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 ?....

Reply to
Jim GM4DHJ ...
Loading thread data ...

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.

Reply to
newshound

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......?

Reply to
Jim GM4DHJ ...

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.

Reply to
Roger Hayter

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

Reply to
Steve Walker

Zip merging is just about the only thing American drivers do better.

UK traffic stalls repeatedly as people refuse to let other people in.

Reply to
Martin Brown

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.

Reply to
Roger Hayter

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.

Reply to
Ian Jackson

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.

Reply to
Roger Hayter

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.

Reply to
Ian Jackson

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.

formatting link
Cheers, T i m

Reply to
T i m

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)

Reply to
FMurtz

Jim GM4DHJ ... formulated the question :

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.

Reply to
Harry Bloomfield, Esq.

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 ? ....

Reply to
Jim GM4DHJ ...

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.

Reply to
NY

very true it depends on the circumstances I think .....

Reply to
Jim GM4DHJ ...

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

Reply to
tabbypurr

Jim GM4DHJ ... formulated on Friday :

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.

Reply to
Harry Bloomfield, Esq.

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.

Reply to
NY

snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com laid this down on his screen :

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.

Reply to
Harry Bloomfield, Esq.

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.