|
highway code
Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this
is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... |
highway code
On 01/08/2019 21:15, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... Do you mean the big red cross on an overhead gantry, or a "conventional" signboard on the hard shoulder? My belief is that it is illegal to go under a red cross although obviously you might claim some lee-way for the first one, if it only lights up as you are approaching. On the most modern gantries I would say it would be unwise to drive under a cross because I'd expect them to have cameras. |
highway code
On 01/08/2019 21:21, newshound wrote:
On 01/08/2019 21:15, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote: Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... Do you mean the big red cross on an overhead gantry, or a "conventional" signboard on the hard shoulder? My belief is that it is illegal to go under a red cross although obviously you might claim some lee-way for the first one, if it only lights up as you are approaching. On the most modern gantries I would say it would be unwise to drive under a cross because I'd expect them to have cameras. no just a normal sign....I always wondered why the motorway ones said the red x is mandatory.....I mean where can you get a shot of upper cylinder lubricant these days......? |
highway code
Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... The Highway Code advises the latter, but people still tend to do the former, creating resentment and inefficiency. Where road layout or long term roadworks make lane merging necessary there tend to be notices advising use of both lanes and merging in turn. -- Roger Hayter |
highway code
On 01/08/2019 21:58, Roger Hayter wrote:
Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote: Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... The Highway Code advises the latter, but people still tend to do the former, creating resentment and inefficiency. Where road layout or long term roadworks make lane merging necessary there tend to be notices advising use of both lanes and merging in turn. The trouble is that the eventual merge usually does involve one lane merging into the other and those that have queued patiently get annoyed that others have nipped into the mostly empty lane instead of queuing. It would be better if the cones were laid out to merge the two lanes equally, promoting zip merging. SteveW |
highway code
On 01/08/2019 22:18, Steve Walker wrote:
On 01/08/2019 21:58, Roger Hayter wrote: Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote: Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... The Highway Code advises the latter, but people still tend to do the former, creating resentment and inefficiency.Â* Where road layout or long term roadworks make lane merging necessary there tend to be notices advising use of both lanes and merging in turn. The trouble is that the eventual merge usually does involve one lane merging into the other and those that have queued patiently get annoyed that others have nipped into the mostly empty lane instead of queuing. It would be better if the cones were laid out to merge the two lanes equally, promoting zip merging. Zip merging is just about the only thing American drivers do better. UK traffic stalls repeatedly as people refuse to let other people in. -- Regards, Martin Brown |
highway code
Steve Walker wrote:
On 01/08/2019 21:58, Roger Hayter wrote: Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote: Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... The Highway Code advises the latter, but people still tend to do the former, creating resentment and inefficiency. Where road layout or long term roadworks make lane merging necessary there tend to be notices advising use of both lanes and merging in turn. The trouble is that the eventual merge usually does involve one lane merging into the other and those that have queued patiently get annoyed that others have nipped into the mostly empty lane instead of queuing. The solution to that is for both lanes to be used equally, so new arrivals have no significant advantage to using either lane. This is what the notices usually advise. It would be better if the cones were laid out to merge the two lanes equally, promoting zip merging. SteveW -- Roger Hayter |
highway code
In message , Martin Brown
writes On 01/08/2019 22:18, Steve Walker wrote: On 01/08/2019 21:58, Roger Hayter wrote: Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote: Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... The Highway Code advises the latter, but people still tend to do the former, creating resentment and inefficiency.* Where road layout or long term roadworks make lane merging necessary there tend to be notices advising use of both lanes and merging in turn. The trouble is that the eventual merge usually does involve one lane merging into the other and those that have queued patiently get annoyed that others have nipped into the mostly empty lane instead of queuing. It would be better if the cones were laid out to merge the two lanes equally, promoting zip merging. Zip merging is just about the only thing American drivers do better. UK traffic stalls repeatedly as people refuse to let other people in. The problem that drivers have with merging is that they slow down. Congestion is least when they zip merge in plenty of time - and if this doesn't result in vehicle separation becoming too close, they maintain speed (or, if possible, even speed up). In practice, there's always some silly bugger who tries to zoom up the lane which is closing (passing as many as possible) - and then, at the last moment, force their way into the already merged traffic. -- Ian |
highway code
Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Martin Brown writes On 01/08/2019 22:18, Steve Walker wrote: On 01/08/2019 21:58, Roger Hayter wrote: Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote: Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... The Highway Code advises the latter, but people still tend to do the former, creating resentment and inefficiency. Where road layout or long term roadworks make lane merging necessary there tend to be notices advising use of both lanes and merging in turn. The trouble is that the eventual merge usually does involve one lane merging into the other and those that have queued patiently get annoyed that others have nipped into the mostly empty lane instead of queuing. It would be better if the cones were laid out to merge the two lanes equally, promoting zip merging. Zip merging is just about the only thing American drivers do better. UK traffic stalls repeatedly as people refuse to let other people in. The problem that drivers have with merging is that they slow down. Congestion is least when they zip merge in plenty of time - and if this doesn't result in vehicle separation becoming too close, they maintain speed (or, if possible, even speed up). In practice, there's always some silly bugger who tries to zoom up the lane which is closing (passing as many as possible) - and then, at the last moment, force their way into the already merged traffic. I'm afraid I disagree. If there is so little traffic that speed can be maintained after the merge then probably it doesn't matter either way, but in slowing traffic it is best to make use of all the road by not "panic" merging in advance but leaving it until the roads merge. This also avoids the problem of resenting those who don't panic merge. -- Roger Hayter |
