Merge in turn?

[Deleted member 65149]

Another thread (http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/driv.../159519-really-getting-pxxxd-drivers-m25.html) soon drifted away from the OP's rant about M25 lane-hoggers to the age old argument about how and when to react to lane closure notification. It started with this:

After three sets, each with tie-breaks, the ball continued to be knocked back and forth. As a hardened member of the "stay in lane until it's necessary to change" group I did a bit of searching for the official and 'expert' views on this. I've reproduced below what I found, but that is still being argued against. I thought that this was important enough to create its own thread where others (particularly those with no interest in the M25!) may be more likely to visit.

This is what the Highway Code (Rule 134)says on the subject:

You should follow the signs and road markings and get into the lane as directed. In congested road conditions do not change lanes unnecessarily. Merging in turn is recommended but only if safe and appropriate when vehicles are travelling at a very low speed, e.g. when approaching road works or a road traffic incident. It is not recommended at high speed.

And this is what Advance Driving UK said on the subject a while ago:

Roadworks misery and the congestion that goes with them could be radically reduced, according to the IAM ( Institute of Advanced Motorists ), if UK motorists take on board new advice in the Highway Code published today (28 September 2007).

For the first time, the Highway Code has a rule on “merging in turn” under the section on lane discipline (Rule 134; Highway Code 2007).

“We are pleased to see this as we believe it will ease many pinchpoints at roadworks,” said IAM Chief Examiner Peter Rodger.

“Too often we see a long, empty lane leading up to roadworks, doing nothing, because drivers have been told to get in lane too early. Then there is a tension with people perceived as ‘pushing in’. The new recommendation to merge in turn in the Highway Code will encourage drivers to use all the available lanes – right up to the lane closure – and could make roadworks less of a problem,” he said.

“It will avoid frustration and mean everybody gets through the restriction that much quicker.”

Mr Rodger, a former Metropolitan Police driving instructor, said that the IAM had long campaigned for merge in turn recognition in the Highway Code.
“We are convinced everybody will get through sooner if they merge in turn. If drivers try it, encouraged by the Highway Code, it could be the end to the ‘I’m first, you’re next’ attitude that slows everybody down.

“We now need to see this initiative supported by physical ‘merge in turn’ roadside signs as well, because we know many drivers don’t bother with the Highway Code once they have passed their test.”

Of course very many here and elsewhere will continue to stubbornly refuse to accept expert advice like this and continue to get upset by those of us who use all available lanes safely and in the manner intended.

 

[jotter22]

I wont get upset....i just wont let you in!

Tony.

 

[Deleted member 65149]

I wont get upset....i just wont let you in!

Tony.

Because the rules of the road don't apply to you?

 

[developer]

You do like a good fight don't you KE?

 

[jotter22]

you said it was advice not rules! So now your saying everyone has to drive to the last cone before merging with the traffic that has had the sense to merge safely prior to the last diverting cone?

Tony.

 

[jotter22]

You do like a good fight don't you KE .

Lol he is like my wife!

Tony.

 

[Deleted member 65149]

Lol he is like my wife!

Tony.

I hope for your sake that your wife is better looking!

 

[Deleted member 65149]

you said it was advice not rules! So now your saying everyone has to drive to the last cone before merging with the traffic that has had the sense to merge safely prior to the last diverting cone?

Tony.

I'm following the rules of the Highway Code and the advice of qualified experts that say stay in lane and merge when approaching the temporary lane closure.

This is no different to roads where 2 lanes permanently merge into 1 or 3 lanes into 2. The arrows in the road tell people where to merge and they're nearly always just before a lane comes to an end. The arrows aren't half a mile back. When there are roadworks it's not practical to provide the same guidance, so it's hoped that motorists' knowledge of normal practice will prevail. Unfortunately a large group has taken it upon themselves to come up with their own set of standards, and God help those who chose to obey the official rules/guidance/advice instead.

If we all stay in lane and merge together peacefully just as we're approaching the lane restriction (just as we manage to do reasonably well at permanent lane reductions), there won't be any empty lane for the chargers and bargers to rush down and upset us all. Of course it will still mean that one lane moves faster than another - if you have a problem with this then I'd advise you to keep well clear of all multi-lane roads!

 

[cinek]

I shall threw my two pence worth...

Merge in turn signs are commonly used on both, permanent and temporary set ups.
In principle, they work quite well.

However, I don't feel there is an issue with signs and what specific information should they display, or not display. The problem lies with individuals, their level of traffic awareness, their driving aptitude, as well as attitude towards fellow drivers.

Have you ever wondered, why at some point you are doing 70mph on a motorway, only to be brought to a complete stop, then crawl at 10mph, through 30mph and back to 70?
In 9 out of 10 cases, this a result of tailgating, a vehicle cutting up another vehicle or similar, unsocial behaviour.

