You're on a two lane highway and there are signs far ahead of a lane closure that one lane is closed ahead. There are no signs that you must form one lane prior to the merge point and no signs indicating that you should use both lanes until the merge point. You're basically free to merge at any point prior to the lane closure. All drivers seem to have formed a single lane a mile or so before the merge point, leaving an empty lane far before the lane closure. What do you do? I believe studies have shown that in heavy traffic, it's better to use both lanes until the merge point. Not only does it increase capacity through the construction zone, but it's safer for various reasons. This, however, enrages drivers who merge as soon as they see the end of the single lane of traffic in the open lane. Some even take it upon themselves to regulate traffic by blocking drivers who legally pass in the lane that is closed ahead. Are you one of the "selfish" drivers who zooms to the front of the line or do you wait in the single lane of traffic?
Use Both Lanes To Merge Point?
- Thread starter flashlite
- Start date
Help Support Candle Power Flashlight Forum
- Status
The above happens far more often in NYC than I care to remember. And yes, the average driver here is a selfish @$$ who races to the very end of the lane that is closed, and then noses his way into the lane that others had the courtesy to take far sooner.
Even more aggravating are the jack-@$$e$ who let them in!
Yes, I merge sooner. I'm not an @$$. And I have been known to play the role of Blocker Car so those rude drivers who think they're more important than everyone else on the road are forced into driving the right damn way.
Even more aggravating are the jack-@$$e$ who let them in!
Yes, I merge sooner. I'm not an @$$. And I have been known to play the role of Blocker Car so those rude drivers who think they're more important than everyone else on the road are forced into driving the right damn way.
Last edited:
It01Firefox
Newly Enlightened
I don't know what the deal is anywhere else in the world, but in Germany it's in the law that you have to drive all the way to the lane closure or obstruction before merging into the ongoing lane. And every driver in the ongoing lane has to let in exactly one car right at the point of the obstruction.
This is done to prevent unneccesary traffic jams. But since most people here in Germany don't get the concept we actually had to create new traffic signs that tell you to merge right at the obstruction.
So yes I do drive all the way to the front before merging but since most people don't get it and adding to that the fact that I'm driving a Mercedes-Benz everybody thinks I'm the selfish @$$ who just wants to get ahead faster than everybody else so they start playing cop and try to give me s%&t.
This is done to prevent unneccesary traffic jams. But since most people here in Germany don't get the concept we actually had to create new traffic signs that tell you to merge right at the obstruction.
So yes I do drive all the way to the front before merging but since most people don't get it and adding to that the fact that I'm driving a Mercedes-Benz everybody thinks I'm the selfish @$$ who just wants to get ahead faster than everybody else so they start playing cop and try to give me s%&t.
What's legal and what's polite can be two different things. Also, it's one thing if the situation is bumper to bumper traffic vs. normal driving where the closed-up lane is virtually empty.
If it's the former, the polite thing is indeed to let one car merge in front of you from the closed lane. The next car merges in front of the next driver in the open lane. One at a time is perfectly fine when it's bumper to bumper. When the closed lane is pretty much open, and some @$$ decides to use it to race all the way up front in order to cut everyone else off (because let's face it, that's exactly what he's doing; and he knows it) then that's not okay at all.
A few months back I had some @$$ who not only tried that B.S. on me, but actually used that "Oh it's one at a time, you're supposed to let me in" nonsense on me. We were both by the spot where the lanes merged. He had his window down. In response, I rolled mine down; and told him he was full of it. Told him that only applied in heavy traffic. Told him that he damn well saw that the lane was closed up ahead, that he saw everyone else merge sooner into the open lane, but that he decided to race all the way to the end in order to get in front of everyone else. Told him he was a selfish jerk. Told him I wasn't letting him in in front of me. He wanted to race all the way to the end, now he could sit there and wait for someone else to let him in. He knew he was full of it! Didn't say another word to me after I told him off. He knew I was right. I called him out on his rude behavior. So he just sat there waiting for someone else to let him into the open lane.
If it's the former, the polite thing is indeed to let one car merge in front of you from the closed lane. The next car merges in front of the next driver in the open lane. One at a time is perfectly fine when it's bumper to bumper. When the closed lane is pretty much open, and some @$$ decides to use it to race all the way up front in order to cut everyone else off (because let's face it, that's exactly what he's doing; and he knows it) then that's not okay at all.