highway code
In message , Roger Hayter
writes Ian Jackson wrote: In message , Martin Brown writes On 01/08/2019 22:18, Steve Walker wrote: On 01/08/2019 21:58, Roger Hayter wrote: Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote: Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... The Highway Code advises the latter, but people still tend to do the former, creating resentment and inefficiency. Where road layout or long term roadworks make lane merging necessary there tend to be notices advising use of both lanes and merging in turn. The trouble is that the eventual merge usually does involve one lane merging into the other and those that have queued patiently get annoyed that others have nipped into the mostly empty lane instead of queuing. It would be better if the cones were laid out to merge the two lanes equally, promoting zip merging. Zip merging is just about the only thing American drivers do better. UK traffic stalls repeatedly as people refuse to let other people in. The problem that drivers have with merging is that they slow down. Congestion is least when they zip merge in plenty of time - and if this doesn't result in vehicle separation becoming too close, they maintain speed (or, if possible, even speed up). In practice, there's always some silly bugger who tries to zoom up the lane which is closing (passing as many as possible) - and then, at the last moment, force their way into the already merged traffic. I'm afraid I disagree. If there is so little traffic that speed can be maintained after the merge then probably it doesn't matter either way, but in slowing traffic it is best to make use of all the road by not "panic" merging in advance but leaving it until the roads merge. This also avoids the problem of resenting those who don't panic merge. Slowing before the merger results in a tailback forming. OK - when there's a lot of traffic, slowing is often unavoidable - but on countless occasions, when traffic has been relatively light, and there have been no reduced speed limit slow-downs. I've been in tailbacks which were totally unnecessary. -- Ian |
highway code
On Thu, 1 Aug 2019 21:15:54 +0100, "Jim GM4DHJ ..."
wrote: Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... You shouldn't be in the outside lane of a dual carriageway unless you were overtaking slower cars in the inside lane. 'Merging in turn is recommended but only if safe and appropriate when vehicles are traveling at a very low speed, e.g. when approaching road works or a road traffic incident. It is not recommended at high speed.' The chances are there would be a speed restriction before the closed lane. So, if traffic throughput was less than the slower limit then all cars would move out of the closed lane at the first warning sign and all go though the restriction with no issue. 'You should follow the signs and road markings and get into the lane as directed.' If the throughput was temporarily more than the restriction could carry unhindered then a buildup would start and depending on the environment, traffic would either just queue in the open lane (given an open road leading up to the restriction) or, if said (short even) queue cause some other issue (spilling onto the exit of a roundabout) then you might slowly use the inside lane to clear the problem and slowly merge with the outside lane. 'In congested road conditions do not change lanes unnecessarily.' If the throughput was persistently more than the restriction allowed then you would probably make use of both lanes equally. Making the call when however can be difficult to judge. https://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/mult...iageways.html# Cheers, T i m |
highway code
T i m wrote:
On Thu, 1 Aug 2019 21:15:54 +0100, "Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote: Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... You shouldn't be in the outside lane of a dual carriageway unless you were overtaking slower cars in the inside lane. 'Merging in turn is recommended but only if safe and appropriate when vehicles are traveling at a very low speed, e.g. when approaching road works or a road traffic incident. It is not recommended at high speed.' We have two instances here one where a dotted line continues to the end and the left have no rights and one where the dotted line finishes early where each take turns (zippers) The chances are there would be a speed restriction before the closed lane. So, if traffic throughput was less than the slower limit then all cars would move out of the closed lane at the first warning sign and all go though the restriction with no issue. 'You should follow the signs and road markings and get into the lane as directed.' If the throughput was temporarily more than the restriction could carry unhindered then a buildup would start and depending on the environment, traffic would either just queue in the open lane (given an open road leading up to the restriction) or, if said (short even) queue cause some other issue (spilling onto the exit of a roundabout) then you might slowly use the inside lane to clear the problem and slowly merge with the outside lane. 'In congested road conditions do not change lanes unnecessarily.' If the throughput was persistently more than the restriction allowed then you would probably make use of both lanes equally. Making the call when however can be difficult to judge. https://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/mult...iageways.html# Cheers, T i m |
highway code
Jim GM4DHJ ... formulated the question :
Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... With proper co-operation, zip at the point of closure works best - everyone is forced to take their turn with a zip merge and it prevents those who rush down the one lane which is closed, to gain a few yards. |
highway code
On 02/08/2019 08:54, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Jim GM4DHJ ... formulated the question : Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... With proper co-operation, zip at the point of closure works best - everyone is forced to take their turn with a zip merge and it prevents those who rush down the one lane which is closed, to gain a few yards. agreed but how do you get everybody to do it and not be looked upon as the fly man if you are the only one doing it ? .... |