When you brake, so does the car behind you, so does the car behind him and so on. But at some point, way back from the initial vehicle braking another vehicle is brought to complete halt. In practice, few seconds of braking, can actually result in major congestion in that lane, that takes some time to clear up.

Very similar will apply to merging in turn situations. I will use A1m, junction 6 heading north as an example, which some of you will know very well.
Three lanes on the approach, where lane 3 merges with lane 2.

Now, strictly speaking there is nothing wrong with anybody driving as far as P1014 (directional arrow painted on the tarmac) and merge in turn with lane 2.
However, have you noticed that lane 1 always moves much, much quicker than lane 2 and lane 3? You might say, it is simply because lane 2 and 3 merge together, hence bear larger capacity in term of traffic flows.
Well, sorry to disappoint, but no. As a matter of fact, lane 1 has got higher traffic count per minute, than lane 2 and 3 combined.

How is that possible?

If you were to actually watch the traffic at this section of the road from bird view, ideally from CCTV camera located near by, you will see that lane 1 isn't actually carrying the traffic from lane 1 only. Most of local, regular drivers know that they will get quicker through the bottle neck in lane 1 than drivers in lane 2 and/or 3. This means huge number of drivers move over to lane 1 well before the merge in turn section.

And this is the key as to why lane 1 moves a lot quicker. Number of drivers, constantly move over from lane 2 to lane 1, but because it is done in good time, before cut off point, this keeps this lane moving. Yes it is slow pace, but moving nevertheless.

In the meantime, traffic in the lane 2 and lane 3 meet at a particular point where simply, someone has to give in. Problem is, a lot of a time nobody wants to. At this point, traffic is no longer flowing smoothly, it is more of a jerking movement as nobody wants to be mug and give way.

You may be aware that this specific junction is a subject to a major scheme next year. Lane 1 will become a dedicated filter lane coming off completely at junction 6. From that point there will only be two lanes running on the main carriageway.
What this will actually do, is force drivers into correct lane in a timely manner, oppose to uncontrolled cutting in at the very last moment. Of course there will be people driving down lane 1 and changing in the lane 2 at the very last point. But the idea is, that once people get used to the new layout, the traffic flows will improve over time.

In summary, you are not braking the law by driving in the closed lane to the very point of that lane being closed. But by doing so you actually contributing to congestion build up, or worse, putting lives at risk if that closed lane happen to have people working in there.

 

[Stratman]

Just blat up the outside. There's always someone near the front trying to engage a gear with her knee while she makes a vitally important phone call who will leave enough gap to cut in.

Job done

 

[Mr E]

I think Cinek hit the nail on the head: "In the meantime, traffic in the lane 2 and lane 3 meet at a particular point where simply, someone has to give in. Problem is, a lot of a time nobody wants to. At this point, traffic is no longer flowing smoothly, it is more of a jerking movement as nobody wants to be mug and give way."

Rather than pander to the fragile egos of those who fall into this category, I'll continue to observe the signs and drive accordingly, i.e. up to the merge point.

Having to drive through the roadworks on the A23 on a daily basis for my commute at the moment, the attitude of many drivers who refuse to allow merging in the correct manner both amuses and annoys me. Perhaps the signage needs to be made even more clear, but I doubt it would matter to to those who can't grasp the concept in the first place.

 

[w124nut]

Life is too short to get worked up about whether I let other drivers in or not. On seeing that two lanes are due to merge, when it's safe to do so, I get into the lane that will become the sole lane.

I don't see that getting in front of the queue is a "win" situation nor do I lose face when I let someone join the lane that I'm in.

I just can't be fussed with the hassle of being that assertive. As I say, life is too short.

 

[Deleted member 65149]

However, I don't feel there is an issue with signs and what specific information should they display, or not display. The problem lies with individuals, their level of traffic awareness, their driving aptitude, as well as attitude towards fellow drivers.

Absolutely

Have you ever wondered, why at some point you are doing 70mph on a motorway, only to be brought to a complete stop, then crawl at 10mph, through 30mph and back to 70?
In 9 out of 10 cases, this a result of tailgating, a vehicle cutting up another vehicle or similar, unsocial behaviour.

When you brake, so does the car behind you, so does the car behind him and so on. But at some point, way back from the initial vehicle braking another vehicle is brought to complete halt. In practice, few seconds of braking, can actually result in major congestion in that lane, that takes some time to clear up.

Again, totally correct. Never had any doubt about it.

Very similar will apply to merging in turn situations. I will use A1m, junction 6 heading north as an example, which some of you will know very well.
Three lanes on the approach, where lane 3 merges with lane 2.

Now, strictly speaking there is nothing wrong with anybody driving as far as P1014 (directional arrow painted on the tarmac) and merge in turn with lane 2.
However, have you noticed that lane 1 always moves much, much quicker than lane 2 and lane 3? You might say, it is simply because lane 2 and 3 merge together, hence bear larger capacity in term of traffic flows.
Well, sorry to disappoint, but no. As a matter of fact, lane 1 has got higher traffic count per minute, than lane 2 and 3 combined.

