OT: Four in every five sets of traffic lights should be removed, report claims

Ok.

*As long* as your (or anyone etc) actions don't impede the progress of others at all (and you may be as you would gain right_of_ way over those still queuing, slowing them up, once on the roundabout etc) then yes, it would be fair. ;-)

Similar to those leaving a motorway as a tailback is forming to then to re-join it and force their way back in (often only a few cars ahead). Or those going down the outside of a queue trying to exit a main road and again, forcing their way back in (forcing the queuing drivers back).

I saw a lorry straddling both lanes of a dual carriageway approaching a lane closure (he was doing so to prevent people overtaking the long queue of people waiting patiently in the left (open) lane) and a car mount the grass on the central reservation to get past and then force his way into the queue, right up against the cones.

Well, whilst it's true it's potentially 'safer' than turning left from the right hand lane, it does increase the traffic 'on' the roundabout and maybe therefore increase the general level of risk (granted, probably not by much).

I wonder if those who do this sort of thing all the time would be as confident when trying to jump a queue at a nightclub or cinema?

I will often use a local 'rat run' but have to do so at reduced speed (speed ramps) and the route is a straight alternative route to my destination. 1) I'm not *just* taking it to save distance over a longer trip, in fact it's the route I would have taken every time, prior the addition of the speed ramps and 2) it isn't impacting on anyone else (including the local residence as I'm having to travel at the 'traffic calming speed', as per the traffic speed calming measures that were put in to distract the racers). I only take it when I can see the queue on the main road is extended and I would save time (and traffic load) overall.

Don't get me wrong, I'll not wait when someone is dithering about, I'll try to make 'good progress' at all times but also try to do so without making matters worse for anyone else.

Cheers, T i m

Reply to
T i m
Loading thread data ...

On 25/01/2016 12:50, Tim Streater wrote: ...

Anti-skid surfaces are available in various colours and black will normally be used where there are adequate other indications of a hazard, such as before pedestrian crossings. Obviously, where red is used to mark a hazard, an anti-slip surface is usually also appropriate, so red surfaces will normally also be anti-skid.

Reply to
Nightjar

Highway code says that the only red on roads is used to desiignate no parking ever.

It has no meaning at junctions.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

Wrong. Don't flash.

I do similar if appropriate, but without the flash. The onus is then on the person in the side road to decide whether to pull out or not, and I merely have to be ready for them to do so or not. A fair proportion of people take the gap.

Try it - it does work, and doesn't create the dangerous situation a flash does that the person flashing might not have seen the other reasons not to pull out (motorbike filtering for example).

(And yes, I've been in the situation where somebody on the road has flashed somebody in the side road to pull out right in front of me. They didn't (being a good driver), and the person flashed again. No thought of checking why the other driver wasn't moving. When I asked them, they had no idea that they were being dim.)

Reply to
Clive George

So it's not just me that wishes for that?

I am not asking for a wheel spin set off but for them to just to accelerate "a little bit faster" than a a 90 year old woman with a zimmer frame:-)

Reply to
ARW

Why weren't both lanes full up to the cones? That's the right way to do it, one clearly defined merge point, zip merge, nobody loses out.

(ans - because people are idiots and merge early.)

Reply to
Clive George

Yep - I always keep my eye on the opposing lights if possible and when they're red, I get into gear. I might have a mouldy old diesel but it can take off fairly sharpish.

Reply to
Tim Watts

Tim Watts wrote in news:qvainc-3u2.ln1 @squidward.sv.dionic.net:

It is the "I'm alright Jack" attitude - I am through - stuff those behind me, that annoys me.

Reply to
DerbyBorn

But that obligation always exists doesn't it? Flashing someone (which I agree is against the rules and potentially dangerous) is simply an indication that *you* (the flashee) have seen the other driver and are ready and willing for them to pull out, *if* they judge it safe to do so.

But of course we will always have what happens ITRW and what the rules say we should (or shouldn't) do. ;-)

Yes, I think we (or anyone indicating to another driver so) have been in the same position and expect there will be such situations (and others like the other driver wasn't paying attention or had stalled etc).

Well, I'm not sure anyone has all the answers all the time ... however I accept some may be less 'open minded' about it all than others.

;-)

Cheers, T i m

Reply to
T i m

Wellll... Tunbridge Wells has a retail park/industrial estate just off the A21 - with my local Screwfix/Toolsatan. Over the years they added more lights - last one being just so people coming out of CarpetRight could turn right. That and more and more giant stores opening made a pigs ear of the traffic 2003-2015 - often backing up onto the A21 blocking the left lane for some distance.

It's all been reworked - all lights gone except at the far end and the whole thing turning into a sort of one way gyratory with roundabouts - works a treat now.

Reply to
Tim Watts

Flashing is an indication that you are there, no more. The rest of what you write is merely possibility, not guaranteed, so is best not relied on. Which means don't flash to convey that information.

Reply to
Clive George

Because the traffic signs indicated that the outside lane was closed ahead (xxx hundred yards) and to pull into the left lane (while arrow facing down - left on a blue circle or overhead gantry indicator).

Yes, *once* the traffic is stationary or very slow moving. If moving fast(er) (like it often still could if people pulled into the left lane sooner), then *most people* would prefer to get into the unblocked lane 'early', rather than risk running out of road up against the cones (as the 'nutters' often do). ;-(

See above re your 'idiots', oh, and the Highway Code ... ;-)

"Rule 134

You should follow the signs and road markings and get into the lane as directed. In congested road conditions do not change lanes unnecessarily. 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."

formatting link

I think an unwritten exception to the single line queuing is when that would force the end of the queue to interfere with some other traffic, like tailing back a cross a junction or roundabout.

So, if you dive down the outside and *hope* all the other drivers are aware of your (unfair, when they have made a decision to merge in plenty of time) intention to 'zip' in (that works fine when driving slowly), then it's quite likely that you will bring the traffic to a halt or at best a grind.

'Free flowing' only generally works when drivers have plenty of time to make the changes necessary ... like when traffic flow is managed on motorways with the overhead gantries slowing and speeding traffic over a reasonably long distance.

Cheers, T i m

Reply to
T i m

That only refers to the use of red paint as a road marking enforcing a traffic order. The use of red as a surface colouration is quite different from road markings and one reference to it may be found in the section on village gateways in Know Your Traffic Signs.

Like the transverse yellow lines found on the approaches to some roundabouts, it does not convey any instruction to road users, but Highway Authorities use it to highlight a hazard.

Reply to
Nightjar

Poll 100 drivers and see what they say though?

Quite, but no 'driver' can be 'relied' on totally can they? How many times have you seen someone approach a junction with an indicator on because it was left on from the previous junction? In contrast, now many times have you seen a driver approaching another waiting to pull out of a side road flash them and not indicate what I suggest most would mean by so doing?

Poll 100 drivers ... ;-)

Cheers, T i m

Reply to
T i m

I remember when I lived in Germany, The main road through the town (Gutersloh) had lights every 500 yards or so, about 15 sets of them. When you joined the road and kept to a steady 50KPH you hit every light on green, and sailed through the lot.

There was no point in speeding as you would just reach the lights on Red. Everyone knew how they worked.

Reply to
Eednud

And the same approach seems to be used at the other end of their trip ... still deciding where to go in the garden centre car park or which petrol pump to go to with half their car still in the main road. ;-(

Cheers, T i m

Reply to
T i m

And me.

There are a few very short timing traffic lights round here and a right filter that if you aren't off as soon as they change only let a few cars through. I have seen just one car get though and that was the one at the front not paying attention (of course).

So, for the exact same reason you mention I stay alert, keep close to the car in front and take the corner slightly 'wide' to give more room for cars behind.

Cheers, T i m

Reply to
T i m

I agree with the report in its entirety.

Reply to
Mr Macaw

No. It's because people merged too early.

And they're wrong. You've already pointed out the traffic was stationary/slow moving ("long queue waiting patiently"), so all the people moving in early were idiots.

If everybody zip merges calmly then nobody runs out of road up against the cones.

In the case you've just described, it apparently wasn't high speed, so merge in turn is what the HC says to do. So yes, they were early-merging idiots, and they weren't doing what the HC says - exactly the opposite of what you have just written. It's good that you have provided the evidence to contradict your view yourself, it's a bit dumb that you've failed to actually take note of it.

No such thing as "unwritten exception" like that.

No. Plan the merge sensibly and it works fine. Don't take the piss, but don't be a victim.

No.

I'm afraid you are one of the early merging idiots. There are plenty of people like you out there - you've no need to worry about being alone. But while there are people like you out there, there will be an opportunity for people to overtake you and your journey time will be higher as a result. The only way you can beat this is to be one of those overtaking people. If everybody fills both lanes then there's no opportunity for people to overtake in that manner, and no opportunity for "unfairness".

This has all been said many times before by many people. I don't expect you'll change your mind.

Reply to
Clive George

Depends on traffic volumes. Traffic lights first, then roundabouts then roundabouts with traffic lights.

Reply to
bert

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.