Morning vent, it's been done before but it still annoys me. Damn wagons purposefully blocking 2 perfectly usable lanes 200 yards before a narrowing at 5mph. Blocking 2 junctions worth of traffic behind them because they won't let the traffic use both lanes to queue. Don't they realise that if everyone queues in 2 lanes and takes turn to go through the traffic gets through at the SAME SPEED as if it all queues in 1 lane, and if everyoen did it there would be no net benefit or loss to anyone in the queue, other than keeping the roads flowing better.

Morons.

They're the knights of the road.
You are a serf.

+1 the bastards do it on the A303. The dual carriageways are there to allow overtaking. Selfish morons.

Gives me the hump too, road narrows means here- not 500m back down the road

some people just just to important to queue.

some people just just to important to queue.

Not sure what you meant here, I must admit.

im with the wagons. nothing infurates me more than bellends in bmw's screaming past the cue to cut in 200yds later on and cause everyone to pause while we wait for the idiot to get let in.

tracknicko – Member

im with the wagons. nothing infurates me more than bellends in bmw's screaming past the cue to cut in 200yds later on and cause everyone to pause while we wait for the idiot to get let in.

that's not what he's talking about. 2 lanes of traffic, 1 lane closed further up the road. The idea is that both lanes are full, then take it in turn to merge into the open lane – it keeps the roads/islands <— back that way clearer.

Where is TJ when you need him?

where s this mythical world you live in where everyone queues in 2 lanes and takes turn to go through, i've never been there, i live in a place where people scream right to the end of the closed lane and then arrogantly barge in

Here he is TSY

(Community Speed Watch)

tracknicko – Member
im with the wagons. nothing infurates me more than bellends in bmw's screaming past the cue to cut in 200yds later on and cause everyone to pause while we wait for the idiot to get let in.

If you applied that to all places where the lanes reduce from 2 to 1 then you may as well just get rid of the 2nd lane altogether. The point is that its 2 lanes untill the merge point not where the lorry driver decieds it is.
If every one does it properly and let people merge in turn then the traffic normal moves fast.

im with the wagons. nothing infurates me more than bellends in bmw's screaming past the cue to cut in 200yds later on and cause everyone to pause while we wait for the idiot to get let in.

tracknico, and JoB

You're missing the whole point though, you shouldn't be queuing back 200 yards in a single lane, you should be merging AT the restriction (at low speeds, at high you get in earlier). If people drove properly there would be no room for people to race up the inside, and if you've left room for people to race up the inside you're not making proper use of the space available and THEY are the ones doing the correct thing, the fact that you chose to queue miles back from the merge point is your own idiotic move. The highway code specifically tells you to stay in lane until the merge point, not earlier, then merge in turn. If both lanes queue correctly and merge at the end point, no-one benefits unfairly and no-one loses out, and the road flows better and stops the junctions behind being blocked.

this really annoys me – some sit in a line for miles -are they stupid? Hold on they must be.

GRRRRRR

Quite true coffeeking, but I think they need to change the psychology of the merge for this to happen though.
Rather than having the current road signs where you see one lane merging into an existing one, they need some temporary cone chicane so that the two lanes merge into a new lane, that is neither of the existing lanes. That way there won't be the urge to change into the non disappearing lane early.

Easier said than implemented though 🙂

Good idea Ian, people think that the stretch of road immediately in front of them is theirs so why should people push in and use it.

nah i dont buy it. if everyone merges as soon as they see the roadworks sign saying the lane is shut, then you merge at pace, and you never have to slow to go through the gap.

if everyone nails it down both lanes, at some point someone will have to come to a complete stop to let someone else in.

I'm currently *this* close to hitting send to the HQ of the company that the driver worked for, with a little request that they be reminded of the highway code before their next trip out. I can't decide if that's taking the stress too far or if just writing it has eased my annoyance 🙂

coffeeking is right. I used to think the people leaving it to the last minute before pulling over were bulbends but now being older and wiser I appreciate that having both lanes used up to the restriction AND MERGING IN TURN is the way to go.

I agree with you. But am not saying anymore than that after the 'other' thread.

ah well. maybe one day i'll see the light then. but not yet.

oh i completely understand the "merge in turn" concept and how it should work according to the highway code, but in the real world…

nah i dont buy it. if everyone merges as soon as they see the roadworks sign saying the lane is shut, then you merge at pace, and you never have to slow to go through the gap.

That can only work if the traffic in the two lane section is less than the capacity of the single lane. If there is more traffic than this in the two lane section then there won't be enough room to merge at speed make what you suggest impossible assuming that your not going to allow the traffic speed to double.

nah i dont buy it. if everyone merges as soon as they see the roadworks sign saying the lane is shut, then you merge at pace, and you never have to slow to go through the gap.

Wrong. There's no "buying it" needed, its a proven fact and many different techniques were tested by the department of transport before they settled on the best one to include in the highway code in 2007. You can merge at the same pace whether it's back from the narrowing or not, all you're doing is creating a fake merging point earlier in the road, meaning the tailbacks are longer and block other junctions, nothing is "faster" about it.

But on the thought of speed through the narrowing:
Think about it, you can only fit so many cars down a road with safe stopping distances. The higher the speed, the larger the gaps, the fewer cars you get through per minute, meaning more queueing for everyone to get through a gap quickly, instead of going slowly for a short space of time then returning to normal.

oh i completely understand the "merge in turn" concept and how it should work according to the highway code, but in the real world…

That's kind of the point Jo, we are in the real world, merging in turn DOES work in the real world if idiots don't screw it up by blocking lanes and getting over WAY too early. The only reason the "real world" you see is different, is because you're defeatist and so is everyone else in their greedy rush to get somewhere without thinking it through sensibly. (no offence intended, I used to think that way too before I had a discussion with a chap who designs the road layouts)

tracknicko – Member
nah i dont buy it. if everyone merges as soon as they see the roadworks sign saying the lane is shut, then you merge at pace, and you never have to slow to go through the gap.