A few months back I had some @$$ who not only tried that B.S. on me, but actually used that "Oh it's one at a time, you're supposed to let me in" nonsense on me. We were both by the spot where the lanes merged. He had his window down. In response, I rolled mine down; and told him he was full of it. Told him that only applied in heavy traffic. Told him that he damn well saw that the lane was closed up ahead, that he saw everyone else merge sooner into the open lane, but that he decided to race all the way to the end in order to get in front of everyone else. Told him he was a selfish jerk. Told him I wasn't letting him in in front of me. He wanted to race all the way to the end, now he could sit there and wait for someone else to let him in. He knew he was full of it! Didn't say another word to me after I told him off. He knew I was right. I called him out on his rude behavior. So he just sat there waiting for someone else to let him into the open lane.
Last edited:
TorchBoy
Flashlight Enthusiast
If the traffic is really heavy no more traffic will get through the bottleneck whichever you do. So I be patient. (That doesn't sound grammatically correct. :thinking: )
Good on you Monocrom, but it sounds quite risky.
It01Firefox
Newly Enlightened
There's a logical reason for using both lanes right up to the point of the obstruction, it is to save space. If everybody merged way before the actual obstruction you turn a 200 yard traffic jam into a 400 yard one, possibly blocking the last intersection creating even more chaos/traffic jams.
Most people just don't think about that.
Most people just don't think about that.
Flying Turtle
Flashaholic
I usually get over early, and try to be patient with those in a hurry. That lane will fill up soon enough. Sometimes you miss the warnings yourself.
Geoff
Geoff
A bottleneck is a bottleneck. It will only pass so much traffic at a speed. More people will get through the bottleneck if all merging was done ahead of the bottleneck and if you don't slow down to let other people merge in from a stop. Double lines cause slow downs. Jerks cause double lines when ample warning is given. As soon as you see a lane closure sign merge over. The definition of selfishness is putting yourself before others. By passing all of the people who have merged over is putting your interests ahead of the others and of the general welfare of the public. If you race up to the merge point as I approach after I have merged and waited patiently, you will WAIT!!! And in this country we have no law on merging it is left to common courtesy. Try to force your way in in front of me and you will have a repair bill for any damage you cause.
was.lost.but.now.found
Enlightened
Technically speaking, in order to understand the best way to allow the most traffic through a point of restriction on a roadway, you first must understand that the restriction point has some fixed parameters of traffic flow. Let's all start with some basic assumptions and that all considerations will be within the parameters of the law. We'll also make an assumption that our restriction for this example is a construction zone where 2 lanes of traffic are merging down to 1.
Typically a construction zone speed limit is 45 MPH (which as I think about it this actually is irrelevant). We are also aware that the appropriate distance in between cars in good weather is considered 2 seconds. Assuming a perfectly spaced line of cars at the maximum speed, the maximum number of cars that will get through our constricted one lane of traffic is 30 cars per minute. When the traffic flow 5 miles back is 2 lanes of cars going 60 MPH (again irrelevant) with a perfect 2 second gap between cars, we understand that there are 60 cars per minute arriving at the point of congestion. Nothing we can do will eliminate the congestion, no matter how far back drivers begin merging. Demand (the number of cars) has overwhelmed supply (the finite volume of traffic which the restriction point can handle).
The important thing to consider when trying to reduce the severity of the congestion is do whatever possible to keep the flow of traffic through the congestion point at the perfect 2 second gap between cars. Any increase in the spacing between cars is what will worsen the congestion.
Now, here comes my opinion because I don't have any hard fact to back it up. It is my personal believe that by having some cars wait to the very end to merge, it creates the scenario where many cars do not have an appropriate amount of distance to get up to speed and pace themselves behind the car in front of them - which will inevitably lead to gaps between cars that are greater than 2 seconds; this is what can further reduce the total volume of traffic that can go through the point of restriction within a given amount of time.
