Read up, its not a merge in turn that's being discussed, also it says its recommended at low speed.
Dual carriageway question?
- Thread starter Minstadave
- Start date
Read up, its not a merge in turn that's being discussed, also it says its recommended at low speed.
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 32,910
- Location
- Rutland
What? I started the thread, I'm pretty sure it's a merge in turn situation we're discussing.
If it's not a merge in turn that's being discussed, then what it???
And every situation I have ever been in when there is 1 lane of moving traffic due to road works, it has ALWAYS been at low speed!!!
Check out post #9
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 32,910
- Location
- Rutland
I don't he's right. I don't think you need a merge sign to make it a merge in turn. As rule 134 says, if you're coming up to roadworks merging in turn is recommended. The fact there is distance markers and a slip road marked in cones would seem to agree with this.
It certainly doesn't say straddle 2 lanes like a loon.
It certainly doesn't say straddle 2 lanes like a loon.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2003
- Posts
- 91,812
- Location
- Falling...
This. I just don't understand people who like to queue for miles back when you can do "zip merging" which is far more efficient. 1 for 1 - it just works.
I did have a tete-a-tete with someone who disliked my merge in turn attempt. I explained it made more sense - he just came back at me saying it was cheeky and he'd been queuing for over 15 mins not to have some "idiot" come in and nip in front of him at the last minute. Seriously... some people. :/
The reason why ubersonic thinks it doesn't work, is because people DON'T merge in turn, and as such causes congestion. If everyone did merge in turn it would work - but because you get ignorant ****s that think it's big and clever and macho to block people it causes even more delays than the mugs that queue up for 10 miles.
Last edited:
It's funny how you are both wrong and sanctimonious at the same time.
Yup, this.
I still think that the guys who block the lane are better than the **** who blitz it to the end and try and force their way in instead of just merging properly, but meh, people will always have differing opinions that's why their opinions.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2003
- Posts
- 91,812
- Location
- Falling...
True different opinions are fine.
However, many studies (mainly time and motion) have proven that merge in turn is more efficient in terms of average time through a road work.
I must admit I sometimes don't bother merging at the merge point as I don't feel in the mood for confrontation, and just pull in a little earlier. However, certainly in London (where I do most of my driving) if you don't merge in turn you get nowhere.
However, many studies (mainly time and motion) have proven that merge in turn is more efficient in terms of average time through a road work.
I must admit I sometimes don't bother merging at the merge point as I don't feel in the mood for confrontation, and just pull in a little earlier. However, certainly in London (where I do most of my driving) if you don't merge in turn you get nowhere.
Got some cones on the main DC near mine, and the idiots are always doing it, had it happen to me twice so far, and seen other people do it in front. I just got alongside them and mouthed "WTF" and they somehow lost their policeman of the roads bravado and looked a bit sheepish. Knobs, both lanes are open, use both lanes until they end then merge, not use one lane for 1,000 yards while the other is wide open.
But what is gained from lane blocking? You then create a second built up que in another lane, meaning more people need to let people in.
I tend to cruise down the open lane, and 9 times out of 10, a gap will appear and I will slot in. No need for anyone to block me, nor the need to blast right up to the cones and force into a non existent spot.
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 32,910
- Location
- Rutland
Which is exactly what the highway code suggests. I think I'll keep doing it too.
Nothing is really gained from it, but nothing is lost either as the only people inconvenienced are one or two losers who just want to floor it down to the end and cut in, it doesn't inconvenience the people who merge in properly (whereas the cutters do)
It does inconvenience the people who merge in properly, because merging properly means merging when the cones indicate. Not a mile beforehand.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 32,910
- Location
- Rutland
Indeed you're just stopping people doing what they're meant to do. So who's in the wrong? You and all the other muppets who can't use the road properly.
No it doesn't, the point where the cones slice through the lane being closed is the point where you absolutely should have already merged as you are running out of road. If your still in the closing lane at that point you either have to stop and wait for somebody to let you in or just force in making people brake, its idiot behaviour like this that makes people block off the closing lane to stop this type of stupidity.
The reason you get countdowns every 100 yards on the final 500 yards or so of a lane closure is because its basically saying "you should be merging in" - "quicker" - "do it now" - "your running out of road ****".
WHAT!!!
So you take the law into your own hands. I have never had a problem tootling down the open inside lane, and finding a spot to merge into, in plenty of time. This doesn't affect anyone at all, and if the majority followed this, there wouldn't be the backlog of cars the tend to build up. Caused by idiots like you, blocking usable lanes!!
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2003
- Posts
- 91,812
- Location
- Falling...
No that's the countdown to where you should be merging!
If you have to stop and wait, or force your way anywhere, you're doing it wrong.
Don't be grumpy at others who know how to merge in turn, just because you can't do it properly.