But if you do that 300yards/half a mile from the merge point then what is the point of haveing the merge point there and not just reduce the whole road to one lane?
In france they have signs telling people to merge in turn and on the whole they do. I have seen a few places over here with the same signs as well.

ha ha. epic use of 'wrong'

perhaps ill leave this discussion here with the infallible in charge.

i agree 'merge in turn' works better, but they need to have more obvious signs and better education for all driver about, like signs saying 'use BOTH lanes until cones' or something.

At the moment most people queue early on as they know that most people wont let them in when the cones start, cos the queueing people class them as queue jumping tw*ts

ha ha. epic use of 'wrong'

perhaps ill leave this discussion here with the infallible in charge.

Far from infallible, just grumpy this morning 🙂

meeeee- glad they're finally starting to do it:

spot on coffeeking with regards using the 2nd lane. theres absolutely no need to sit and queue in just one lane. hence there are two lanes open until the merge point.

In New Zealand they 'merge like a zip'

The problem is with attitudes, everyone seems to think theyre right and other drivers are somehow trying to usurp their rightful place on the road. If people could just lighten up things would be more pleasant.
Next time you can, be nice to another driver, youll feel better and often youll see them be nice to someone else further on.

Next time you can, be nice to another driver, youll feel better and often youll see them be nice to someone else further on.

That's actually very true, it seems to be contagious!

where s this mythical world you live in where everyone queues in 2 lanes and takes turn to go through, i've never been there

Germany.

Play nicely out there!

Coffeeking is correct; the single carriage way section is what limits the cars per hour rate, not the behaviour of the drivers approaching the narrowing of the lanes.

A lane reduction at normal driving speed works well because the faster vehicles in the second lane are able to merge efficiently. Tail backs occur when the volume of traffic to too great for the single carriage way. The irate second lane drivers are failing to adapt to the changing driving conditions created by the tail back, and the common courtesy and social convention that governs the acceptable behaviour in a queue i.e not pushing to the front.

Allowing the second lane to merge freely in to near stationary traffic causes problems because the queuing traffic is moving backwards relative to the second lane. Sadly both sets of drivers are exhibiting a disappointing ‘me’ first attitude to the driving conditions.

I'm a new member and joined originally to comment on the 29er nonsense thread. However, I've been well and truly sucked into these driving threads – wow there are some ill-informed drivers…

A bit of background. I own 6 bikes (3 road (fixie/winter/summer), 3 mtb (full-sus/ss rigid/geared rigid(all 26 inch wheels!))), a motorbike and a car (both BMWs, as it happens, because in my opinion they make the best vehicles – simple). I used to be a cycle courier so I consider myself to be very aware of other road users and I am keenly aware of cyclists when driving. I've been driving over 11 years and currently commute 90 miles a day mostly on motorbike but occasionally by car (sometimes by bike and train).

There is absolutely no reason that keen cyclists (like me) shouldn't be interested in driving and like making progress when driving. Because I like to make progress I like to do perfectly legal things like overtake on A/B roads, flash people to get out of the way when they are hogging the outside lane, filter through traffic on my motorbike etc. Yes you do get there quicker and no it's not dangerous (when done responsibly). I have chilled significantly since I was a silly teenager but still like to drive quickly.

On undertaking, many countries positively allow undertaking so it is not in itself dangerous. What is dangerous is people pulling in without checking the inside lane is clear. Personally, I always check inside before pulling in as it is a pretty sensible thing to do. If drivers don't then any accident is as much their fault as the undertaker's. I, like others, get extremely frustrated at people hogging the outside lane. It's particularly annoying in Scotland as most of our motorways only have 2 lanes! On my motorbike I give them a flash or 2, wait for a few seconds and if they don't pull over then I undertake. It is quite safe.

On merging in-turn, yes you absolutely should merge at the cones!! If the road-traffic people wanted you to merge 1/2 mile before the merge then that's where the merge would be! It's inexplicable that people don't grasp this. I agree that a sign to the effect of 'USE BOTH LANES UNTIL MERGE' would be useful to inform the thickos of how to drive. A zip effect, at the merge itself, is what 'MERGE IN-TURN' actually means. I quite enjoy driving up the outside lane past the clowns in the queue; it gets you there quicker!

In short, driving sensibly is not driving like a cock, it is driving as the law was intended.

Hey-ho, off to wind up some 29er riders now….

Seriously, good forum for the mtb chat; I look forward to sharing biking stories/experiences in due course.

Allowing the second lane to merge freely in to near stationary traffic causes problems because the queuing traffic is moving backwards relative to the second lane

Not if you merge in turn. Have you been reading this thread?

IF everyone merges at the same point as me I will be happy!!!!

+1 for the lorry drivers.
Merging in turn is great in theory & works if everyone does it properly, but you usually get some t**t braking like hell & "merging" at the last possible oportunity – if you are in a truck you've got a lump of gears to go through & use more fuel in stop start traffic so it's better to keep trundling along rather than stop starting caused by the late brake brigade. BTW – you joined a queue behind the lorry & got to the obstruction behind the lorry so what is your gripe exactly?

Gosh farty, I read your entire post. I usually scan the long ones. "Driving over 11 years" – is that supposed to be a long time then? 😉

Come to think of it the lorry driver was actually merging in turn – just the drivers in front had already merged some distance before the lane restriction 😆

DezB, not especially. It was a statement of fact, not a boast.