Reply to: The Angry Motorist Thread

[Peoplesoft bloke]

Condolences, in case they haven't been conveyed already.

Thanks - it was 13 years ago.

[expat]

I think you'll find, it's like a really really old fashioned English mannnerism that travelled from the north to the south of England like via the US.

I guess.

[threaded]

Wouldn't the ideal be to have full lanes right up to the restriction and then have everyone merge in turn?

Yes, but the problem then is 'professional drivers' i.e. lorries, have accidents with them, so it's a little psychological trick thing to have a 'slide in'

[Royston Vasey]

Selfish stupid chavs who drive right up to the cones blocking off a lane and then slow traffic to a crawl having to be let in, when they could join the back of the next lane like everyone else so the traffic would move much faster.

Corollary: Slow-witted idiots in front of you who let said chavs in (accidently or otherwise) before even reaching the cones, so yet more idiots can zoom past them.

Ever heard of "merge in turn". The queue would then be half the length.

Edit: Oops...Just seen someone's already said this.

[lexington_spurs]

The copper who gave evidence at the inquest into the death of my father-in-law who was killed in a collision with a lorry couldn't even get the make and model of the truck right (it was totally different so I assume just a guess later) so I doubt it.

Condolences, in case they haven't been conveyed already.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

It won't work as people are kinda shocked when they find restrictions or diversions in the place they are not use to even if they've had loads of advanced warning.

Where the A3 goes from 3 lanes into 2 outside the school holidays it normally works as commuters wait their turn, know they get home faster if they cooperate and don't switch lanes randomly. In the school holidays nobody gives way so the journey takes an extra half hour.

Bah! That's the problem with ideals

[SueEllen]

Wouldn't the ideal be to have full lanes right up to the restriction and then have everyone merge in turn?

It won't work as people are kinda shocked when they find restrictions or diversions in the place they are not use to even if they've had loads of advanced warning.

Where the A3 goes from 3 lanes into 2 outside the school holidays it normally works as commuters wait their turn, know they get home faster if they cooperate and don't switch lanes randomly. In the school holidays nobody gives way so the journey takes an extra half hour.

[Marina]

I don't agree - What happens at the moment is that there is some point in the raod about half a mile from the point where the road is blocked off where everybody should merge - why? Why not move that point half a mile further on and merge closer to the blockage. I've seen lorries pulling out to block the 3rd lane nearly a mile from the obstruction which is stupid.

Seems like I'm in a minority of one here. But I'm not saying everyone should merge at one point, wherever that may be. Also my argument assumes that half a mile, or wherever, from the cones the traffic is freely moving and reasonably spaced in each lane. Obviously there's nothing to be gained merging "early" once past where the traffic has already backed up.

But look at this way, a strategy that allows traffic to flow in the narrowed section at maximum speed and minimum separation has to be optimal, and I maintain that alternating cars at the cones (driver, chav, driver, chav, ..) is less likely to achieve that.

Personally I get in the slow lane when the motorway clogs as often that tends to flow better plus you can creatively use the slip roads.

Yes, I "wear" at some roundabouts rather than "tack", if you follow my drift. Heading out of London onto the A12 at the Bow Roundabout is a good example - Sometimes there's a huge queue to turn left, but practically nothing going right, so it's much quicker to turn right and scoot straight round a whole revolution and straight onto the A12 sliproad ;-)

[Peoplesoft bloke]

Actually, they are helping traffic flow. The reason is a little complex for most to 'get', but essentially, for everyone to get through a narrowed section the traffic has to go slower, so these that wait until the last moment actually aid the traffic to slow down.

If they joined in earlier then the traffic would tail back further and there'd be more discontinuous flow.

If TPTB actually wanted them to join in further back they'd just block the lane earlier.

Wouldn't the ideal be to have full lanes right up to the restriction and then have everyone merge in turn?

[BoredBloke]

No, no, no!

The ideal situation, to optimize average speed for all, is where everyone manages to get in the right lane early enough for there to be ample room between cars to change lanes (and I'd concede that isn't always possible, with slip roads joining the queue near the cones for example).

But it'll never happen while short-cutting gits *think* they can gain an advantage but in fact slow things down for everyone, including themselves!

I don't agree - What happens at the moment is that there is some point in the raod about half a mile from the point where the road is blocked off where everybody should merge - why? Why not move that point half a mile further on and merge closer to the blockage. I've seen lorries pulling out to block the 3rd lane nearly a mile from the obstruction which is stupid.

Personally I get in the slow lane when the motorway clogs as often that tends to flow better plus you can creatively use the slip roads.

[threaded]

No, no, no!

The ideal situation, to optimize average speed for all, is where everyone manages to get in the right lane early enough for there to be ample room between cars to change lanes (and I'd concede that isn't always possible, with slip roads joining the queue near the cones for example).

But it'll never happen while short-cutting gits *think* they can gain an advantage but in fact slow things down for everyone, including themselves!

Actually, they are helping traffic flow. The reason is a little complex for most to 'get', but essentially, for everyone to get through a narrowed section the traffic has to go slower, so these that wait until the last moment actually aid the traffic to slow down.

If they joined in earlier then the traffic would tail back further and there'd be more discontinuous flow.

If TPTB actually wanted them to join in further back they'd just block the lane earlier.

[Marina]

I can't understand why that goes on. On the motorway, when they close a lane people start getting out of the lane to be closed about half a mile away from the point of closure - this wastes tons of space. Why doesn't everybody just drive to the closure point and merge there. That way the people who do this currently would not gain any advantage.

No, no, no!

The ideal situation, to optimize average speed for all, is where everyone manages to get in the right lane early enough for there to be ample room between cars to change lanes (and I'd concede that isn't always possible, with slip roads joining the queue near the cones for example).

But it'll never happen while short-cutting gits *think* they can gain an advantage but in fact slow things down for everyone, including themselves!

[BoredBloke]

I can't understand why that goes on. On the motorway, when they close a lane people start getting out of the lane to be closed about half a mile away from the point of closure - this wastes tons of space. Why doesn't everybody just drive to the closure point and merge there. That way the people who do this currently would not gain any advantage.

[Marina]

Selfish stupid chavs who drive right up to the cones blocking off a lane and then slow traffic to a crawl having to be let in, when they could join the back of the next lane like everyone else so the traffic would move much faster.

Corollary: Slow-witted idiots in front of you who let said chavs in (accidently or otherwise) before even reaching the cones, so yet more idiots can zoom past them.

[threaded]

That git what did for fleetwood.