highway code
"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
... Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote: Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... The Highway Code advises the latter, but people still tend to do the former, creating resentment and inefficiency. Where road layout or long term roadworks make lane merging necessary there tend to be notices advising use of both lanes and merging in turn. I *prefer* to merge early, while everyone is still moving at a reasonable speed and there are still gaps appropriate for that speed that you can slot into. If you have to merge in turn, that tends to imply both lanes have to slow to a crawl to make it safe to do, since it requires coordination between alternate drivers. The delay in roadworks is often the slowing everyone to a crawl so they can merge; once they have merged, the resulting single lane can often accelerate again and move through the roadworks at a sensible speed for the proximity of the workmen, rather then at a crawl. I wonder whether queues would be as bad if traffic all merged early, without needing to slow to a zip-merge speed. |
highway code
On 02/08/2019 09:43, NY wrote:
"Roger Hayter" wrote in message ... Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote: Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... The Highway Code advises the latter, but people still tend to do the former, creating resentment and inefficiency.* Where road layout or long term roadworks make lane merging necessary there tend to be notices advising use of both lanes and merging in turn. I *prefer* to merge early, while everyone is still moving at a reasonable speed and there are still gaps appropriate for that speed that you can slot into. If you have to merge in turn, that tends to imply both lanes have to slow to a crawl to make it safe to do, since it requires coordination between alternate drivers. The delay in roadworks is often the slowing everyone to a crawl so they can merge; once they have merged, the resulting single lane can often accelerate again and move through the roadworks at a sensible speed for the proximity of the workmen, rather then at a crawl. I wonder whether queues would be as bad if traffic all merged early, without needing to slow to a zip-merge speed. very true it depends on the circumstances I think ..... |
highway code
On Friday, 2 August 2019 08:54:50 UTC+1, wrote:
Jim GM4DHJ ... formulated the question : Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... With proper co-operation, zip at the point of closure works best - everyone is forced to take their turn with a zip merge and it prevents those who rush down the one lane which is closed, to gain a few yards. Zip at point of closure is dangerous to the point of stupid unless at a crawl, that's why people don't do it. It might appear to maximise traffic flow, but since this zipping process does not operate perfectly, if you're not crawling it results in collisions. NT |
highway code
Jim GM4DHJ ... formulated on Friday :
agreed but how do you get everybody to do it and not be looked upon as the fly man if you are the only one doing it ? .... I try to be the one in the least occupied lane, but matching position with the more occupied lane. Sometimes, you get the heavies driving side by side co-operating to force a zip merge. Co-operation in filling both lanes for an orderly zip, does seem to vary a lot. I used to have a regular visit to make early morning at Halifax, so M62 then down the dual carriageway, which becomes a single lane crawl at its end near town. That road was very congested, but oddly - I was impressed by just how many co-operated with a zip merge there. Down south, they seemed much less co-operative. |
highway code
wrote in message
... Zip at point of closure is dangerous to the point of stupid unless at a crawl, that's why people don't do it. It might appear to maximise traffic flow, but since this zipping process does not operate perfectly, if you're not crawling it results in collisions. I agree. Anything which requires two streams of traffic to do something alternately, one car from each stream, is tedious and dangerous. Better to give one stream exclusive access for a period of time then give the other stream exclusive access for a period of time, or else get them to merge while road conditions are still normal. Any fool can make zip merging safe, but it takes *skill* to make it work without imposing a very severe bottleneck on traffic flow, when with a bit of advance warning, everyone can get into one lane without having to slow down much and then the single stream can keep moving through the roadworks. It's one of those things (like right-turning cars at traffic lights having to pass driver's side to driver's side *) where I think the Highway Code has got it wrong or has not kept pace with modern traffic levels. (*) Doing it the "wrong" way does potentially mean that you don't have such good visibility of oncoming traffic, but this is far outweighed by the fact that the two streams of traffic can then act independently of each other, without each blocking the other's ability to clear the junction so they have to both move at the same time or not at all. If you do it the wrong way, one car can turn because of a gap in his oncoming traffic even if the other car is blocked because there's no gap in his oncoming traffic. Fortunately many roads now have right-filter lane markings that force you to do it the "wrong" way, while allowing both cars to pull far enough forward to the stop line that the drivers each have a good view behind the other car. |
highway code
|
highway code
