use a 4>1 alternate merge.. it's simple brilliance.
If someone decides to merge early, they're a fool, i'm going to carry on till the merge point and merge there followed by the rest of the drivers behind me.
It works on the road like it does in a ski lift queue North America... unlike the unpleasant European queues where you're probably going to get into an argument with a German.
And this works in a country where the majority of drivers [s]don't even realise their rear view mirror isn't just for applying makeup, can't fathom a roundabout, pootle along in the outside lane and steer with their knee while drinking coffee and eating doughnuts.[/s] are appallingly bad!
Here's a nice vid
That's a fallacious argument - you're in front of them going through the restriction, so slowing them down even if you're going a different way afterwards.
No the people queuing on the left and merging early have chosen to slow themselves down.
One fundamental issue here is that whilst it is correct and recommended behaviour to merge in turn at the point one lane ends, and that this should happen with two equal queues, if you insist on doing this even in situations (as in the majority of cases) where a longer queue leading up to the obstruction has no impact on any other junctions, then you are getting in front of drivers who might be incorrect, but were still waiting before you, have been waiting longer, and will have to wait longer because you've got in front of them.
No, again by merging too early and not in accordance with the HC, these drivers have taken it upon themselves to delay their own journeys. If they are at all concerned about not waiting longer then they have the option to use the right hand lane and merge at the obstruction.
Mostly this debate shows that people are basically unsuited to driving cars. Bring on driverless ones.
All the stuff about traffic seamlessly 'zipping together' at the point where the lanes merge is hilariously unrealistic, not because it couldn't happen if everyone agreed to do it and had a modicum of driving ability, but because, guess what, THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN IN THE UK.
It takes only one or two people to be oblivious, stupid, ignorant etc, for the whole thing to fall to pieces. Arguing about theoretical, Kantian driving scenarios based on 'what would a reasonable driver do' is a waste of time and energy because drivers are not reasonable.
Even if there were a clear an unambiguous law demanding that people merge where the lanes disappear, there would still be no seamless zipping together of traffic because people are simply stupid and selfish and no more so than when driving cars where, in their heads, they have some sort of free will within the constraints of the possible and, in some people's heads, are exempt from the normal rules of society.
Like I said, bring on driverless cars and this thread will mercifully be a thing of the past. Better still, get rid of cars, encourage people to use bikes, trains and other public transport. 🙂
I will look forward to towing 500kg of cement behind my bike 😯
I will look forward to towing 500kg of cement behind my bike
It'll serve you right, you started all this 😉
Logic tells us to merge in turn, as fourbanger eloquently explained.
Common sense tells us to merge in turn. Why would we not use the available road? What do you think it's there for, to act as decoration and use up the EU Tarmac Mountain? What causes more delays, a road works ten yards long, or one a mile long? Because in merging too early and reducing everything to one lane that's the situation you've created.
Merging too early can cause problems further down the road as demonstrated with the M1 example on page 2.
The IAM teach you to merge in turn.
ROSPA recommends we merge in turn.
Roadcraft tells us to merge in turn.
At least two of the "merge at an arbitrary point anywhere so long as it's behind me" people on this thread have admitted that merging in turn is the right thing to do, even if they've then caveated this by saying they're going to carry on doing it their way anyway because Reasons.
Many people here have explained, over and over, that they believe you should merge in turn and explained why.
And if you reject all of this, The Highway Code, the manual that dictates to the entire country how to drive, the standard by which you're judged on when sitting a driving test, recommends we merge in turn when appropriate (where appropriate is "not at high speeds") and tells us to do it at road works.
It's really, really simple. The only reasons I can see why anyone would still be contesting this is:
1) a lack of critical thinking. Which, you know, is fine, it's a skill not everyone has.
2) trolling or a stubborn determination to argue.
3) their ego won't allow them to admit that they're wrong. It's difficult to come to terms with the realisation that a belief you've held for two decades is fallacious (see also religion) so first we see denial, then anger, before a finally either a begrudging acceptance or a flat out rejection that despite everything they're going to carry on claiming that their way is better. Doubly so where driving is concerned, no-one wants to be told that they could be a better driver.
Still not seeing any answers to my earlier questions, incidentally:
Why would you not follow the recommended course of action and do something else?Why would you get angry at those who are following recommended procedure, even if you yourself choose not to because of some "unwritten rule" you've just made up?