How is that possible?

If you were to actually watch the traffic at this section of the road from bird view, ideally from CCTV camera located near by, you will see that lane 1 isn't actually carrying the traffic from lane 1 only. Most of local, regular drivers know that they will get quicker through the bottle neck in lane 1 than drivers in lane 2 and/or 3. This means huge number of drivers move over to lane 1 well before the merge in turn section.

And this is the key as to why lane 1 moves a lot quicker. Number of drivers, constantly move over from lane 2 to lane 1, but because it is done in good time, before cut off point, this keeps this lane moving. Yes it is slow pace, but moving nevertheless.

In the meantime, traffic in the lane 2 and lane 3 meet at a particular point where simply, someone has to give in. Problem is, a lot of a time nobody wants to. At this point, traffic is no longer flowing smoothly, it is more of a jerking movement as nobody wants to be mug and give way.

I know this bit of road reasonably well although I don't use it every day. I have to confess that in the hundred or more times I've been along there I've not had any problems merging between lanes 2 & 3. Neither have I been aware of lane 1 moving noticeably faster. Perhaps when I've been there people HAVE been prepared to "give in" as you put it. I call it "being sensible". However, I suspect you and your colleagues are far more familiar with this section of the A1(M) and will have seen many incidents as you describe. A specific difference though between this and roadworks lane closures is that the speed limit throughout that stretch of road is 70mph, whereas it's generally 40 or 50 into roadworks.

This is a genuine question to someone who clearly has a good grasp of what happens: - do traffic "manipulation" methods all work the same way, no matter what speeds are being dealt with?

In summary, you are not braking the law by driving in the closed lane to the very point of that lane being closed. But by doing so you actually contributing to congestion build up, or worse, putting lives at risk if that closed lane happen to have people working in there.

I fully understand your justified concern. But you know as well as I do that the only way to ensure the protection of people working at the roadside is with brick walls. No matter what you do with cones, signs or whatever, there'll always be the idiots who drive through them. What I'm suggesting is that we should strive to educate people how to correctly merge in turn, how to accept the fact that someone will get to a point on the road before they do, how to be courteous and considerate, how to drive at a safe distance.

Life would be so much better if enough people in the inside lane can drive up to lane closures with plenty space to the car in front, and allow people to move over to their lane in turn and with ease, AND enough people in the outside lane can reduce their speed to match those in the inside lane before indication their intention and moving into the available space as they approach the end of their lane. With both lanes of drivers cooperating like this there will be no need for any to slow to any less than the traffic flow within the roadworks section. Nobody will need to brake, thereby causing the domino effect behind that you described earlier. It needs people in BOTH LANES to have some common sense. At the moment they're mostly as bad as each other.

 

[Stratman]

Using both lanes and what the Americans call 'zip merging' seems just common sense.

As an example, you can have two queues of half a mile each or one queue of a mile. The mile queue could be blocking an entry or exit to the motorway which would be left clear if people weren't so uptight about what they consider to be losing face.

 

[cinek]

Temporary speed limits are introduced on the larger, long duration jobs. This will not be the case in simple, overnight closures (unless convoy operation is deployed).

Regarding traffic manipulation, there are so many variations starting from narrow lanes, contraflows, hard shoulder running, rolling road systems through to more basic like temporary traffic signals or stop & go boards.
Each of those is a subject to various laws and industry standards and there would be not enough hours in this night to try to describe them all.

 

[cinek]

Is how it is done

[YOUTUBE HD]B_RWiecl4eg[/YOUTUBE HD]

 

[Dieselman]

What was the driver of that black car thinking...fancy giving in like that...

 

[davidjpowell]

Back when I was younger and more impatient I had a set method of getting close to the font and picking the car that was going to let me in. It had either left a gap that I would simply arrive in before they had chance to close it, or it would be something like a fiesta or a Micra.... Would never by a Cavalier or a Sierra...

One thing that I do quite enjoy is where the lorries decide to block a lane and lengthen the traffic jam, they don't like it if you don't let them back in. Takes nerve though.

 

[cinek]

What was the driver of that black car thinking...fancy giving in like that...

No idea, happened early hours on M11 today.

Just proves the point, people do not get merge in turn...

 

[E55BOF]

You need the Nimitz... An American estate car I had in the late 70s - US mid-size, so only 17 ft long by 6ft 6in wide - when I was posted to Berlin with the RAF. Slightly battered rear quarter, just to add to the image. Even Turkish taxi drivers would let me in....

The problem with merge in turn is that almost everyone thinks it's THEIR turn first. Personally, I rarely have a problem; if one driver won't let me in in my turn (first, of course...), I just ease off the throttle; the following driver is usually so astonished (at my lack of aggression?) that he or she DOES let me in. I'm so b****y reasonable it's embarrassing.