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.

On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 04:09:03 -0700 (PDT), fred
wrote:

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.

I am one of these pillocks. I don't expect you to push past a queue
at the supermarket so why should you do so on the road?

On 20/04/2021 12:38, Scott wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 04:09:03 -0700 (PDT), fred
wrote:

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.

I am one of these pillocks. I don't expect you to push past a queue
at the supermarket so why should you do so on the road?

Because at least round here on major roadworks it says:
"Use *both* lanes, merge in turn"

It is one of the very few things driving wise that Americans do better.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 12:47:57 +0100, Martin Brown
wrote:

On 20/04/2021 12:38, Scott wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 04:09:03 -0700 (PDT), fred
wrote:

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.

I am one of these pillocks. I don't expect you to push past a queue
at the supermarket so why should you do so on the road?

Because at least round here on major roadworks it says:
"Use *both* lanes, merge in turn"

It is one of the very few things driving wise that Americans do better.

It doesn't always say that.

What you can do does not necessarily replace good manners. By your
logic, if a sign says 'Give Way' and you are on the main road you
should never allow the other vehicle in because strict interpretation
of the Highway Code displaces good manners. I'm not surprised people
take exception to OP if he forces his way in front of other drivers
who have patiently waited in a queue.

On Tuesday, 20 April 2021 at 12:09:05 UTC+1, fred wrote:
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.

One to one merge at the point could be a good idea. But only if the vehicles in BOTH lanes have double the gap that would usually be required for the speed/weather/etc. Otherwise, at and after the point of merge, they end up having too small gaps. Also, only really can work if speeds are pretty much the same in both lanes.

Further, if there are are plenty of large gaps, is there a reason to defer merging until the merge point?

In other places I know where there is a merge in turn arrangement, there is often plenty of road ahead in case it is needed. If you wait until the last moment to merge, then any slight mistake by anyone results in much braking and annoyance.

What is, in my view, wholly unacceptable, is for those in the right lane to whizz past lots of slow or stationary vehicles and expect positive action to be let in.

On 20/04/2021 12:09, fred wrote:
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.

just do what Audi drivers do and push your way in....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBnV...anderNemes is

On 20/04/2021 12:47, Martin Brown wrote:
On 20/04/2021 12:38, Scott wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 04:09:03 -0700 (PDT), fred
wrote:

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.

I am one of these pillocks.Â* I don't expect you to push past a queue
at the supermarket so why should you do so on the road?

Because at least round here on major roadworks it says:
"Use *both* lanes, merge in turn"

The germans do it automatically :-

Reisverschlussverfahren

Reißverschlussverfahren is the Germany word for late merge or zipper
method. This is a convention for merging traffic into a reduced number
of lanes. The idea is quite good and actually law in Germany.

On 20/04/2021 13:08, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
On 20/04/2021 12:09, fred wrote:
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.

just do what Audi drivers do and push your way in....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBnV...anderNemes is

What's wrong with that?

I was tooted yesterday for merging by a BMW driver.

On 20/04/2021 13:33, Fredxx wrote:
On 20/04/2021 13:08, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
On 20/04/2021 12:09, fred wrote:
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.

just do what Audi drivers do and push your way in....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBnV...anderNemes is


What's wrong with that?

I was tooted yesterday for merging by a BMW driver.


he either should have speeded up are slowed dowm not just into the side
of me if I hadn't slowed dowm ...

"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.

In message , Martin Brown
writes
On 20/04/2021 12:38, Scott wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 04:09:03 -0700 (PDT), fred
wrote:

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.
I am one of these pillocks. I don't expect you to push past a queue
at the supermarket so why should you do so on the road?

Because at least round here on major roadworks it says:
"Use *both* lanes, merge in turn"

It is one of the very few things driving wise that Americans do better.

"Right turn on red" is another - as well as 'n5-type' speed limits (such
as 35mph).
--
Ian

On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 05:02:22 -0700 (PDT), polygonum_on_google
wrote:

On Tuesday, 20 April 2021 at 12:09:05 UTC+1, fred wrote:
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.

One to one merge at the point could be a good idea. But only if the vehicles in BOTH lanes have double the gap that would usually be required for the speed/weather/etc. Otherwise, at and after the point of merge, they end up having too small gaps. Also, only really can work if speeds are pretty much the same in both lanes.

Further, if there are are plenty of large gaps, is there a reason to defer merging until the merge point?

In other places I know where there is a merge in turn arrangement, there is often plenty of road ahead in case it is needed. If you wait until the last moment to merge, then any slight mistake by anyone results in much braking and annoyance.