Why would you feel justified in illegally blocking the other lane?
Here's a fourth one. What do you gain by merging in chaos rather than merging in turn?
Why are the advanced driving forum having the same debate then and making the same points ?
That'd be that "appeal to authority" thing again. I haven't looked but I'd expect that those forums aren't an authority, they're people who want to be better drivers.
The point's been made. Lane's closing in a mile. Ok, best get ready, this lane you're driving in won't be there in 500 yards. Right, c'mon, you've got 200 yards, slow down and merge.
Oh I see. You're going to push in at the front.
It's just the way our UK brains work.
It's just the way our UK brains work.
And that right there is the problem. Bring on compulsory re-tests every ten years.
I fully agree but in the meantime? Personally, I'll go with the flow rather than risk getting to the front of the right hand lane and see nothing but set jaws and angry faces, with no beggar letting me merge.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate, or something.
I fully agree but in the meantime? Personally, I'll go with the flow rather than risk getting to the front of the right hand lane and see nothing but set jaws and angry faces, with no beggar letting me merge.
This.
If I was the crusading type, I'd do it every time to try to force a change in thinking.
Unfortunately, sometimes I just want an easy life and decide to cowtail to the majority.
Did you have your bike attached to the car ? Wouldn't want to be tarred with same brush as people like you....you'll probably go to jail and become someones bit*h. Get in the queue like the rest of us. then everyones happy 😀
Not getting involved in the name calling/drawing weak caricatures of those who have different views from me as it is really not helpful.
I was driving to work today and the M61 splits with one lane to get off for the M6 or M65[cougar you may know this bit the Roundabout].
This was queing today, as was the MWay but the M61 lanes were moving faster but go straight on
In this scenario you always get a small number who dont go into the proper lane [ ie the lane for the M6/M65] and queue but rather stay on the M61 bit push in at the end and queue jump. I suspect we have all seen this done in various places.
I suspect this behaviour is what makes folk cross re the merging action as it seems to be the same. I suspect the cross over of drivers who do both of these is high but , clearly, I am guessing.
[url= https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.711041,-2.631064,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s_SvFed7OEqXcd-GdwNCxrw!2e0 ]HERE[/url]
Totally different situation. That's just just being in the wrong lane and then forcing into the queue, I wouldn't /don't do that.
I'd wager that 90% of drivers would resort to being in the wrong lane when they are late or in a hurry. (Queue swam of people, in single file, telling me they wouldn't)
The issue is that people are always in a hurry or at least want to minimise their time in the car, since driving is such a miserable experience. What they can't do is conflate this with driving less since driving is so damn convienient.
I suspect this behaviour is what makes folk cross re the merging action as it seems to be the same.
It may [i]seem [/i]to be the same, but it isn't.
An inability to differentiate between "two lanes of traffic forming a queue to go to the same place" and "one lane of traffic queuing and other lanes going somewhere else entirely" may well explain why some people get cross, yes.
When the left lane has become stationary already those merging/pushing in at the front are delaying everyone who has shown some consideration to other road users.
Njee theory never works unless the traffic is flowing freely.
Not read all the thread, so I'm sure it has been mentioned already. But there are plenty of circumstances where it's best to use all available lanes. Otherwise you end up with traffic blocking up preceding junctions and causing mayhem.
There's also plenty of circumstances where it just makes you a dick mind. And sometimes there's a fine line in between.
They have these signs in New Zealand, sorry if its been posted before but I cant be bothered to check.
[img] 
[/img]
Now hopefully this thread can loopback round and disappear up it's own arse.
I'm sure it has been mentioned already. But there are plenty of circumstances where it's best to use all available lanes. Otherwise you end up with traffic blocking up preceding junctions
Ad nauseum.
sorry if its been posted before but I cant be bothered to check.
Ad nauseum.
Can't quite believe I found the time and energy to post this little missive, frankly.
I think my picture is more informative 😆
Point well made Dez B 😉
😀
Ad nauseum.
Well I'm glad I could help with drilling the point in a bit more 😀
I've skipped from page 5, I got bored of reading self righteous drivers think they are correct in sitting in one lane not moving.
I always thought that roads get you from A-B in as little time as possible...hence me jumpin...ahem merging in later on.
Not an Audi driver though, I'm his worst enemy...white van man!!!