Typically a construction zone speed limit is 45 MPH (which as I think about it this actually is irrelevant). We are also aware that the appropriate distance in between cars in good weather is considered 2 seconds. Assuming a perfectly spaced line of cars at the maximum speed, the maximum number of cars that will get through our constricted one lane of traffic is 30 cars per minute. When the traffic flow 5 miles back is 2 lanes of cars going 60 MPH (again irrelevant) with a perfect 2 second gap between cars, we understand that there are 60 cars per minute arriving at the point of congestion. Nothing we can do will eliminate the congestion, no matter how far back drivers begin merging. Demand (the number of cars) has overwhelmed supply (the finite volume of traffic which the restriction point can handle).
The important thing to consider when trying to reduce the severity of the congestion is do whatever possible to keep the flow of traffic through the congestion point at the perfect 2 second gap between cars. Any increase in the spacing between cars is what will worsen the congestion.
Now, here comes my opinion because I don't have any hard fact to back it up. It is my personal believe that by having some cars wait to the very end to merge, it creates the scenario where many cars do not have an appropriate amount of distance to get up to speed and pace themselves behind the car in front of them - which will inevitably lead to gaps between cars that are greater than 2 seconds; this is what can further reduce the total volume of traffic that can go through the point of restriction within a given amount of time.
I'm with was.lost ... up until that last assumption. Merging at the last moment could create larger gaps momentarily, but drivers will quickly fill in those gaps a short distance further on. The flow is still limited by what can come out the end.
I believe the purpose of long merge lanes is to avoid abrupt merges and let everyone see what is going on in time. Merging at the last moment is NOT polite!
Next, we could talk about people who move into a turn lane before the turn lane is marked, thus endangering those who have waited until the proper point to move over!
I believe the purpose of long merge lanes is to avoid abrupt merges and let everyone see what is going on in time. Merging at the last moment is NOT polite!
Next, we could talk about people who move into a turn lane before the turn lane is marked, thus endangering those who have waited until the proper point to move over!
to wlbnf and pw,
Lets get even more technical. Flow is flow. To achieve best flow, it should be laminar. A simplified meaning of this is smooth or a lack of turbulence. That is why a nozzle(flow restriction) usually has a long transition. The proper merging as far back as possible and as smoothly as possible is laminar. If you have two restrictions the same size, one having a smooth transition and one with a 90 degree transitions the flow will be reduced without the smooth transition. The turbulence causes further restriction. So even if it was not selfish or impolite, traffic is best served by the smooth orderly merge. Back to the real world while not only impeding traffic the arrogant sob that puts his time or needs or want above others is a burden to society in general. jmho
Lets get even more technical. Flow is flow. To achieve best flow, it should be laminar. A simplified meaning of this is smooth or a lack of turbulence. That is why a nozzle(flow restriction) usually has a long transition. The proper merging as far back as possible and as smoothly as possible is laminar. If you have two restrictions the same size, one having a smooth transition and one with a 90 degree transitions the flow will be reduced without the smooth transition. The turbulence causes further restriction. So even if it was not selfish or impolite, traffic is best served by the smooth orderly merge. Back to the real world while not only impeding traffic the arrogant sob that puts his time or needs or want above others is a burden to society in general. jmho
was.lost.but.now.found
Enlightened
Thank you, this was the scientific concept I was lacking for the conclusion of my post.
I must admit, that type of situation is one in which my looks help a lot.
I look like the psycho from the film "Full Metal Jacket." Some @$$ looks over to argue with me where the lanes merge, they think twice. (Not joking.)
Most rude drivers don't think about other people. When the situation doesn't involve bumper to bumper traffic, racing to the end to cut everyone else off is just plain selfish and rude. It's the equivalent of telling every courteous driver who merged sooner to f**k off.
If some rude jerk walked up and pushed you out of the way on a crowded street, would you be fine with that? If someone got angry, would you say that they just didn't think about increasing the flow of pedestrian traffic?
jtr1962
Flashaholic
Here's a similar type of behavoir but in a different situation. Traffic light turns red. There are one or two or three traffic lanes ( the exact number is irrelevant ), and all more or less end up with the same number of cars in line waiting for the light to change. Some butthole decides to squeeze in the space between the rightmost lane and the lane of parked cars. This just so happens to be even easier if there is a bike lane there. Even if not, it is sometimes possible. Jerk rides in his self-made "lane" right to the crosswalk. When the light turns green he actually expects other drivers to let him back into the regular traffic lanes, then gets irate if they don't. Is he kidding? Bad enough he can't wait his turn like everyone else, but now he wants to delay people further just so he can be a big 5 or 7 car lengths ahead of everyone else. The pathetic part is often people do let these jerks in, so the behavoir continues. I make a point when I'm cycling to ride right in the middle of the space I have, and never get out of the way of some jack$$$ trying to save a big 3 seconds. It gets them fuming sometimes, but I rightly point out they have no business being there. It's not a traffic lane.
kitelights
Flashlight Enthusiast
What you're described is illegal, plain and simple. What the OP described is more debatable.
Laws vary from state to state. Let me make it clear that I'm one that believes that real estate on the roadway should be utilized. Three lanes of traffic utilized up to a merge point creates much less of a backup than a single line of traffic.
The situation described by the OP I believe was very poorly executed by the DOT. The better ones that I have seen that intend for an early merge have traffic cones that narrow the closing lane down indicating that they do want you to get out of that lane at that point, not at an abrupt stopping point.
There is a permanent lane reduction very near where I live on the interstate and it has a sign that indicates that the left lane is closing ahead. The traffic signs from that point read 'lane closure 2000 feet' and continue with declining footage. That lane also contains markings on the road that say 'merge' and that's exactly what happens. Other drivers allow cars from that lane to merge into their lane, light or heavy traffic (stopped or flowing).
The best ones, whether they narrow or not, have a sign that says, 'Alternate Merge.' To go a step further, I believe that any merge is an implied 'alternate merge.'
Quite a few here have gone on and on about inconsiderate drivers and they are assuming that they are correct about when the single lane starts.
I disagree. In fact, I think that those that form a single line way ahead of the merge point are inconsiderate (through ignorance) of other drivers by creating unnecessarily long back ups.
I am an aggressive driver, but a very considerate one. In the situation described here, I always allow others to merge. In other situations, I still usually give the benefit of doubt to the other driver just to be considerate. My exception would be the situation that jtr described above. That's an asshole. Not only would I not let them in, but I've been known to call police.
If I make a mistake while driving, I make it known to the other driver and attempt to apologize through hand gestures. It is usually acknowledged.
And BTW, I've never been intimidated by another driver no matter how mean or ugly they look.
Laws vary from state to state. Let me make it clear that I'm one that believes that real estate on the roadway should be utilized. Three lanes of traffic utilized up to a merge point creates much less of a backup than a single line of traffic.
The situation described by the OP I believe was very poorly executed by the DOT. The better ones that I have seen that intend for an early merge have traffic cones that narrow the closing lane down indicating that they do want you to get out of that lane at that point, not at an abrupt stopping point.
There is a permanent lane reduction very near where I live on the interstate and it has a sign that indicates that the left lane is closing ahead. The traffic signs from that point read 'lane closure 2000 feet' and continue with declining footage. That lane also contains markings on the road that say 'merge' and that's exactly what happens. Other drivers allow cars from that lane to merge into their lane, light or heavy traffic (stopped or flowing).
The best ones, whether they narrow or not, have a sign that says, 'Alternate Merge.' To go a step further, I believe that any merge is an implied 'alternate merge.'
Quite a few here have gone on and on about inconsiderate drivers and they are assuming that they are correct about when the single lane starts.
I disagree. In fact, I think that those that form a single line way ahead of the merge point are inconsiderate (through ignorance) of other drivers by creating unnecessarily long back ups.
I am an aggressive driver, but a very considerate one. In the situation described here, I always allow others to merge. In other situations, I still usually give the benefit of doubt to the other driver just to be considerate. My exception would be the situation that jtr described above. That's an asshole. Not only would I not let them in, but I've been known to call police.
If I make a mistake while driving, I make it known to the other driver and attempt to apologize through hand gestures. It is usually acknowledged.
And BTW, I've never been intimidated by another driver no matter how mean or ugly they look.
was.lost.but.now.found
Enlightened
Problem is some out there with similar attitudes as yours think the 3 feet behind my bumper at highway speed is also real estate that needs to be utilized.
You must be the first considerate aggressive driver I have ever know, because up to this point I did not know that such a thing existed.
Agreed.
was.lost.but.now.found
Enlightened
I don't understand why you believe it's inconsiderate to be prepared and aware of your surroundings.
- Status
Similar threads