On 02/08/2019 10:29, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Thu, 01 Aug 2019 22:25:24 +0100, Martin Brown wrote: On 01/08/2019 22:18, Steve Walker wrote: On 01/08/2019 21:58, Roger Hayter wrote: Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote: Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... The Highway Code advises the latter, but people still tend to do the former, creating resentment and inefficiency.Â* Where road layout or long term roadworks make lane merging necessary there tend to be notices advising use of both lanes and merging in turn. The trouble is that the eventual merge usually does involve one lane merging into the other and those that have queued patiently get annoyed that others have nipped into the mostly empty lane instead of queuing. It would be better if the cones were laid out to merge the two lanes equally, promoting zip merging. Zip merging is just about the only thing American drivers do better. UK traffic stalls repeatedly as people refuse to let other people in. It can be OK where it's a fixed part of the road. There's one road near (going uphill) where cars seem to know to merge in turn. Occasionally you'll get a **** straddling the lane thinking they're clever. And I will die happy having once see a car do that with a police car up it's back, and get pulled over :) :) :) We do roundabouts better though :) Actually, straddling the lane as you get closer to the merge point is a good way to deter the queue jumpers. I totally agree with using both lanes where appropriate, but it does all depend on traffic density. We have a good example inside our local tip, where there are huge signs saying Use Both Lanes to try to stop traffic tailing back out on to the access road when it is busy, but most people stick in the right hand lane. That is one place where I take some pleasure in passing ten cars "ahead" of me. |
highway code
On Fri, 2 Aug 2019 15:19:51 +1000, FMurtz wrote:
T i m wrote: On Thu, 1 Aug 2019 21:15:54 +0100, "Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote: Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... You shouldn't be in the outside lane of a dual carriageway unless you were overtaking slower cars in the inside lane. 'Merging in turn is recommended but only if safe and appropriate when vehicles are traveling at a very low speed, e.g. when approaching road works or a road traffic incident. It is not recommended at high speed.' We have two instances here one where a dotted line continues to the end and the left have no rights Like a slip lane joining a road? and one where the dotted line finishes early where each take turns (zippers) Where you have permanent two-into-one's there is normally an arrow in the lane with least / no priority indicating which lane (the secondary) is merging with the other (the primary). Round here there is a two lane roundabout where one main route (specifically) exits onto a single carriageway and 'most people' use the zip thing. This still seems to be accepted when a vehicle has gained some advantage by under/overtaking vehicles queuing (the main traffic track if it was / when it was free flowing) to exit the roundabout as it means the roundabout is kept clear when the lights change in favour of traffic trying to cross the roundabout. And when the lights are off it all flows much better, in all but the busiest parts of the rush hour. Cheers, T i m |
highway code
On Fri, 02 Aug 2019 10:30:32 +0100, Harry Bloomfield, Esq.
wrote: snip Sometimes, you get the heavies driving side by side co-operating to force a zip merge. I've seen an instance of that round here on a dual carriageway where the right lane was closed ahead and a car went up onto the grass central reservation with two wheels to overtake the lorry (who was doing said 'sleazy advantage' moderation). Cheers, T i m |
highway code
On 02/08/2019 13:02, newshound wrote:
On 02/08/2019 10:29, Jethro_uk wrote: On Thu, 01 Aug 2019 22:25:24 +0100, Martin Brown wrote: On 01/08/2019 22:18, Steve Walker wrote: On 01/08/2019 21:58, Roger Hayter wrote: Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote: Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... The Highway Code advises the latter, but people still tend to do the former, creating resentment and inefficiency.Â* Where road layout or long term roadworks make lane merging necessary there tend to be notices advising use of both lanes and merging in turn. The trouble is that the eventual merge usually does involve one lane merging into the other and those that have queued patiently get annoyed that others have nipped into the mostly empty lane instead of queuing. It would be better if the cones were laid out to merge the two lanes equally, promoting zip merging. Zip merging is just about the only thing American drivers do better. UK traffic stalls repeatedly as people refuse to let other people in. It can be OK where it's a fixed part of the road. There's one road near (going uphill) where cars seem to know to merge in turn. Occasionally you'll get a **** straddling the lane thinking they're clever. And I will die happy having once see a car do that with a police car up it's back, and get pulled over :) :) :) We do roundabouts better though :) Actually, straddling the lane as you get closer to the merge point is a good way to deter the queue jumpers. I totally agree with using both lanes where appropriate, but it does all depend on traffic density. We have a good example inside our local tip, where there are huge signs saying Use Both Lanes to try to stop traffic tailing back out on to the access road when it is busy, but most people stick in the right hand lane. That is one place where I take some pleasure in passing ten cars "ahead" of me. good man...one must follow instructions... |
highway code
On Fri, 2 Aug 2019 10:33:31 +0100, "NY" wrote:
snip Any fool can make zip merging safe, but it takes *skill* to make it work without imposing a very severe bottleneck on traffic flow, when with a bit of advance warning, everyone can get into one lane without having to slow down much and then the single stream can keep moving through the roadworks. Bingo. In many cases, especially on fast / dual carriageways they generally give you *plenty* of warning about 1) the speed limit being reduced and 2) the lane being closed. I rarely have any problem obeying both at the first warning sign to 'get ready' for the restriction. This isn't the case for some though (and generally a minority in a roadwork situation) who totally ignore the signs and continue at speed (say up the inside, effectively undertaking 'at speed') right to the last second, forcing their way into the traffic that *has* behaved correctly / respectfully. I saw that happen on the M25 the other day were all the traffic was being pushed off at a junction and the Police were waiting in good quantity and scooping up *everyone* who didn't think they should have to join the queue in the single exit lane and hope to push in at the last second. I would have been equally happy with a flipper arrangement that sent them and their car straight into a crusher. ;-) The reason I think that is because I've seen people trying to do that down the outside of first one then two lines of traffic queing to get off a motorway, only to find they were unable to force their way in at the last knockings and end up stationary on a live lane of a busy motorway. If it were a foreigner or someone lost you might have more sympathy but it is obvious from their vehicle, the number and age / gender of the occupants and the make / model of vehicle that they were just trying it on. Cheers, T i m p.s. Anyone not realising in time that there was the single line of queuing traffic would do the 'gentlemanly thing' (as mentioned elsewhere) and indicate their wish to pull in asap (by matching the speed of the queuing traffic) and so demonstrate they weren't *intentionally* trying to gain any real advantage. |
