On 20/04/2021 14:08, NY wrote:
"fred" wrote in message
...
Two lanes merging into one. Arrows clearly define which lane merges
into which. At the merge point who has the right of way ?
I only ask because in certain parts of the country if a lane is
closing and prior warning is being given all the sheep immediately
abandon the about to be closed lane. Same sheep take great umbrage if
one tries to merge at the head of the queue as recommended. (i..e) Zip
merge as opposed to a comb merge)
To me the obvious choice should be a one to one merge at the merge
point but lots of pillocks take offence.

It may sound perverse, but I'd have thought that zip merging works best
if it can be done at almost the normal running speed of the road - ie in
advance of the lane drop. If you wait until the last few yards, as the
HC says you should, both streams of traffic have to come to an almost
complete halt to allow in-turn merging, because a car in the stream that
is *expecting* to go next (eg alternately) has to have room to stop if
the other car doesn't give way.

The best solution is not to design roads with a lane drop, wherever
possible, except at a place where traffic has to stop anyway (eg at a
junction). That way you are not bringing all the traffic to a halt
simply so two lanes can merge into one.

Zip merging makes sense where traffic will be queuing and/or moving
slowly. On faster open roads, the speed differential between cars doing
70 and trucks or even tractors moving far more slowly is too great a
risk and it makes sense for the one driver to adjust speed and find a
gap, rather than both be responsible for merging - especially as the
slow moving vehicle is unlikely to be able to make a rapid adjustment
and likely cannot see far enough back (due to following vehicles) to
plan for a much faster vehicle arriving at the merge point at the same time.