Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Mon Oct 22, 2018 03:19

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 92 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Dual carriageway into single carriageway with traffic backed up on lane 1. Do you :-
Join L1 and wait passively. 18%  18%  [ 8 ]
Join L1 but suffer annoyance if someone goes past in L2 2%  2%  [ 1 ]
Join L1 but attempt to 'block' L2 11%  11%  [ 5 ]
Use L2 with some feeling of guilt 16%  16%  [ 7 ]
Use L2 without hesitation 52%  52%  [ 23 ]
Total votes : 44
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 10:18 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 13:16
Posts: 76
Location: Fife, Scotland.
The way I see it Paul is basically similar to the ball bearing theory. If it's left to the last moment then it's going to cause congestion.

Believe me, I know that sometimes it's difficult to merge because of people 'bunching', (hence the reason I do it sooner rather than later.), but when I see someone hiking past the gap I've left for them to get maybe 50 to 100 yards ahead then sit at the cones cursing other drivers for not yeilding, that kind'a annoys me.

Actually, in thinking about it, I think I might not've explained myself very well. It's not leaving it to the last gasp that I disapprove of perse, providing there's a space available, (although I think in many cases it's a contributing factor to what causes this), it's the ones who leave it to the last minute before they even consider merging and expect someone to brake to allow them to enter the flow of traffic.

Remember, even if the traffic's flowing at 40 MPH and the cars are two seconds apart, there'll not be enough space between the vehicles for a car to merge and get up to speed from a standstill without the requirement for someone to adjust the space between them and the car in front and consequently cause a domino effect up the line of traffic and in turn cause worse congestion.

Just to clarify, I don't necessarily have an issue with people leaving their merge till a little later, as long as they don't reach a standstill at the cones. I only merge earlier as I'm perhaps being a little more defensive. I do leave space for others to zip merge, but I'm not inclined to yeild for someone who in my eyes has been reckless and expects somone to corrupt the flow of traffic for them.

I'm basically in my own way trying to promote the steady flow of traffic, just the same as I do when approaching a junction in a queue, I'll always leave space for the traffic entiring from the slip road to merge.

Does that make my position a wee bit clearer.

_________________
If I have to explain you won't understand.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 10:28 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 15:27
Posts: 683
Location: New Forest
SafeSpeed wrote:
Grumpy Old Biker wrote:
SafeSpeed wrote:
That'd be good for the signmakers and bad for the tax payers. (=£expensive)


The signs are there - they've just got the wording wrong.


In some large scale works, yes they are. But in most of the day to day situations they aren't.


For uncommon queue situations - sure, they aren't there, but anywhere there's a common problem they erect "Queues likely". Roadworks always have loads of signs.

If it's said often enough - the message might sink in.

SafeSpeed wrote:
Grumpy Old Biker wrote:
SafeSpeed wrote:
How about a bit in the Highway Code instead?


Who reads that?


Jeremy Vine? The Highway Code is an important tool for setting cultural norms - even amongst those who haven't read it personally for decades.


Fair point.

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 11:48 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire
Its interesting, Big Rod, that you begin with a scientific justification, but then end up citing a psychological factor for your queue behavior.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:24 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
We ought to abandon this queueing madness ans adopt a "queue merge here" sign 100m before the obstruction. It is the lack of guidance that causes road rage.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:33 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 13:16
Posts: 76
Location: Fife, Scotland.
RobinXe wrote:
Its interesting, Big Rod, that you begin with a scientific justification, but then end up citing a psychological factor for your queue behavior.


I wasn't aware that I did.

What makes you think that?

All I was trying to say is that the car at the cones waiting for someone to let them enter the moving line of traffic is like the analogy of the two ballbearings trying to get through a hole slightly bigger than one of them.

If someone gives way to the driver at the cones, or they barge in, there'll be a domino effect down the line of the queueing traffic.

Although not entirely scientific, I can't see where I used any psychological factors.

_________________
If I have to explain you won't understand.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 13:03 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire
Big Rod wrote:
Just to clarify, I don't necessarily have an issue with people leaving their merge till a little later, as long as they don't reach a standstill at the cones. I only merge earlier as I'm perhaps being a little more defensive. I do leave space for others to zip merge, but I'm not inclined to yeild for someone who in my eyes has been reckless and expects somone to corrupt the flow of traffic for them.


My bold. Not faulting you, its just interesting.

Pragmatism is all very well when analysing these things, but unfortunately altogether too many drivers allow emotions to invade their driving process. Some don't want people 'pushing in', others take great exception to a car 'less nice' than theirs overtaking them.

Its clearly a human factor, and as such cannot be prevented, only managed, but wouldn't it be nice if everyone's only motivation on the roads was to keep themselves, and everybody else, running smoothly.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 14:02 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 22:35
Posts: 643
Location: South Wales
SafeSpeed wrote:
Secondly, if that's true, it's the bloody minded queue mentality causing the problem in the first place.

It seems to me, that if Gopher is right, it's every aware driver's duty to try to gradually shift this bloody-mindedness by using both lanes.


I think it's that, but also ignorance of the benefits of such action, who has heard any public information on the matter? I know I haven't.

In this case I believe there are too few "aware" drivers to make any difference, to the vast majority of the L1'ers we would be the rude queue jumpers who deserve to sit waiting to be let in by some "fool".

I think a small series of films highlighting the problem would do far more and a lot more quickly, but who's going to pay for that?

_________________
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.

Upton Sinclair


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 14:19 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 15:27
Posts: 683
Location: New Forest
RobinXe wrote:
............ unfortunately altogether too many drivers allow emotions to invade their driving process. Some don't want people 'pushing in', others take great exception to a car 'less nice' than theirs overtaking them.