highway code
Harry wrote:
laid this down on his screen : Zip at point of closure is dangerous to the point of stupid unless at a crawl, that's why people don't do it. It might appear to maximise traffic flow, but since this zipping process does not operate perfectly, if you're not crawling it results in collisions. Those self important, unco-operative types, who race down the empty lane, cause the collisions. The uncooperative types are the ones who merge too soon, then worry about others gaining an advantage over them. Those in the full lane, will be distracted spending lots of time watching their mirrors for those trying to beat the queue, trying to prevent them pushing in. With sensible, responsible people they will spend no time at all trying to prevent anyone else from doing anything. Just driving safely and cooperating with other drivers. With an orderly zip, you can relax concentrate on what is happening ahead and relax. A steady speed merge can work perfectly. The merge point should should move back as speed increases and move nearer the obstruction as speed falls. All it needs for a steady flow, is each to position themselves alongside a gap in the adjacent lane, then gradually move into the gap. Unless there is a queue the whole problem will not arise, as there will be no slow traffic for people conscientiously trying to use both lanes to overtake. Or those going slightly more slowly if there is no queue will respect the right of others to drive faster and overtake, without any dog in the manger attitudes. -- Roger Hayter |
highway code
NY wrote:
"Harry Bloomfield"; "Esq." wrote in message ... laid this down on his screen : Zip at point of closure is dangerous to the point of stupid unless at a crawl, that's why people don't do it. It might appear to maximise traffic flow, but since this zipping process does not operate perfectly, if you're not crawling it results in collisions. Those self important, unco-operative types, who race down the empty lane, cause the collisions. Those in the full lane, will be distracted spending lots of time watching their mirrors for those trying to beat the queue, trying to prevent them pushing in. With an orderly zip, you can relax concentrate on what is happening ahead and relax. A steady speed merge can work perfectly. The merge point should should move back as speed increases and move nearer the obstruction as speed falls. All it needs for a steady flow, is each to position themselves alongside a gap in the adjacent lane, then gradually move into the gap. It all depends on people leaving a bit enough gap from the car in front that a car on the left or right can move into. What usually happens is that everyone approaches the slowing traffic and brakes to leave a minuscule gap ahead which no-one can move into. A lot of it is down to lane markings: people tend to think "I'm staying in the same lane so I have priority over people trying to join this lane from another one". I agree. This selfishness is much of the cause of people merging too soon. -- Roger Hayter |
highway code
"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
... What usually happens is that everyone approaches the slowing traffic and brakes to leave a minuscule gap ahead which no-one can move into. A lot of it is down to lane markings: people tend to think "I'm staying in the same lane so I have priority over people trying to join this lane from another one". I agree. This selfishness is much of the cause of people merging too soon. The alternative is that everyone needs to drop back a bit to create a gap ahead them that a car from the adjacent lane will be able to pull into. I tend to move into the lane that is still open fairly early, so I'm not having to do it at the last minute, but I make sure I co-operate with other people who want to wait until they've got a bit closer and slower. My experience is that the vast majority of people get into the correct lane early (*), and it is *comparatively* rare to get people storming past and then trying to bully their way in at the last possible moment. Normally on a motorway where there's been an accident, you get a rash of last-minute braking as everyone slows down, maybe to a virtual halt, to let people in from the lane that is closed a few yards ahead of them, and then once you get past that pinch point you accelerate to a sensible speed (faster than a crawl but a lot slower than 70) as you pass the accident. I remember a junction in Wakefield where two oncoming streams of traffic turned left (for one stream) and right (for the other) so they ran alongside and then joined together (this one https://youtu.be/f3eZB2QNvtM?t=71 seen before the change - apologies for the jerky motion of the stop-motion film). Originally it was treated as a T junction: the stream that had traffic coming from their right had to give way. Then it was replaced in the 1970s with a sign "adjust speed and weave" to encourage zip-merging. The traffic queues *for both streams* increased dramatically - it was the worst of all worlds for everyone. I'm not sure they ever changed it back, though. They probably put lights there eventually which can be better at peak times when you may have to stop but you may alternatively be able to keep going at normal speed knowing that you don't have to co-operate with another stream of traffic. That's why in the UK we try to make sure at junctions one stream always has priority over the other according to well-understood rules (eg priority from right at T junctions and roundabouts, my turn/your turn at traffic lights). I never got the hang of 4-way-stop junctions in the US because I could never remember what order we had arrived in and resented having to stop even if I was the only car. On the other hand, I was a dab hand with their "rotaries" or "traffic circles" because I was familiar with roundabout rules (just apply them in mirror-image). Letting a car merge ahead of me is one of those situations where I favour flashing my headlights to give the other car a *positive* signal (rather than the absence of a negative signal) that I'm letting him in. I think a *possibly* ambiguous signal is better than no signal at all which leaves the other driver thinking "is he or isn't he letting me in?". But the Highway Code deprecates flashing your lights as an "I will wait for you" signal. I think it thinks that *no* signal, even one that has no other meaning, is the correct response. I disagree: a signal is needed in just the same way as flashing your indicators to show that you are turning. (*) Which the HC says you shouldn't do. |
highway code
In message , Jim GM4DHJ ...