What is, in my view, wholly unacceptable, is for those in the right lane to whizz past lots of slow or stationary vehicles and expect positive action to be let in.

They've been doing work near the roundabout at Amesbury on the A303.
Going east the signs say use both lanes. Last time I went past the
traffic had merged about 5/600 yards before the merge point. Given the
instructions I continued (at reduced speed in case someone decided to
pull out) down to the merge point, found a gap, indicated and moved
into the line with no problems. (I don't drive an Audi, BMW, Range
Rover .........).

What would have had me do, given the sign telling me to use both
lanes?

On 20/04/2021 12:47, Martin Brown wrote:
On 20/04/2021 12:38, Scott wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 04:09:03 -0700 (PDT), fred
wrote:

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.

I am one of these pillocks.Â* I don't expect you to push past a queue
at the supermarket so why should you do so on the road?

Because at least round here on major roadworks it says:
"Use *both* lanes, merge in turn"

If it tells you that, then that is what you should do. I wish they'd put
that generally or write it into the Highway Code. However, if it does
not say that, then merge early rather than at the point where you have
no choice but to merge.

Normal road marking for a merge have one lane ending and an arrow and as
the ones changing lanes, it is up to the mergers to give way to those
who are not changing.

On 20/04/2021 13:28, Andrew wrote:
On 20/04/2021 12:47, Martin Brown wrote:
On 20/04/2021 12:38, Scott wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 04:09:03 -0700 (PDT), fred
wrote:

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.

I am one of these pillocks.Â* I don't expect you to push past a queue
at the supermarket so why should you do so on the road?

Because at least round here on major roadworks it says:
"Use *both* lanes, merge in turn"

The germansÂ* do it automatically :-

Reisverschlussverfahren

Reißverschlussverfahren is the Germany word for late merge or zipper
method. This is a convention for merging traffic into a reduced number
of lanes. The idea is quite good and actually law in Germany.

That's the problem. It is not law here and the road layouts usually have
one lane merging into the other, not two lanes both moving together into
a single one.

The sensible thing would be for signage to tell drivers to merge in turn
or, for long term roadworks with temporary markings, to equally merge
the lanes; and for roads remaining marked with one lane merging into the
other maintaining a requirement for the merging driver to give-way, as
zip-merging and expecting other drivers to make a gap is perhaps not
such a good idea on a high speed road.

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.

Most of them have probably never looked closely at how a zip fastener works
either.
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"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.

"Scott" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 04:09:03 -0700 (PDT), fred
wrote:

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.

I am one of these pillocks. I don't expect you to push past a queue
at the supermarket so why should you do so on the road?

because if I don't do it, some other ******* will do it and push in in front
of me

so the only way to avoid people pushing in, is if everybody does it

obviously it depends upon the length of the Q

if it's just 5 or 6 cars I get on the back

if it's 30 or more, I go down the outside

"Ian Jackson" wrote in message
...
In message , Martin Brown
writes
On 20/04/2021 12:38, Scott wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 04:09:03 -0700 (PDT), fred
wrote:

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.
I am one of these pillocks. I don't expect you to push past a queue
at the supermarket so why should you do so on the road?

Because at least round here on major roadworks it says:
"Use *both* lanes, merge in turn"

It is one of the very few things driving wise that Americans do better.

"Right turn on red" is another

as I have explained before

right turn on red came about because it's normal not to find pedestrian
phases on US lights

peds cross the side roads at the same time as traffic runs "across", so if
you want to make a turn you can't do it then because the road is full of
crossing peds

so right turn on red is allowed instead

On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 14:13:57 +0100, Ian Jackson
wrote:

In message , Martin Brown
writes
On 20/04/2021 12:38, Scott wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 04:09:03 -0700 (PDT), fred
wrote:

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.
I am one of these pillocks. I don't expect you to push past a queue
at the supermarket so why should you do so on the road?

Because at least round here on major roadworks it says:
"Use *both* lanes, merge in turn"

It is one of the very few things driving wise that Americans do better.

"Right turn on red" is another

This seems to me unacceptable for pedestrians, particularly anyone
with vulnerabilities or disabilities who expect to be able to cross
the road without worrying about moving vehicles.

- as well as 'n5-type' speed limits (such
as 35mph).

They can't be relied on to comply with a straightforward 70 mph speed
limit proposition so what makes you think they would drive at 65 or 75
mph?

On 20/04/2021 12:09, fred wrote:
Two lanes merging into one. Arrows clearly define which lane merges into which. At the merge point who has the right of way ?

In law, neither has right of way, unless road markings and signs say
otherwise.*

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.

The Highway Code says:

'Merging in turn is recommended but only if safe and appropriate when
vehicles are travelling at a very low speed'

The AA advice is that it all depends upon the circumstances:

https://www.theaa.com/driving-advice.../merge-in-turn



* I have seen this. The situation was a dual carriageway that ended and
became a single carriageway on a left hand curve. Unfortunately, not
everybody noticed that the dual carriageway ended there, resulting in a
couple of fatal head-on crashes when vehicles travelling at high speed
in lane 2 carried on round the curve as if it were all dual carriageway,
ending up on the wrong side of the road. To avoid these accidents, the
highways authority closed off the end of lane 2 with a physical barrier
and put a give way line on lane 2 where the lanes started to converge.
This made all traffic exit the dual carriageway in single file and did
stop the type of accident that had happened before. Unfortunately, it
also meant that a car in lane 2 trying to get to the give way line
before a slower vehicle in lane 1 was forced into a rapid left - right -
left manoeuvre. That proved beyond the capabilities of some, notably the
teenage driver of a heavily overloaded car with almost bald tyres and
badly maintained brakes, bringing other teenagers back from a party. He
lost control coming out of the bend and went head on into a car coming
the other way. The road has since been made dual carriageway up to the
next junction, where they built a roundabout.


--
Colin Bignell

On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 15:07:13 +0100, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 20/04/2021 12:47, Martin Brown wrote:
On 20/04/2021 12:38, Scott wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 04:09:03 -0700 (PDT), fred
wrote:

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.

I am one of these pillocks.* I don't expect you to push past a queue
at the supermarket so why should you do so on the road?

Because at least round here on major roadworks it says:
"Use *both* lanes, merge in turn"

If it tells you that, then that is what you should do. I wish they'd put
that generally or write it into the Highway Code. However, if it does
not say that, then merge early rather than at the point where you have
no choice but to merge.

As the old joke goes, 'Use both lanes' may be okay for cars and vans
but it is a challenge for cyclists,

On 20/04/2021 13:37, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
On 20/04/2021 13:33, Fredxx wrote:
On 20/04/2021 13:08, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
On 20/04/2021 12:09, fred wrote:
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.

just do what Audi drivers do and push your way in....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBnV...anderNemes is



What's wrong with that?

I was tooted yesterday for merging by a BMW driver.


he either should have speeded up are slowed dowm not just into the side
of me if I hadn't slowed dowm ...

He had the 'racing line' so you had no choice but top slow down. Yes, I
do feel he could have been a bit more assertive in his actions.

In may case I was quite close to the car in front, and the guy was
ungracious of me getting in front of him.

On 20/04/2021 12:38 pm, Scott wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 04:09:03 -0700 (PDT), fred
wrote:

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.

I am one of these pillocks. I don't expect you to push past a queue
at the supermarket so why should you do so on the road?

Where two lanes merge into one some distance up ahead (say a half mile),
what is the purpose of the second lane just where you are (whether on
your offside or nearside)?

On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 16:49:55 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Scott" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 04:09:03 -0700 (PDT), fred
wrote:

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.

I am one of these pillocks. I don't expect you to push past a queue
at the supermarket so why should you do so on the road?

because if I don't do it, some other ******* will do it and push in in front
of me

so the only way to avoid people pushing in, is if everybody does it

obviously it depends upon the length of the Q

if it's just 5 or 6 cars I get on the back

if it's 30 or more, I go down the outside

And meantime another breed of motorists will do they can to stop you
getting in. A recipe for unsafe roads I would say. It's not a
competition.

On 20/04/2021 04:49 pm, tim... wrote:


"Scott" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 04:09:03 -0700 (PDT), fred
wrote:

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.

I am one of these pillocks.Â* I don't expect you to push past a queue
at the supermarket so why should you do so on the road?

because if I don't do it, some other ******* will do it and push in in
front of me

so the only way to avoid people pushing in, is if everybody does it

obviously it depends upon the length of the Q

if it's just 5 or 6 cars I get on the back

if it's 30 or more, I go down the outside

....thereby making use of the RH lane.

Some seem to think it's just there for decoration.

On 20/04/2021 17:19, Fredxx wrote:
On 20/04/2021 13:37, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
On 20/04/2021 13:33, Fredxx wrote:
On 20/04/2021 13:08, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
On 20/04/2021 12:09, fred wrote:
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.

just do what Audi drivers do and push your way in....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBnV...anderNemes is




What's wrong with that?

I was tooted yesterday for merging by a BMW driver.


he either should have speeded up are slowed dowm not just into the
side of me if I hadn't slowed dowm ...

He had the 'racing line' so you had no choice but top slow down. Yes, I
do feel he could have been a bit more assertive in his actions.

In may case I was quite close to the car in front, and the guy was
ungracious of me getting in front of him.


he was to merge either in front of me or behind me not into the side of
me.....

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 20/04/2021 04:49 pm, tim... wrote:


"Scott" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 04:09:03 -0700 (PDT), fred
wrote:

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.

I am one of these pillocks. I don't expect you to push past a queue
at the supermarket so why should you do so on the road?

because if I don't do it, some other ******* will do it and push in in
front of me

so the only way to avoid people pushing in, is if everybody does it

obviously it depends upon the length of the Q

if it's just 5 or 6 cars I get on the back

if it's 30 or more, I go down the outside

...thereby making use of the RH lane.

Some seem to think it's just there for decoration.

A single lane can move at maybe 30-40 mph through roadworks or in the
lead-up to an accident (probably go slower past it if necessary. If there
are two lanes of traffic leading up to the lane drop, then both of them will
have to slow to a crawl while each lets the other in. Zip-merging is unsafe
at anything above a few mph if both queues of traffic are more or less
bumper to bumper by the time they get to the drop-dead point where one lane
disappears.

What should happen (but doesn't) is for traffic to keep a couple of
car-lengths from the car ahead to allow space for cars to merge at a higher
speed.

"tim..." wrote in message
...
right turn on red came about because it's normal not to find pedestrian
phases on US lights

peds cross the side roads at the same time as traffic runs "across", so if
you want to make a turn you can't do it then because the road is full of
crossing peds

so right turn on red is allowed instead

How does that work? You've got a stream of cars. Most of them want to go
straight on. One wants to turn right. He has a green light but he is blocked
from turning by the pedestrians. So he has to stop, blocking all the traffic
behind him until he gets a red light. That's assuming that there isn't a
separate lane for turning right, which allows straight on traffic to get
past on the left.

On 20/04/2021 16:57, Scott wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 14:13:57 +0100, Ian Jackson
wrote:

In message , Martin Brown
writes
On 20/04/2021 12:38, Scott wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 04:09:03 -0700 (PDT), fred
wrote:

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.
I am one of these pillocks. I don't expect you to push past a queue
at the supermarket so why should you do so on the road?

Because at least round here on major roadworks it says:
"Use *both* lanes, merge in turn"

It is one of the very few things driving wise that Americans do better.

"Right turn on red" is another

This seems to me unacceptable for pedestrians, particularly anyone
with vulnerabilities or disabilities who expect to be able to cross
the road without worrying about moving vehicles.

It would be easy enough to add a marker to any lights where (left for
the UK) turn on Red would be allowed and to define in law, that while
doing so, the road you are turning into must be treated as a Zebra crossing.

- as well as 'n5-type' speed limits (such
as 35mph).

They can't be relied on to comply with a straightforward 70 mph speed
limit proposition so what makes you think they would drive at 65 or 75
mph?

Some speedos have no intermediate divisions, making n5 limits less defined.

"Steve Walker" wrote in message
...

Some speedos have no intermediate divisions, making n5 limits less
defined.

I'm not sure the last time I saw a car with 5 mph divisions. You have to
interpolate between the 10s markers - and on my car only the even numbered
ones have digits beside them.

On 20/04/2021 19:08, NY wrote:
"Steve Walker" wrote in message
...

Some speedos have no intermediate divisions, making n5 limits less
defined.

I'm not sure the last time I saw a car with 5 mph divisions. You have to
interpolate between the 10s markers - and on my car only the even
numbered ones have digits beside them.

It is easy enough to see where the 5mph points are, but as they are not
marked, it will require a touch more concentration - and the speedo is
not where you want to be concentrating for too long while driving.

On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 19:02:39 +0100, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 20/04/2021 16:57, Scott wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 14:13:57 +0100, Ian Jackson
wrote:

In message , Martin Brown
writes
On 20/04/2021 12:38, Scott wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 04:09:03 -0700 (PDT), fred
wrote:

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.
I am one of these pillocks. I don't expect you to push past a queue
at the supermarket so why should you do so on the road?

Because at least round here on major roadworks it says:
"Use *both* lanes, merge in turn"

It is one of the very few things driving wise that Americans do better.

"Right turn on red" is another

This seems to me unacceptable for pedestrians, particularly anyone
with vulnerabilities or disabilities who expect to be able to cross
the road without worrying about moving vehicles.

It would be easy enough to add a marker to any lights where (left for
the UK) turn on Red would be allowed and to define in law, that while
doing so, the road you are turning into must be treated as a Zebra crossing.

It can be done by a filter of course but the red man would be red.

After decades of the green man meaning it is the turn of the
pedestrians, I think many pedestrians, particularly older people,
would be find the idea of cars driving at them highly alarming. Human
nature being as it is, some drivers would inevitably interpret the
rule as meaning stop if you absolutely have to but keep going if you
can in the expectation the pedestrians will get out of the way.

PS. Also a Zebra crossing without clear sight lines would make for a
very dangerous crossing.

On 20 Apr 2021 18:46:29 GMT, Tim Streater
wrote:

On 20 Apr 2021 at 16:57:25 BST, Scott wrote:

On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 14:13:57 +0100, Ian Jackson
wrote:

"Right turn on red" is another

This seems to me unacceptable for pedestrians, particularly anyone
with vulnerabilities or disabilities who expect to be able to cross
the road without worrying about moving vehicles.

You have *always* to give way to peds in the US, even if you have a green
light. At a RToR, you not only give way to them, but also to any cross
traffic.

Actually, the Highway Code says you have to give way to pedestrians
when turning right or left, which almost never happens. I would have
no confidence at all that this rule would be any more observed at
traffic lights.

On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 9:01:57 PM UTC+1, Scott wrote:
On 20 Apr 2021 18:46:29 GMT, Tim Streater
wrote:
On 20 Apr 2021 at 16:57:25 BST, Scott wrote:

On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 14:13:57 +0100, Ian Jackson
wrote:

"Right turn on red" is another

This seems to me unacceptable for pedestrians, particularly anyone
with vulnerabilities or disabilities who expect to be able to cross
the road without worrying about moving vehicles.

You have *always* to give way to peds in the US, even if you have a green
light. At a RToR, you not only give way to them, but also to any cross
traffic.

Actually, the Highway Code says you have to give way to pedestrians
when turning right or left, which almost never happens. I would have
no confidence at all that this rule would be any more observed at
traffic lights.


Yes the rule is if the car is entering a side street then the pedestrian has the right of way. If the car is exiting the side street then the car has the right of way.

In Germany cars turning right at traffic lights (dont forget they drive on the right) have to give way to pedestrians who have a green light to cross. This eliminates that annoying traffic light phase where all traffic has to stop for a pedestrian phase, especially when there is no pedestrians waiting to cross as they all took their chance after pressing the button on the pole

On 20/04/2021 19:08, NY wrote:
"Steve Walker" wrote in message
...

Some speedos have no intermediate divisions, making n5 limits less
defined.

I'm not sure the last time I saw a car with 5 mph divisions. You have to
interpolate between the 10s markers - and on my car only the even
numbered ones have digits beside them.

I saw one this morning. I own it

https://media.ed.edmunds-media.com/j..._30613_600.jpg

--
"A point of view can be a dangerous luxury when substituted for insight
and understanding".

Marshall McLuhan

On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 12:38:52 PM UTC+1, Scott wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 04:09:03 -0700 (PDT), fred
wrote:
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.
I am one of these pillocks. I don't expect you to push past a queue
at the supermarket so why should you do so on the road?

Its not a supermarkey queue. Its multi lane road. Signs advising the use of both lanes are often used but still the pillocks queue.
I've noticed in other countries its accepted practice to use both lanes to the the merge point and 95% of the drives accept this

In article , Scott
writes
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 04:09:03 -0700 (PDT), fred
wrote:

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.

I am one of these pillocks. I don't expect you to push past a queue
at the supermarket so why should you do so on the road?
If you all queue at the same checkout leaving another one without a
queue why should I not go to that one?

Use all the tarmac is my philosophy.
--
bert

In article , Scott
writes
On 20 Apr 2021 18:46:29 GMT, Tim Streater
wrote:

On 20 Apr 2021 at 16:57:25 BST, Scott wrote:

On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 14:13:57 +0100, Ian Jackson
wrote:

"Right turn on red" is another

This seems to me unacceptable for pedestrians, particularly anyone
with vulnerabilities or disabilities who expect to be able to cross
the road without worrying about moving vehicles.

You have *always* to give way to peds in the US, even if you have a green
light. At a RToR, you not only give way to them, but also to any cross
traffic.

Actually, the Highway Code says you have to give way to pedestrians
when turning right or left, which almost never happens. I would have
no confidence at all that this rule would be any more observed at
traffic lights.
Pedestrians always have right of way.
--
bert

"NY" wrote in message
...
"tim..." wrote in message
...
right turn on red came about because it's normal not to find pedestrian
phases on US lights

peds cross the side roads at the same time as traffic runs "across", so
if you want to make a turn you can't do it then because the road is full
of crossing peds

so right turn on red is allowed instead

How does that work?

because there are two lanes