Its clearly a human factor, and as such cannot be prevented, only managed, but wouldn't it be nice if everyone's only motivation on the roads was to keep themselves, and everybody else, running smoothly.


I have a little theory about this.

I wonder if the driving process for many is too dull. Those that neither have the will nor the knowledge to improve their driving enjoyment with some training. To them, perhaps the only motivation is to ‘get one over’ on someone, or, conversely, to prevent someone ‘getting on over’ on them.

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 14:21 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 21:17
Posts: 3734
Location: Dorset/Somerset border
Quote:
If I have queued for 30mins, I don’t want a bunch of freeloaders belting down L2 and forcing me to wait even longer.


The point is, by merging too early, you create opportunities for others. If both lanes were used to their capacity, then the problem would solve itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 14:21 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire
You're probably right GoB! We're pretty much screwed if people start to see driving as a competition; all road users should be on the same team.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 14:23 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 16:04
Posts: 816
RobinXe wrote:
all road users should be on the same team


But we're not are we? The boy racers don't like the rep mobiles who don't like van drivers who don't like lorry drivers and everyone doesn't like bikers.

_________________
Prepare to be Judged


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 14:24 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 15:27
Posts: 683
Location: New Forest
Johnnytheboy wrote:
If both lanes were used to their capacity, then the problem would solve itself.


Exactly. But how do we make that happen?

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 14:27 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire
R1Nut wrote:
RobinXe wrote:
all road users should be on the same team


But we're not are we? The boy racers don't like the rep mobiles who don't like van drivers who don't like lorry drivers and everyone doesn't like bikers.


No, we're certainly not, and this is clearly an area that needs addressing for the benefit of road safety!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 14:33 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 21:17
Posts: 3734
Location: Dorset/Somerset border
Grumpy Old Biker wrote:
Johnnytheboy wrote:
If both lanes were used to their capacity, then the problem would solve itself.


Exactly. But how do we make that happen?


Bournemouth has more than its share of "merge in turn" signs, and they do seem to work.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 14:45 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 15:27
Posts: 683
Location: New Forest
R1Nut wrote:
everyone doesn't like bikers.


DON'T THEY? :cry:

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 14:47 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 16:04
Posts: 816
RobinXe wrote:
R1Nut wrote:
RobinXe wrote:
all road users should be on the same team


But we're not are we? The boy racers don't like the rep mobiles who don't like van drivers who don't like lorry drivers and everyone doesn't like bikers.


No, we're certainly not, and this is clearly an area that needs addressing for the benefit of road safety!


The problem is what organisation is going to take this on? Especially when you consider the fact our own government and, to some extent, the EU are determined to divide all motoring groups.

I just remembered that caravans and tractors are disliked by everyone including the bikers :lol:

_________________
Prepare to be Judged


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 15:08 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 13:16
Posts: 76
Location: Fife, Scotland.
RobinXe wrote:
Big Rod wrote:
Just to clarify, I don't necessarily have an issue with people leaving their merge till a little later, as long as they don't reach a standstill at the cones. I only merge earlier as I'm perhaps being a little more defensive. I do leave space for others to zip merge, but I'm not inclined to yeild for someone who in my eyes has been reckless and expects somone to corrupt the flow of traffic for them.


My bold. Not faulting you, its just interesting.

Pragmatism is all very well when analysing these things, but unfortunately altogether too many drivers allow emotions to invade their driving process. Some don't want people 'pushing in', others take great exception to a car 'less nice' than theirs overtaking them.

Its clearly a human factor, and as such cannot be prevented, only managed, but wouldn't it be nice if everyone's only motivation on the roads was to keep themselves, and everybody else, running smoothly.


Ah, I see. TBH, I'm not being beligerant for the sake of it Robin, I'm more concerned with defending the overall flow of traffic. The driver stopped in the redundant lane evidently hasn't considered the traffic flow and is in effect stuck mainly due to his lack of consideration. If he'd 'merged' while still on the move whether sooner or later then he wouldn't be stuck.

While I don't defend the 'bunchers', there is still a largely known propensity for that to occur and as such the late merger is guilty for not considering the prevailing conditions IMO.

For the record, I'm not using late mergers on the whole as an example here, it's the ones who take it to the extreme then either barge in or expect concession from other traffic to tap the flow of traffic.

_________________
If I have to explain you won't understand.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 15:33 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire
Big Rod wrote:
The driver stopped in the redundant lane evidently hasn't considered the traffic flow and is in effect stuck mainly due to his lack of consideration. If he'd 'merged' while still on the move whether sooner or later then he wouldn't be stuck.


I agree with the latter point. Clearly merging whilst moving is the way to ensure everyone moves more freely, but in many cases those that don't allow a merger whilst the traffic is still moving are as guilty of exacerbating the problem as the person who leaves it too late to merge whilst still moving.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 15:45 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 13:16
Posts: 76
Location: Fife, Scotland.
RobinXe wrote:
but in many cases those that don't allow a merger whilst the traffic is still moving are as guilty of exacerbating the problem as the person who leaves it too late to merge whilst still moving.


Totally agree.

_________________
If I have to explain you won't understand.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 22:08 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere
Since the two extremes are either Lane 2 coming to a halt because NOBODY in lane 1 will let them in, OR lane 1 coming to a halt as lane 2 drives past and through the restriction, it just proves that 2 into 1 wont go without a happy medium, AND a build up of traffic behind.

Nearly all drivers dislike the idea of cars passing them while queing.
The question is how to cajole drivers into a merge in turn, without having to organise it with signs, and a massive campaign in the media.

I think the ball bearings and small hole analogy sums up the issue perfectly ALL the container is full of balls, but unless you can align them to the hole in advance, they will simply jam. Even with a short tube you'd need to agitate them gently to assist! :wink:

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 92 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.254s | 12 Queries | GZIP : Off ]