writes On 02/08/2019 09:43, NY wrote: "Roger Hayter" wrote in message .. . Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote: Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... The Highway Code advises the latter, but people still tend to do the former, creating resentment and inefficiency.* Where road layout or long term roadworks make lane merging necessary there tend to be notices advising use of both lanes and merging in turn. I *prefer* to merge early, while everyone is still moving at a reasonable speed and there are still gaps appropriate for that speed that you can slot into. If you have to merge in turn, that tends to imply both lanes have to slow to a crawl to make it safe to do, since it requires coordination between alternate drivers. The delay in roadworks is often the slowing everyone to a crawl so they can merge; once they have merged, the resulting single lane can often accelerate again and move through the roadworks at a sensible speed for the proximity of the workmen, rather then at a crawl. I wonder whether queues would be as bad if traffic all merged early, without needing to slow to a zip-merge speed. very true it depends on the circumstances I think ..... As I've said, there are times when it is lot better if drivers merge early, and try to maintain the maximum possible safe/legal speed. In my experience, when there's a 5-mile tailback before the point of merger, it's usually caused by sillybuggers trying to steal a march on the 'lesser mortals', and trying to merge in the last possible microsecond (which also often leads to a prang, making things worse). -- Ian |
highway code
In message , NY writes
I never got the hang of 4-way-stop junctions in the US because I could never remember what order we had arrived in The best answer I got was "The first one there has priority to move off first". and resented having to stop even if I was the only car. The Americans seem to love having to stop unnecessarily - (which might explain their attachment to traffic lights, and why roundabouts are still a bit of a novelty. In mitigation, they do often allow a 'Right turn on red'. -- Ian |
highway code
On Fri, 2 Aug 2019 14:53:51 +0100, "NY" wrote:
"Roger Hayter" wrote in message ... What usually happens is that everyone approaches the slowing traffic and brakes to leave a minuscule gap ahead which no-one can move into. A lot of it is down to lane markings: people tend to think "I'm staying in the same lane so I have priority over people trying to join this lane from another one". I agree. This selfishness is much of the cause of people merging too soon. The alternative is that everyone needs to drop back a bit to create a gap ahead them that a car from the adjacent lane will be able to pull into. I tend to move into the lane that is still open fairly early, so I'm not having to do it at the last minute, but I make sure I co-operate with other people who want to wait until they've got a bit closer and slower. Yes, if they are still in the lane that will be closed soon, not those undertaking you in the soon-to-be-closed lane to gain 3 car places because they think they have a right to. My experience is that the vast majority of people get into the correct lane early (*), and it is *comparatively* rare to get people storming past and then trying to bully their way in at the last possible moment. And that *is* what they are doing when they have had plenty of warning to do as instructed. Normally on a motorway where there's been an accident, you get a rash of last-minute braking as everyone slows down, maybe to a virtual halt, to let people in from the lane that is closed a few yards ahead of them, and then once you get past that pinch point you accelerate to a sensible speed (faster than a crawl but a lot slower than 70) as you pass the accident. Yup. snip Letting a car merge ahead of me is one of those situations where I favour flashing my headlights to give the other car a *positive* signal (rather than the absence of a negative signal) that I'm letting him in. Agreed, where the specific scenario dictates. eg. A car coming fast down a slip obviously knows the deal and if I drop back to give them more space, the chances are they will take it unprompted. However, a car coming down the slip and not preparing to match the existing traffic (even treating the slip like a side road off a T junction) may not be 'aware' enough to notice I have taken my foot off the accelerator to give them more space / de-sync our vehicles, but not might they spot a 'please go ahead' flash, and so you end up breaking or accelerating hard to 'manage' their confusion / lack of skill / hesitation. I think a *possibly* ambiguous signal is better than no signal at all which leaves the other driver thinking "is he or isn't he letting me in?". But the Highway Code deprecates flashing your lights as an "I will wait for you" signal. I think it thinks that *no* signal, even one that has no other meaning, is the correct response. I disagree: a signal is needed in just the same way as flashing your indicators to show that you are turning. Agreed ... and one many of the lorry drivers use to indicate 'you are clear of me you can now pull in'. But then there are flashes and flashes ... ;-( If I flash someone out (say at a T junction where they are going in my direction, I can see its very clear to their right and there are no gaps behind me) they may not see my indication because they were looking the other way. So I now slow further (in case they did see my offer but are just slow at responding and then pull out) but if they are looking at me and still don't go, that's when they might get the rapid flashes as a 'yes, I'm letting you out get on with it' thing (as I'm now at a halt)? ;-( I will *sometimes* flash to tell people I'm turning left off say a dual carriageway down a side road that I know it's a difficult one to turn left out of, as I also know you can't rely on indicators alone in that situation (people leaving them on for miles). Good drivers seem to understand other good drivers (good as in communication, not necessarily following the letter of the HC etc). Cheers, T i m |
highway code
On 02/08/2019 16:52, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , NY writes I never got the hang of 4-way-stop junctions in the US because I could never remember what order we had arrived in The best answer I got was "The first one there has priority to move off first". I decided that was the rule if I wanted to turn right in front of an oncoming car. I have not seen it mentioned before! -- Michael Chare |
highway code
On 02/08/2019 13:43, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
On 02/08/2019 13:02, newshound wrote: On 02/08/2019 10:29, Jethro_uk wrote: On Thu, 01 Aug 2019 22:25:24 +0100, Martin Brown wrote: On 01/08/2019 22:18, Steve Walker wrote: On 01/08/2019 21:58, Roger Hayter wrote: Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote: Have to say I haven't read my higway code since 1968 so no idea if this is covered......going down the dual carriage way I come to a sign saying the inside lane is closed...Do I....immediately go into the outside lane thus building up the tail back and cursing the fly man rushing up the empty inside lane and trying to push in even though nobody is letting them...Or...like in Australia where things are more sensible do I stay in the inside lane right up to the closed lane and expect those in the outside lane instigate the zip effect thus cutting down tailbacks and making better use of the available road space ?.... The Highway Code advises the latter, but people still tend to do the former, creating resentment and inefficiency.Â* Where road layout or long term roadworks make lane merging necessary there tend to be notices advising use of both lanes and merging in turn. The trouble is that the eventual merge usually does involve one lane merging into the other and those that have queued patiently get annoyed that others have nipped into the mostly empty lane instead of queuing. It would be better if the cones were laid out to merge the two lanes equally, promoting zip merging. Zip merging is just about the only thing American drivers do better. UK traffic stalls repeatedly as people refuse to let other people in. It can be OK where it's a fixed part of the road. There's one road near (going uphill) where cars seem to know to merge in turn. Occasionally you'll get a **** straddling the lane thinking they're clever. And I will die happy having once see a car do that with a police car up it's back, and get pulled over :) :) :) We do roundabouts better though :) Actually, straddling the lane as you get closer to the merge point is a good way to deter the queue jumpers. I totally agree with using both lanes where appropriate, but it does all depend on traffic density. We have a good example inside our local tip, where there are huge signs saying Use Both Lanes to try to stop traffic tailing back out on to the access road when it is busy, but most people stick in the right hand lane. That is one place where I take some pleasure in passing ten cars "ahead" of me. good man...one must follow instructions... Though in that situation you might meet the occupants of the vehicles that you past which would be less likely to happen on a main road. -- Michael Chare |
highway code
On Fri, 2 Aug 2019 14:14:16 +0100, (Roger Hayter)
wrote: Harry wrote: laid this down on his screen : Zip at point of closure is dangerous to the point of stupid unless at a crawl, that's why people don't do it. It might appear to maximise traffic flow, but since this zipping process does not operate perfectly, if you're not crawling it results in collisions. Those self important, unco-operative types, who race down the empty lane, cause the collisions. The uncooperative types are the ones who merge too soon, then worry about others gaining an advantage over them. Only uncooperative to your interpretation of the rules? If they merge when or soon after the first warning tells them, THEY are doing the right thing. Those in the full lane, will be distracted spending lots of time watching their mirrors for those trying to beat the queue, trying to prevent them pushing in. With sensible, responsible people they will spend no time at all trying to prevent anyone else from doing anything. Just driving safely and cooperating with other drivers. Except 'welcome to the real world'. ;-( Once you have spent any journeys effectively going backwards because some selfish cnuts thinks it's 'perfectly ok' to push in front of you, you will soon get the idea. I have seen people driving off a motorway in a hold up and straight back down onto it again (and forcing their way in), meaning I go backwards another cars length. Try that in a Cinema or McDonalds queue and see how far you get. With an orderly zip, you can relax concentrate on what is happening ahead and relax. A steady speed merge can work perfectly. The merge point should should move back as speed increases and move nearer the obstruction as speed falls. All it needs for a steady flow, is each to position themselves alongside a gap in the adjacent lane, then gradually move into the gap. Unless there is a queue the whole problem will not arise, Except when people under / overtake those happily merging to then try to increase the restriction throughput to Max+1 and then it all starts to snarl up. as there will be no slow traffic for people conscientiously trying to use both lanes to overtake. Because in many cases those still trying to under / overtake right up to the restriction will *also* be speeding. If I have dropped back from 70 to 50 because it tells me there is a lane closed ahead, no one should be able to under/overtake me? Or those going slightly more slowly if there is no queue will respect the right of others to drive faster and overtake, without any dog in the manger attitudes. See above. Ignoring 'mimzers' which we all hate, 'most people' will be still going at whatever the speed limit is for that restriction. It's those who don't obey the limits, or the HC, or how to behave on the public highway (cinema queue) who are causing all the trouble. Just as those who don't 'get on with it' at lights / junctions that are known to only give you a few seconds or people turning right from a straight on only lane who then pull into the space you would have occupied, had they not sped / undertaken you to get there. It's all fair in love and war, till you get the ticket for causing an obstruction / stopping on a yellow box etc. I have no issue with those simply making a mistake, I've done so myself at an unknown junction where a lane is left turn only and you have to politely sneak back in (match the speed of the existing traffic, indicate, make eye contact, thank them etc), but that's not what an arrogant minority are doing. Cheers, T i m |
highway code
On Fri, 2 Aug 2019 13:02:35 +0100, newshound
wrote: snip Actually, straddling the lane as you get closer to the merge point is a good way to deter the queue jumpers. Agreed. It generally only has to be by a bit (other than for the most extreme of them), just enough to not make it easy to jump the entire queue (especially if you are still moving at a reasonable speed)? But then I've seen cars (even, not just motorbikes / scooters) go down the outside of a queue of single file traffic, round the wrong side of a bollard / island, over the crosshatching's to get to the few feet of twin lane at the traffic lights. Like everyone waiting to turn right didn't think of doing the same but preferred to obey the rules and respect other drivers. And then when you do get to the lights yourself, you don't make it by one (their) car. ;-( If only I drove a grab lorry ... ;-) Cheers, T i m |
highway code
On Friday, 2 August 2019 10:38:48 UTC+1, wrote:
tabbypurr laid this down on his screen : Zip at point of closure is dangerous to the point of stupid unless at a crawl, that's why people don't do it. It might appear to maximise traffic flow, but since this zipping process does not operate perfectly, if you're not crawling it results in collisions. Those self important, unco-operative types, who race down the empty lane, cause the collisions. Those in the full lane, will be distracted spending lots of time watching their mirrors for those trying to beat the queue, trying to prevent them pushing in. With an orderly zip, you can relax concentrate on what is happening ahead and relax. A steady speed merge can work perfectly. The merge point should should move back as speed increases and move nearer the obstruction as speed falls. All it needs for a steady flow, is each to position themselves alongside a gap in the adjacent lane, then gradually move into the gap. Sometimes that happens. But counting on it to do so to avoid a collision is folly indeed. NT |
highway code
NY has brought this to us :
Any fool can make zip merging safe, but it takes *skill* to make it work without imposing a very severe bottleneck on traffic flow, when with a bit of advance warning, everyone can get into one lane without having to slow down much and then the single stream can keep moving through the roadworks. That just moves the merge point further back and reduces the capacity of the road to store waiting vehicles. Merging just in time allows more vehicles to be in the queue, when a queue forms. |
highway code
NY formulated on Friday :
It all depends on people leaving a bit enough gap from the car in front that a car on the left or right can move into. Which I do. What usually happens is that everyone approaches the slowing traffic and brakes to leave a minuscule gap ahead which no-one can move into. A lot of it is down to lane markings: people tend to think "I'm staying in the same lane so I have priority over people trying to join this lane from another one". Not me, I look where I am going so can come to a gentle well planned stop with a gap ahead of me. If in a more urgent stop, you can always make room once the vehicles ahead move do move off. |
highway code
NY explained on 02/08/2019 :
Letting a car merge ahead of me is one of those situations where I favour flashing my headlights to give the other car a *positive* signal (rather than the absence of a negative signal) that I'm letting him in. I think a *possibly* ambiguous signal is better than no signal at all which leaves the other driver thinking "is he or isn't he letting me in?". But the Highway Code deprecates flashing your lights as an "I will wait for you" signal. I think it thinks that *no* signal, even one that has no other meaning, is the correct response. I disagree: a signal is needed in just the same way as flashing your indicators to show that you are turning. (*) Which the HC says you shouldn't do. I do agree. Incidently, I was on a bus this morning as a passenger. I saw the bus coming from quite a long way away, because I thought he had flashed his headlights at an on coming bus, to concede right of way, except his headlights kept on flashing perfectly regularly as would his indicators. When he stopped to pick me up, I told him about the headlights, but after a quick check of his dashboard, he carried on and drove off. I think he got fed up of others pulling out in front of him, because he only got half a mile, before he got out, went to the front, looked, decided I was correct, rang in to cancel his run and transferred his passengers to a following bus. One of those rare happenings, but quite dangerous if headlight flashing is misinterpreted. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:47 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter