It’s simply a sometimes idiotic lack of understanding mixed in with a sense of wrongly positioned justice and good old British queuing.
So no, you cannot get past me, I am upholding the rules sir!
I was going to send my dash footage to the police with the 1 litre corsa knobhead doing this the other month. He was about 400 yards from where you're meant to merge in. Blocked me from going to the end of the lane and had a really smug look on his face.
He didn't appreciate it when I drove into the left hand lane leaving him stranded in the right lane. Nobody let him in either which was the best bit. He then ended up driving to the end of the lane to merge back into the queue, making him a hypocrite
Had someone do it to us yesterday, a mercedes swerved out in front of us just to stop us passing him, so dangerous and pigheaded. Did it to another car too and we were just like wtf is that guy's problem 🤦♀️
The thing is, they aren't upholding the rules, it clearly stated 'merge in turn', not sit in one lane and block others from passing you 😂
Haha yeah, although wonder if there's more: improper use of lane (or something), obstructing road way, something else...
While the driver they're self righteously stopping is upholding: use both lanes and merge in turn.
It's the same as these people that sit in the fast lane doing 70 because it's the speed limit. They might actually find they're breaking more rules than a driver speeding but using the road's lanes properly.
I love merge points dependent on the vehicle I’m in.
Personal vehicle. I’ll happily drive legally down this empty lane and merge to save myself some time because morons don’t understand how to use them.
Work van. Imma sit in this traffic all the way down babeh!! I’m being paid to sit here
I really don't mind merge in turn. The thing that bothers me the most is that there will be a massive gap behind me yet the person will do everything to push to the front and almost bully me to get their way. I will let one car in and then keep moving. I just don't understand why some people have to be at the front no matter what.
This is exactly how merge lanes are supposed to work, each car lets one car in.
Infact, in America they actually call them 'zipper lanes' for this reason.
The UK seems to be just full of moron drivers i think.
90% of people in the closing lane don't use them correctly either. Merge in turn/zipper merging only works if both lanes are going at the same speed. Charging down the closing lane and bullying in at the merge point fucks up the flow of traffic far more than moving across early.
This is really the crux of the issue. It's like racing to the end of a slip road, realising there isn't space to merge there, then slamming on the brakes and forcing yourself into the lane of traffic causing the lane of traffic to grind to a halt.
There wouldn't be stationary traffic if people correctly merged when both lanes were flowing.
Drive down the closing lane at no more than maybe 5mph faster than the lane staying open and merge when there's an appropriate space. Don't get hung up on getting right to the very end of the closing lane and make damn sure you don't need to brake or cause anyone else to brake in order to merge.
No the sitting in two lanes ones aren't the worst. The worst are the one's that actively move into two lanes when they see you know how to use the lanes properly. Like vigilantes that don't actually know the law. And then it's almost always artics
That's what annoys me about taxis being dickheads on the road. They should be the ones with the most experience, I know they effectively get paid per mile, but that's no excuse
'Professional' is a bit too kind of a word for most truck drivers.
Some of the worst driving I have seen has been by trucks. Blocking lanes in traffic, tailgating in 50mph zones, overtaking using the outside lane. All very common to see these days.
I always thought the lorries were doing it to stop people sitting in their blind spots.
Slow moving traffic which they know is about to push into their lane, maybe they're just trying to avoid an accident?
Confidently wrong vigilantes are the worst. Slightly in front (behind?) of people who start off in the right hand lane, but then stop and indicate to move left and sit and wait until someone lets them in. The mind boggles as to what they think that lane must be for really. Personally, I've started honking at people now
Some people just want to chill for a minute, that’s cool but to then get peed about someone doing what they should is must be a sickness, imagine joining the end of a massive queue for a food order or something when there’s an empty one right next to it… like, what’s going on???
Well if there is only one server at the end of the two queues and it’s obvious, then what you are doing is going ahead of people who have been waiting longer - lots of people don’t see that as right and will take their place in the longer queue .
If you’re comfortable taking the other line, you carry on my friend.
Anyone who Polices other people’s behaviour in general grinds my gears, but this example of it is the worst. Why they think backing up the queue several miles further in single further is in any way preferable I’ve no idea.
No the merge in turn people will declare that there is no obligation to move across to let people in. Traditional drivers like me will always move across if it’s safe to do so.
I merge in turn, and also do what I can to accommodate traffic joining. Which sometimes involves moving across, and sometimes, unfortunately, involves braking.
Also, there is no "merge in turn" Vs traditional. There is merging in turn, and there's being wrong. I'm not saying that there aren't people that use merge in turn to justify dangerous driving, but there is no justification for blocking merge in turn. If you want to do things "traditionally", and slow down your journey (and others'), that's fine, just don't stop people merging.
I move across if I'm able, but there are situations where it's not possible to move over and I've had people almost pull into the side of me.
The problem with this behaviour, is it encourages people to just ignore the give way line at the end of the slip road. People seem to think they can push their way onto a motorway.
This just doesn't exist on the continent, people continue in the right lane, and drivers on the slip road are expected to accelerate or decelerate to fit into a sensible gap. I often see in the UK, drivers on the slip road start slowing down to merge, but the driver in lane one also begins slowing to try let them merge in front of them. It can become dangerous.
Motorway merging in this country at peak times is a joke. Everyone pushing nose into the queue. Causing people to stop. Then cutting across to lane 2 causing lane 2 to stop. The problem is in this country we drive way to close so merging can look and often is done aggressively.
I never straddle both lanes because that's obviously wrong, but I do happily just sit in the left lane because I'm not in a rush and I can't be bothered getting in to a confrontation with someone who thinks I shouldn't be able to use both lanes.
I had someone try this to me the other day on the m58 where it mergest into 2 before the m6. I slowly approached conceding defeat then whipped round as they had misjudged the space they'd left me. I saw an angry fist come out of the window and pissed myself laughing knowing I was through 10 minutes earlier than that tosser 😂
I really think this is just a general but fading mindset. I used to see cars moving to the “closing lane” and cutting in dangerously so often it pissed me off a bit. BUT now, as we all get used to the practice of merging ( and we will) it will get easier for all of us. Surely?
I've seen people swerve out at me and others while we're doing what the highway code tells me to do, while they're blocking the previous junction by not using both lanes.
deserved if its their mirror.
the left lane was closing in about a mile the other day, the queue of traffic was blocking the previous junction, so I was going up the left lane and someone swerved out of the right lane at me and I had to dodge up onto the grass behind the kerb, like, what the fuck? What kind of moron would choose to endanger life like that? Someone then pulled out behind me and fully blocked that lane to anyone else who wanted to follow the highway code, they just sat there next to their "position in the queue" so nobody could go around them or "skip the queue"
And a couple weeks or so back, right lane closing so enormous queue in the left lane of a dual carriageway blocking the previous roundabout, a car in front of me going up the right lane, some van swerves out at them out of nowhere for no reason at the last moment almost causing a crash, again, what the fuck?
I drive a cheap car, 🚗 if they want a dent in theirs it's going to cost them. Me I don't care, I live in a happy place, so don't try to blow your trumpet here. It's usually guys in really expensive cars too. You wouldn't wipe your Rolex on the tarmac, but damn they sure do try with cars that cost way more, makes no sense. Some dude trying to scrape a £57 000 car down the side of £800 banger . I can replace my banger at the next garage, I don't think they can replace their car. Senselessness
I enjoy those morons who bunch up really close when attempting to block people correctly merging in turn as the lane closes - I’m in a 15 year old 5 Series that looks like it’s been dropped from a crane.
I guarantee you care a lot more about the bank’s C Class than I do about the appearance of my car, so if you’re not going to leave a gap I shall be making one! 😁
Similar questions could be asked of people who move to the outside lane to jump ahead by 2 or 3 cars and don’t merge ‘in turn’ either but rather merge stuck to the rear bumper of the car directly in front of them at the same time. Merge in turn is dead it’s more like merge whenever you want these days.
My town is currently constantly at a traffic standstill because one of the two lanes on the main road into it is closed halfway down, and rather than merge in turn, people seem to prefer to use only one lane, thus backing up the whole road, the roundabout before it and thus pretty much the whole town. I dared to merge nearer the lane closure the other day, and I could feel the seething resentment aimed at me!
your account is less than 7 days old, post removed automatically to reduce spam. If you post is genuine then sorry for the inconvenience, please wait 7 days before reposting.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/drivingUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
People who don't like sitting in queues but impotently fume and behave like dicks bc they haven't got the confidence to do what the sign says. "Look at him, doing what the sign says and reducing queuing. Who does he think he is?". So very British to want to bring everyone down to their miserable level instead of thinking "why am I sitting in a queue?".
Will do it in crawling traffic when I reach the merger point otherwise there's always that lane weaving idiot who tries to get ahead at all costs. When it's flowing then it's pretty stupid...
I reeeeaaaaaalllly piss those people off when I blast my air horns (HGV) get them out the way, manage to get in front of them then just crawl along and let 10-20 cars in ahead of me
They’re mentally differently abled to an extent. They cannot comprehend that if both lanes were used properly then there would be no ability to jump any queue, and that the length of the queue would be shorter, leaving less chance for other junctions to be blocked.
Also, in the case of a lane closing, if the lane suddenly re-opens: traffic is in a much better position to start flowing properly again, sooner, meaning everyone wins (referencing that viral video of the “special” driver who was blocking a lane which was actually opened back up ahead).
I just replied to a different comment saying more than one wing mirror has gone missing from people swerving to block me on the bike, not exactly going to catch me are they
People that drive on the white line to stop you from filtering are the worst type of people. They just crawl along and look at you in the mirror. "Well I'm sat in traffic so you should too" mentality.
I went a mile in the open lane recently. If anyone had tried to block me I would happily send the dashcam footage to operation crackdown. But I would also get out if possible and point it out to them. I enjoy confrontation.
It's a mixture of people not understanding what merge in turn means, coupled with the fact that we're British and we are programmed to wait our line in a queue. So when someone takes the emptier lane rather than queuing like most other drivers, it grinds the gears of some.
Quite frankly, merge in turn and 2 lanes splitting into 3 lanes for a set of traffic lights / junction before immediately going back to 2 lanes should be banned. Then everyone would queue nicely, get home and have a couple of tea and don't forget to moan about the weather.
> So when someone takes the emptier lane rather than queuing like most other drivers, it grinds the gears of some.
The irony of it is, is this is a perfect queue. If everybody joined the shortest lane on the approach, it would be absolutely flawless. These people must see 2 tills at the supermarket and join the one with the huge queue instead of the free one.
To be fair, I can understand lorries. Their blind spots are huge for one and if you're merging directly Infront of them or behind them, they have absolutely no idea you're there. People (including myself in the past, it was terrifying) merging from the right when there is a slower-moving lorry on the left have an incredibly hard time merging in time when you are travelling at a similar speed to the lorry and then the lorry slows down and leaves you no space.
Never understood why this generates such extreme reactions from the two trains of thought on this.
Merge in turn is surely the most effective way of handling a lane closure, no one can seriously argue against that, but the question is where to merge in turn. One group advocates this should be done at the cones, in order to use all available road, the other group insist the merge should happen where the traffic slows to a halt to get through in turn.
I would have thought there was a maths angle on this ( queuing theory in particular ) which will tell you that once traffic has come to a halt it doesn’t matter where the merge happens - the capacity of the lane to service traffic has maxed out and merging here or there ain’t gonna get traffic through the cones any quicker than the max capacity will allow.
It’s just a matter then of whether you think using all the available road is more important than getting through in the order in which you all arrived - or in another way whether legally gaining an advantage over other drivers is acceptable compared to the ‘fair’ approach of queuing in strict order. That’s all it really comes down to
But nobody ever changes their mind over this because ‘ I’m right and your selfish/moronic’
From an efficiency point of view, the traffic will eventually back up regardless of where people merge, unless it's during low traffic times (eg. one lane is closed only at 22:00-05:00 or something), so it makes sense for everyone to continue using both lanes for as long as possible
It's not matter of using all the available road, it's a matter of if you merge early, someone else will use all the available road thus making the open lane slower.
This topic comes up fairly regularly and last time I got pilloried for preferring to merge early and not ‘making use of all the available road ‘
Last week in Sainsburys, all the sheep were queued up with their trolleys in one side of the aisle leaving lots of unused aisle for me to legally use to get to the front of the queue, and because I don’t care about damaging my trolley I was able to force my way in between two morons who don’t know how to merge in turn, but apparently that makes me a ‘selfish prick’ and I should ‘take my turn because we all want to get home too’ .
Oh it didn’t really happen sorry, I just think it’s an illustration of the absurdity of the argument between the two camps. In most areas of (British) life, people are very happy to accept the principle of queuing to take their turn, except at closed motorway lanes, because merge in turn, my legal entitlement, use all available road etc
I think you're very close in your analogy, but realistically, these queues would never happen in a supermarket. Everybody chooses the shortest queue, with the eventual goal being getting out of the main door. Why then, do they not join the shortest lane on approach? Why is it different in a car at all?
> the capacity of the lane to service traffic has maxed out and merging here or there ain’t gonna get traffic through the cones any quicker than the max capacity will allow.
You're nearly there. It's not just the capacity of the bottleneck, but the capacity of the roads affected by the tailback.
Thanks - I would have been there already but for cars going past to get in front…
Seriously though, once that lane has come to a halt, I see nothing that happens before the cones making any difference to clearance rate, unless you can explain differently. The best you can do is present new traffic to join the queue at the cones in the most efficient manner - I would argue that was in a single file that had merged 800yds back rather than mit two stationary lines of traffic.
If I have 10 metres of road, I can only get some many cars along it in a straight line before it exceeds 10 metres. I can fit twice as many into two lanes though! Therefore, shorter tailback, no junctions blocked.
But then what ? Now you have 2 x 10m lines of stationary traffic which need to merge into 1 , instead of 1 x 20m line already merged . Which one of those do you think is going to get through the cones quickest ?
You're fully missing my point. At this point, the throughput isn't improved as all of the road space is utilised. This is the ideal for a merge in turn. However, it now doesn't block the junction that is 15m back.
Here's one for you. There's a merge on a road near me that backed up past where I can join the road. Everyone all in one line on the right hand side. I literally could not join the back of the queue if I wanted to, but lane 1 was free right to the end. What would you do? Waiting doesn't work, as you're in a live lane that can also go left and straight back off the road.
Well that’s a fairly specific situation that really wasn’t in your original point, and it really sounds like a horrifically designed layout. Do what you have to do to get out of lane 1 and stay safe friend.
Meanwhile, back at the original point, I absolutely cannot believe that people driving down lane 3 past stationary lane 2 are doing it out of altruism for people waiting to join the motorway 15m back. They are doing it because it’s legal and they want to shorten their own journey. Fair enough, and yet not fair enough
We both agree that merge in turn ideal, just when to do it is the intractable issue, and I imagine most people are bored enough with our bickering now. So I wish you safe travels and a good night - until the next time.
With cars doing it it’s probably just ego or something.
With lorries, I was taught to come out early when there’s a clear gap, as it stops you from accidentally crushing people to death as they try and squeeze past right where the road narrows.
I think we might be confusing two separate things here. The mythical "merge in turn" sign which is rare but usually found on permanent road features where the behaviour described (straddling two lanes) is definitely wrong and the "Lane closing in x distance, get in lane now" situation where some people's idea of now is at the lane close point forcing the other lane to stop to let them in.
Firstly, it's not mythical, they're all over the place, and people find ways to abuse them whether they're the ones merging or the ones letting others merge.
When you have the lane closure in 800yds sign, it doesn't mean move across immediately, it means move across in good time. Good time depends on the road conditions, the slower the traffic (and the smaller the difference in speed between lanes), the closer that is to the lane closure. Nobody should be trying to merge in turn at speed, but if it's congested, use the road space available!
I think what people get upset about is that in the lane closure situation the drivers in the closing lane should (once notified by the sign) match their speed to the open lane and wait for a gap (indicators help) and then switch lanes with minimal effect on the open lane rather than drive on bypassing as much of the queue as possible until forced to stop at the end where they then either have to wait for a kind person to stop the open lane to let them in or they force their way into a tiny gap making the driver behind slam on stopping the open lane. I get the whole "if everyone used both lanes to zip merge" thing. All that does is slow both lanes down to the crawl necessary to achieve said merge (everyone loses). If everyone moved over sensibly and as early as is safe to do then the open lane would barely slow. Unfortunately the people who want to "use both lanes" (read:- queue jump) stop this system from working. Neither way works really but at least the one which the overwhelming majority use could work.
You've actually described four different scenarios there, and only acknowledged two of them. The biggest difference between all of these is speed. At speed, merge early. In slow to stopped traffice, use all available road space.
The "use both lanes to merge" only works when people actually merge in turn. But, since most car drivers are selfish assholes who only care about being in front themselves and ignore the rest of the queueing traffic, people do tend to get fed up. If you actually pay attention to the flow of traffic, you'll find that once someone actually slows the 2nd lane down for a minute and gets both lanes moving at the same speed, traffic flow does actually increase and everyone get to move a bit faster. Rather than the selfish gits who go speeding down the 2nd lane and barge their way in at the end forcing the 1st lane to stop and think that they're driving the correct way.......
Not sure the road you are referring to but I use a road similar to this everyday and it is always carnage!
Basically the left lane is from a motorway exit and there are bollards preventing people changing lanes too early (as people used to use it to overtake). The problem is the right lane comes from a small town but does have some traffic, but they are always so entitled. They drive right to the end and then force their way in.
To me, merge in turn means one for one. So I will always let one car in. Unfortunately, in this instance they see I have let someone in and think I will also let them in. This has a knock on effect to the motorway exit and forces cars to queue on the hard shoulder before the exit. It’s is really dangerous.
I’m fairly used to it by now and just go with it but a lot of drivers get really angry and sometimes arctics will deliberately block the right lane to make sure the motorway traffic takes priority (as the layout is).
it's true that 'merger in turn' isn't pushing in, however I still argue there are people who use it in a way that is pushing in. For example obviously I'm happy to let 1 or 2 cars merge at the zip point, but I don't want a queue of 4-5 cars forming and all trying to 'zip merge' at once. That stupidity seems to have died down, but once a car has zip merged ahead of me, I normally move to the side a little to indicate to cars behind that Admission is over.
Biker here. Those people are asshats that achieve nothing.
Move out to “block” me all you like, you can even come _fully_ out into my lane if you like. I’ll still get past you, and I’ll very likely be able to filter long past the merge point (depending on the road layout). It’s not my fault your micropenis is making you angry.
Although I’d never advocate retaliating by smashing off wing mirrors or punching windows.
You’re still in a vulnerable position and smashing their mirror off, or smashing their window, will only push people to retaliate in the only way they can: with their car. It doesn’t matter if someone doesn’t even _realise_ that they’re doing something dangerous enough to kill you, and I don’t care how good a rider you think you are. If someone is prepared to do something dangerous enough to risk your life then you need to treat that kind of person as if they are _actively trying to kill you_. Just drop back and leave The Micropenis Road Warrior alone.
Here’s an interesting question for you to ponder, in a situation where both lanes are being used and everybody is merging in turn what difference would it make if one vehicle took up both lanes? They’d have to be going at exactly same speed anyway right? The reason for doing it(only appropriate in certain circumstances,) is because the queue forms at the merging point, by doing that the merging point moves from in front to behind them, once everyone in front gets into same lane the traffic starts flowing freely. The reason you move faster in right lane is because people don’t use it as intended, meaning they use it when it’s moving faster, but they merge before merge point, so car A, B and C are in a line, I’m level with car A, A starts indicating to move left and I let them in, B now moves into gap left by car A. But I’ve got an extra car in my lane so I effectively move back 1 slot, B Is now level with A and I’m level with C, 10 yds further along and now B wants to move left so A gives way, C now moves past me. A and B and the process repeats continuously, after about 15-20 minutes patience wears thin.
This isn't interesting at all. It's bullshit. Why does that one person get to decide the queue forms behind them? It's also not just about capacity through the bottleneck, but about the side effects the tailback can have on other roads.
These weird personal caveats you have to the written rules will be different from person to person. Where one person decides on an arbritrary place that the merge should happen will be wildly different to the other misinformed people around them. The only sensible place to merge is at the merge point, where people should expect merging traffic. Anything else is dangerous and ill-advised.
I agree, this is exactly point I made at start, in this scenario both lanes would be queuing and they both be moving at exactly same pace. Now all we have to do is tell the other 60 million people in country.
I know what it’s like from both sides of this, in my car I’m in right hand lane, In lorry I’m the person everybody targets as the best place to cut in front of.
I’ve been in situations where there’s been an incident in roadworks and queue is moving so slowly that the cars in right lane move then change lanes leads to me not moving at all for minutes at a time, I’ve got places to be and limited time to get there as well.
Let me ask you this, see if we agree on another point. So, you’re almost at merging point, the cones in right hand lane that close it are just feet away, the last car in right hand lane has just merged about 4 car lengths back, what would be the correct place for the car that now becomes the last vehicle in right lane to merge?
Don’t think I did the best job of explaining that, did you manage to make sense of it?
Merge in turn would work really really well if everyone was moving and stayed at a steady pace with a decent gap then the merge could occur.
The fact that usually it's stationary, and usually so because a bottleneck at the final merge point right before the end of the road , and everyone is stuck, and cars are still driving down trying to force their way in , meaning the others who are in the queue as no where else to go just see these drivers as twats.
I see it from both points, the queued stationary people, and the queue jumping ones that want to get 8 cars further ahead.
This is definitely the case. Merge in turns where both lanes are equally as full and rolling along can zip together quite nicely. A bottle next where a queue extends usually backing up into the more car-heavy left lane, means everyone in the right lane is overtaking and merging ahead. But therefore everyone in the left lane is stuck with all the right hand lane people cutting far up ahead. Therefore the only way to allow this left lane queue to move is for a vigilante to block the right hand lane from merging up ahead.
I'd say it's poor road design or over crowded road that cause this anyway, as opposed to people "not merging properly"
If there's no sign saying merge in turn, there's no merge in turn. If there's an arrow on there road, curving to the left or right, that shows you who has the driving line, the driver in the lane that's ending has to find a safe merge
Are we allowed to just make our own Highway Code up now? I've made it illegal to join the longest queue at a merge in turn, and now everyone has to join the shortest one.
I make a habit of making life hard for queue jumpers (who call themselves merge-in-turners). Join the lane that won’t be closed, queue like a proper British person and do the car equivalent of tutting (crossing the middle line to be block the queue jumpers as soon and the closing lane narrows). If fewer selfish drivers kept using the closing lane then we’d all be a lot happier. Cheers up my journey when they flash and beep, the fools.
"Using the closing lane" therfore it's currently open and you're obstructing traffic which is against the law. While you think those other drivers are queue jumpers, they're actually driving properly, your not. If everyone actually used both lanes to the point of closure and actually merged in turn, the traffic would flow quicker, and that queue you love sitting in, would also clear quicker. Stop been a penis.
So you would rather make your (and everybody else's) journey longer, in the misguided idea that it's fairer. You are on the left side of the curve my friend.
It's not que jumping? The point of the two lanes is to increase traffic flow and decrease congestion. Instead of one very long que you can have two smaller ques, this is useful if you want to avoid congestion
If both lanes were used, as designed, then nobody would be able to jump a queue, because the road would be fully utilised.
The **only** reason that a queue can be jumped is because of pig headedness like this which sees people only use one lane. Use both, no space to jump a queue. Everyone wins.
No, I’m one of the people in the right who won’t let this American zipper nonsense take over our way of driving, or let the fools who update the Highway Code have any sway with those of us who prefer not to read it and use real common sense and justice for those who queue.
You know when you see a sign that communicates the closing lane will close in 600 yards.. 400 yards… 200 yards. It doesn’t mean the lane closes right now, it means it closes in X yards. You’re clearly the wrong one.
You're causing more traffic and queues. If everyone sits in one lane, then the queue backs up further and causes issues at junctions and turnoffs before the lane closure. You can still queue politely in 2 lanes right up until the merge in turn.
Merge in turn is fine, but people do this when there's clearly a queue of traffic and someone decides to drive all the way to the front and push in. I haven't done it myself, but this is often the reason people block both lanes.
There’s only a queue that long because people aren’t using both lanes properly. That mindset causes the queue to be twice as long as it should be, which can cause it to back on to roundabouts or other junctions and then block other routes.
Using only one lane to queue is irresponsible and blocking both lanes is stupid.
Often people can see two lanes are merging into one so they move over in plenty of time. But you always get that one person (probably a member of this sub) who think they're more important than everyone else and will try and get 10 cars ahead, even when there's plenty of other gaps they could merge into.
Personally, I usually stick to the left hand lane because I'm not in a hurry.
They’re using the road properly. If there’s room for more cars in both lanes then both lanes should be filled to reduce the total queue length.
If people start trying to merge early that just makes the left lane queue longer and slower earlier and causes more cars to “jump” in the right lane.
You can’t jump if both lanes are filled properly.
if they wanted traffic to merge there, then they would close the road there. It is open further for a reason, what good does forcing everyone to merge in early do?
I usually see this behaviour close to where the two lanes merge into one. I haven't ever seen anyone blocking two lanes when there's hundreds of yards left of the two lanes. People tend to see the two lanes merging and start to merge one at a time. But you always get that person who will attempt to muscle their way right into the front. It's usually the same type of person who always has to go in the right-hand lane at the traffic lights and roundabouts, and believes they will get to their destination that much quicker if only they could get in front of everyone else.
No, it's nothing to do with muscling their way to the front, it is making the most efficient use of the space. There are 2 lanes to allow traffic to queue more effectively! I dont understand what's so difficult about this
It's also not even about "the front". It's about merging at the merge point, and not at some arbitrary point along the other lane. I'm not sure what people who drive most of the way down and then merge 5-10 cars back think they're doing. They're still pissing people off who think they're queue jumping, but getting no benefit from it? If I'm gonna piss someone off, it's gonna be the person at the merge point. At least they should expect me coming.
There can be no 10 cars ahead if 5 go in the left lane and 5 go in the right. If all 10 go in the left lane, I'm going down the right. You are **creating** the situation you hate so much with this attitude.
Well the sign does say “use both lanes”….
It’s simply a sometimes idiotic lack of understanding mixed in with a sense of wrongly positioned justice and good old British queuing. So no, you cannot get past me, I am upholding the rules sir!
Everyone wants to play the policeman.
Seen a lorry driver try to be one of these policemen years ago, the policeman behind him wasn’t very impressed.
If you give dashcam footage of them to actual policemen they will be fined (potentially with points) for dangerous driving.
I was going to send my dash footage to the police with the 1 litre corsa knobhead doing this the other month. He was about 400 yards from where you're meant to merge in. Blocked me from going to the end of the lane and had a really smug look on his face. He didn't appreciate it when I drove into the left hand lane leaving him stranded in the right lane. Nobody let him in either which was the best bit. He then ended up driving to the end of the lane to merge back into the queue, making him a hypocrite
Brilliant, well played.
Had someone do it to us yesterday, a mercedes swerved out in front of us just to stop us passing him, so dangerous and pigheaded. Did it to another car too and we were just like wtf is that guy's problem 🤦♀️ The thing is, they aren't upholding the rules, it clearly stated 'merge in turn', not sit in one lane and block others from passing you 😂
Ironically they are breaking more rules than they are upholding
They aren’t upholding any rules. The rule is to merge in turn and use both lanes, not use one lane and not allow merging.
Yes Rules upheld: 0 Rules broken: 1 That was the joke 😅
Haha yeah, although wonder if there's more: improper use of lane (or something), obstructing road way, something else... While the driver they're self righteously stopping is upholding: use both lanes and merge in turn. It's the same as these people that sit in the fast lane doing 70 because it's the speed limit. They might actually find they're breaking more rules than a driver speeding but using the road's lanes properly.
I love merge points dependent on the vehicle I’m in. Personal vehicle. I’ll happily drive legally down this empty lane and merge to save myself some time because morons don’t understand how to use them. Work van. Imma sit in this traffic all the way down babeh!! I’m being paid to sit here
I’m the exact same, wouldn’t get angry at people using the free right hand lane whilst I’m not though 🤣
I let loads in when I get to the merge point lol.
I really don't mind merge in turn. The thing that bothers me the most is that there will be a massive gap behind me yet the person will do everything to push to the front and almost bully me to get their way. I will let one car in and then keep moving. I just don't understand why some people have to be at the front no matter what.
I'm the same, 1 car in. It's meant to be like a zip.
This is exactly how merge lanes are supposed to work, each car lets one car in. Infact, in America they actually call them 'zipper lanes' for this reason. The UK seems to be just full of moron drivers i think.
90% of people in the closing lane don't use them correctly either. Merge in turn/zipper merging only works if both lanes are going at the same speed. Charging down the closing lane and bullying in at the merge point fucks up the flow of traffic far more than moving across early.
This is really the crux of the issue. It's like racing to the end of a slip road, realising there isn't space to merge there, then slamming on the brakes and forcing yourself into the lane of traffic causing the lane of traffic to grind to a halt. There wouldn't be stationary traffic if people correctly merged when both lanes were flowing.
How are you meant to use it if there's a huge queue in the left, then? Or do you just mean people should approach the merge slower than they do?
Drive down the closing lane at no more than maybe 5mph faster than the lane staying open and merge when there's an appropriate space. Don't get hung up on getting right to the very end of the closing lane and make damn sure you don't need to brake or cause anyone else to brake in order to merge.
No the sitting in two lanes ones aren't the worst. The worst are the one's that actively move into two lanes when they see you know how to use the lanes properly. Like vigilantes that don't actually know the law. And then it's almost always artics
It is almost always lorries, you would think they would know better,. being professional drivers.
That's what annoys me about taxis being dickheads on the road. They should be the ones with the most experience, I know they effectively get paid per mile, but that's no excuse
'Professional' is a bit too kind of a word for most truck drivers. Some of the worst driving I have seen has been by trucks. Blocking lanes in traffic, tailgating in 50mph zones, overtaking using the outside lane. All very common to see these days.
Professional in the sense that they get paid to do it
Wagon drivers are the worst for it, couldn't agree more.
I always thought the lorries were doing it to stop people sitting in their blind spots. Slow moving traffic which they know is about to push into their lane, maybe they're just trying to avoid an accident?
Confidently wrong vigilantes are the worst. Slightly in front (behind?) of people who start off in the right hand lane, but then stop and indicate to move left and sit and wait until someone lets them in. The mind boggles as to what they think that lane must be for really. Personally, I've started honking at people now
Some people just want to chill for a minute, that’s cool but to then get peed about someone doing what they should is must be a sickness, imagine joining the end of a massive queue for a food order or something when there’s an empty one right next to it… like, what’s going on???
Well if there is only one server at the end of the two queues and it’s obvious, then what you are doing is going ahead of people who have been waiting longer - lots of people don’t see that as right and will take their place in the longer queue . If you’re comfortable taking the other line, you carry on my friend.
Best part is when the lanes merge from three to two and you get the lorries passing you in the third lane down the M62... how do they even get there??
Anyone who Polices other people’s behaviour in general grinds my gears, but this example of it is the worst. Why they think backing up the queue several miles further in single further is in any way preferable I’ve no idea.
Small penis syndrome mixed with a lack of roadcraft
[удалено]
It's a very apt way to describe the problem, unfortunately. 🤭
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
The same kind of people who don’t let you into a dual carriage way when there’s plenty of space in the right lane to safely move across
No the merge in turn people will declare that there is no obligation to move across to let people in. Traditional drivers like me will always move across if it’s safe to do so.
I merge in turn, and also do what I can to accommodate traffic joining. Which sometimes involves moving across, and sometimes, unfortunately, involves braking. Also, there is no "merge in turn" Vs traditional. There is merging in turn, and there's being wrong. I'm not saying that there aren't people that use merge in turn to justify dangerous driving, but there is no justification for blocking merge in turn. If you want to do things "traditionally", and slow down your journey (and others'), that's fine, just don't stop people merging.
[удалено]
Certainly not. No fun having a sports car unless you use the acceleration and feel the joy of speeding whilst fiddling with the cassette player.
Exactly!
I move across if I'm able, but there are situations where it's not possible to move over and I've had people almost pull into the side of me. The problem with this behaviour, is it encourages people to just ignore the give way line at the end of the slip road. People seem to think they can push their way onto a motorway. This just doesn't exist on the continent, people continue in the right lane, and drivers on the slip road are expected to accelerate or decelerate to fit into a sensible gap. I often see in the UK, drivers on the slip road start slowing down to merge, but the driver in lane one also begins slowing to try let them merge in front of them. It can become dangerous.
Motorway merging in this country at peak times is a joke. Everyone pushing nose into the queue. Causing people to stop. Then cutting across to lane 2 causing lane 2 to stop. The problem is in this country we drive way to close so merging can look and often is done aggressively.
I never straddle both lanes because that's obviously wrong, but I do happily just sit in the left lane because I'm not in a rush and I can't be bothered getting in to a confrontation with someone who thinks I shouldn't be able to use both lanes.
I do the same sometimes, the time I’d save by using the road properly just isn’t worth the hassle of some dickhead not wanting to let me in
Failed the Police exam on the IQ section
it makes even less sense when you consider half ot them have slip roads to the left so you are sitting in 3 lanes of traffic in one lane
I had someone try this to me the other day on the m58 where it mergest into 2 before the m6. I slowly approached conceding defeat then whipped round as they had misjudged the space they'd left me. I saw an angry fist come out of the window and pissed myself laughing knowing I was through 10 minutes earlier than that tosser 😂
I really think this is just a general but fading mindset. I used to see cars moving to the “closing lane” and cutting in dangerously so often it pissed me off a bit. BUT now, as we all get used to the practice of merging ( and we will) it will get easier for all of us. Surely?
Me.... When I stick my works van up their arse 😁
should report them for impersonating a police officer 😆
I've seen people swerve out at me and others while we're doing what the highway code tells me to do, while they're blocking the previous junction by not using both lanes.
More than one wing mirror has gone missing from people swerving at me on my bike
deserved if its their mirror. the left lane was closing in about a mile the other day, the queue of traffic was blocking the previous junction, so I was going up the left lane and someone swerved out of the right lane at me and I had to dodge up onto the grass behind the kerb, like, what the fuck? What kind of moron would choose to endanger life like that? Someone then pulled out behind me and fully blocked that lane to anyone else who wanted to follow the highway code, they just sat there next to their "position in the queue" so nobody could go around them or "skip the queue" And a couple weeks or so back, right lane closing so enormous queue in the left lane of a dual carriageway blocking the previous roundabout, a car in front of me going up the right lane, some van swerves out at them out of nowhere for no reason at the last moment almost causing a crash, again, what the fuck?
I drive a cheap car, 🚗 if they want a dent in theirs it's going to cost them. Me I don't care, I live in a happy place, so don't try to blow your trumpet here. It's usually guys in really expensive cars too. You wouldn't wipe your Rolex on the tarmac, but damn they sure do try with cars that cost way more, makes no sense. Some dude trying to scrape a £57 000 car down the side of £800 banger . I can replace my banger at the next garage, I don't think they can replace their car. Senselessness
Solution is to nip into the gap they created in the left lane then don’t allow them to merge when the time comes!
Because they’re self righteous pricks.
I enjoy those morons who bunch up really close when attempting to block people correctly merging in turn as the lane closes - I’m in a 15 year old 5 Series that looks like it’s been dropped from a crane. I guarantee you care a lot more about the bank’s C Class than I do about the appearance of my car, so if you’re not going to leave a gap I shall be making one! 😁
Similar questions could be asked of people who move to the outside lane to jump ahead by 2 or 3 cars and don’t merge ‘in turn’ either but rather merge stuck to the rear bumper of the car directly in front of them at the same time. Merge in turn is dead it’s more like merge whenever you want these days.
I see this significantly less often. Almost never, even.
My town is currently constantly at a traffic standstill because one of the two lanes on the main road into it is closed halfway down, and rather than merge in turn, people seem to prefer to use only one lane, thus backing up the whole road, the roundabout before it and thus pretty much the whole town. I dared to merge nearer the lane closure the other day, and I could feel the seething resentment aimed at me!
[удалено]
your account is less than 7 days old, post removed automatically to reduce spam. If you post is genuine then sorry for the inconvenience, please wait 7 days before reposting. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/drivingUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
People who don't like sitting in queues but impotently fume and behave like dicks bc they haven't got the confidence to do what the sign says. "Look at him, doing what the sign says and reducing queuing. Who does he think he is?". So very British to want to bring everyone down to their miserable level instead of thinking "why am I sitting in a queue?".
Pro Tip. If you have an old BMW people are very courteous & give way at all times (Scared for their Lives)
Will do it in crawling traffic when I reach the merger point otherwise there's always that lane weaving idiot who tries to get ahead at all costs. When it's flowing then it's pretty stupid...
One of the worse places I've found for this is on the A66, absolutely terrible place for it, people just don't have a clue how to merge at all
I reeeeaaaaaalllly piss those people off when I blast my air horns (HGV) get them out the way, manage to get in front of them then just crawl along and let 10-20 cars in ahead of me
They’re mentally differently abled to an extent. They cannot comprehend that if both lanes were used properly then there would be no ability to jump any queue, and that the length of the queue would be shorter, leaving less chance for other junctions to be blocked. Also, in the case of a lane closing, if the lane suddenly re-opens: traffic is in a much better position to start flowing properly again, sooner, meaning everyone wins (referencing that viral video of the “special” driver who was blocking a lane which was actually opened back up ahead).
[удалено]
I just replied to a different comment saying more than one wing mirror has gone missing from people swerving to block me on the bike, not exactly going to catch me are they
People that drive on the white line to stop you from filtering are the worst type of people. They just crawl along and look at you in the mirror. "Well I'm sat in traffic so you should too" mentality.
> get an armoured-knuckled glove through your car window You're hard
I’m so hard that I don’t have armoured knuckled gloves, just simple leather
No, the worst ones are those in the queue who move right up to the bumper of the car in front so merge in turn doesn't work.
I mean, OP's example is that but on steroids... so not really worse?
I went a mile in the open lane recently. If anyone had tried to block me I would happily send the dashcam footage to operation crackdown. But I would also get out if possible and point it out to them. I enjoy confrontation.
It's a mixture of people not understanding what merge in turn means, coupled with the fact that we're British and we are programmed to wait our line in a queue. So when someone takes the emptier lane rather than queuing like most other drivers, it grinds the gears of some. Quite frankly, merge in turn and 2 lanes splitting into 3 lanes for a set of traffic lights / junction before immediately going back to 2 lanes should be banned. Then everyone would queue nicely, get home and have a couple of tea and don't forget to moan about the weather.
> So when someone takes the emptier lane rather than queuing like most other drivers, it grinds the gears of some. The irony of it is, is this is a perfect queue. If everybody joined the shortest lane on the approach, it would be absolutely flawless. These people must see 2 tills at the supermarket and join the one with the huge queue instead of the free one.
I carry a knuckle bar in the boot for undoing wheel nuts, when I see people doing this, my hand yearns for the steel.
To be fair, I can understand lorries. Their blind spots are huge for one and if you're merging directly Infront of them or behind them, they have absolutely no idea you're there. People (including myself in the past, it was terrifying) merging from the right when there is a slower-moving lorry on the left have an incredibly hard time merging in time when you are travelling at a similar speed to the lorry and then the lorry slows down and leaves you no space.
Please hand your license back in if you think a lorry holding a queue up for around a mile on a merge in turn is sensible 🤦♂️
Never understood why this generates such extreme reactions from the two trains of thought on this. Merge in turn is surely the most effective way of handling a lane closure, no one can seriously argue against that, but the question is where to merge in turn. One group advocates this should be done at the cones, in order to use all available road, the other group insist the merge should happen where the traffic slows to a halt to get through in turn. I would have thought there was a maths angle on this ( queuing theory in particular ) which will tell you that once traffic has come to a halt it doesn’t matter where the merge happens - the capacity of the lane to service traffic has maxed out and merging here or there ain’t gonna get traffic through the cones any quicker than the max capacity will allow. It’s just a matter then of whether you think using all the available road is more important than getting through in the order in which you all arrived - or in another way whether legally gaining an advantage over other drivers is acceptable compared to the ‘fair’ approach of queuing in strict order. That’s all it really comes down to But nobody ever changes their mind over this because ‘ I’m right and your selfish/moronic’
I mean, the correct place to merge is literally at the arrow sign
From an efficiency point of view, the traffic will eventually back up regardless of where people merge, unless it's during low traffic times (eg. one lane is closed only at 22:00-05:00 or something), so it makes sense for everyone to continue using both lanes for as long as possible
It's not matter of using all the available road, it's a matter of if you merge early, someone else will use all the available road thus making the open lane slower.
This topic comes up fairly regularly and last time I got pilloried for preferring to merge early and not ‘making use of all the available road ‘ Last week in Sainsburys, all the sheep were queued up with their trolleys in one side of the aisle leaving lots of unused aisle for me to legally use to get to the front of the queue, and because I don’t care about damaging my trolley I was able to force my way in between two morons who don’t know how to merge in turn, but apparently that makes me a ‘selfish prick’ and I should ‘take my turn because we all want to get home too’ .
What are you on about? Was there a sign at the checkout telling people to merge two queues?
Oh it didn’t really happen sorry, I just think it’s an illustration of the absurdity of the argument between the two camps. In most areas of (British) life, people are very happy to accept the principle of queuing to take their turn, except at closed motorway lanes, because merge in turn, my legal entitlement, use all available road etc
I think you're very close in your analogy, but realistically, these queues would never happen in a supermarket. Everybody chooses the shortest queue, with the eventual goal being getting out of the main door. Why then, do they not join the shortest lane on approach? Why is it different in a car at all?
> the capacity of the lane to service traffic has maxed out and merging here or there ain’t gonna get traffic through the cones any quicker than the max capacity will allow. You're nearly there. It's not just the capacity of the bottleneck, but the capacity of the roads affected by the tailback.
Thanks - I would have been there already but for cars going past to get in front… Seriously though, once that lane has come to a halt, I see nothing that happens before the cones making any difference to clearance rate, unless you can explain differently. The best you can do is present new traffic to join the queue at the cones in the most efficient manner - I would argue that was in a single file that had merged 800yds back rather than mit two stationary lines of traffic.
If I have 10 metres of road, I can only get some many cars along it in a straight line before it exceeds 10 metres. I can fit twice as many into two lanes though! Therefore, shorter tailback, no junctions blocked.
But then what ? Now you have 2 x 10m lines of stationary traffic which need to merge into 1 , instead of 1 x 20m line already merged . Which one of those do you think is going to get through the cones quickest ?
You're fully missing my point. At this point, the throughput isn't improved as all of the road space is utilised. This is the ideal for a merge in turn. However, it now doesn't block the junction that is 15m back. Here's one for you. There's a merge on a road near me that backed up past where I can join the road. Everyone all in one line on the right hand side. I literally could not join the back of the queue if I wanted to, but lane 1 was free right to the end. What would you do? Waiting doesn't work, as you're in a live lane that can also go left and straight back off the road.
Well that’s a fairly specific situation that really wasn’t in your original point, and it really sounds like a horrifically designed layout. Do what you have to do to get out of lane 1 and stay safe friend. Meanwhile, back at the original point, I absolutely cannot believe that people driving down lane 3 past stationary lane 2 are doing it out of altruism for people waiting to join the motorway 15m back. They are doing it because it’s legal and they want to shorten their own journey. Fair enough, and yet not fair enough We both agree that merge in turn ideal, just when to do it is the intractable issue, and I imagine most people are bored enough with our bickering now. So I wish you safe travels and a good night - until the next time.
With cars doing it it’s probably just ego or something. With lorries, I was taught to come out early when there’s a clear gap, as it stops you from accidentally crushing people to death as they try and squeeze past right where the road narrows.
I think we might be confusing two separate things here. The mythical "merge in turn" sign which is rare but usually found on permanent road features where the behaviour described (straddling two lanes) is definitely wrong and the "Lane closing in x distance, get in lane now" situation where some people's idea of now is at the lane close point forcing the other lane to stop to let them in.
Firstly, it's not mythical, they're all over the place, and people find ways to abuse them whether they're the ones merging or the ones letting others merge. When you have the lane closure in 800yds sign, it doesn't mean move across immediately, it means move across in good time. Good time depends on the road conditions, the slower the traffic (and the smaller the difference in speed between lanes), the closer that is to the lane closure. Nobody should be trying to merge in turn at speed, but if it's congested, use the road space available!
I think what people get upset about is that in the lane closure situation the drivers in the closing lane should (once notified by the sign) match their speed to the open lane and wait for a gap (indicators help) and then switch lanes with minimal effect on the open lane rather than drive on bypassing as much of the queue as possible until forced to stop at the end where they then either have to wait for a kind person to stop the open lane to let them in or they force their way into a tiny gap making the driver behind slam on stopping the open lane. I get the whole "if everyone used both lanes to zip merge" thing. All that does is slow both lanes down to the crawl necessary to achieve said merge (everyone loses). If everyone moved over sensibly and as early as is safe to do then the open lane would barely slow. Unfortunately the people who want to "use both lanes" (read:- queue jump) stop this system from working. Neither way works really but at least the one which the overwhelming majority use could work.
You've actually described four different scenarios there, and only acknowledged two of them. The biggest difference between all of these is speed. At speed, merge early. In slow to stopped traffice, use all available road space.
The "use both lanes to merge" only works when people actually merge in turn. But, since most car drivers are selfish assholes who only care about being in front themselves and ignore the rest of the queueing traffic, people do tend to get fed up. If you actually pay attention to the flow of traffic, you'll find that once someone actually slows the 2nd lane down for a minute and gets both lanes moving at the same speed, traffic flow does actually increase and everyone get to move a bit faster. Rather than the selfish gits who go speeding down the 2nd lane and barge their way in at the end forcing the 1st lane to stop and think that they're driving the correct way.......
Not sure the road you are referring to but I use a road similar to this everyday and it is always carnage! Basically the left lane is from a motorway exit and there are bollards preventing people changing lanes too early (as people used to use it to overtake). The problem is the right lane comes from a small town but does have some traffic, but they are always so entitled. They drive right to the end and then force their way in. To me, merge in turn means one for one. So I will always let one car in. Unfortunately, in this instance they see I have let someone in and think I will also let them in. This has a knock on effect to the motorway exit and forces cars to queue on the hard shoulder before the exit. It’s is really dangerous. I’m fairly used to it by now and just go with it but a lot of drivers get really angry and sometimes arctics will deliberately block the right lane to make sure the motorway traffic takes priority (as the layout is).
it's true that 'merger in turn' isn't pushing in, however I still argue there are people who use it in a way that is pushing in. For example obviously I'm happy to let 1 or 2 cars merge at the zip point, but I don't want a queue of 4-5 cars forming and all trying to 'zip merge' at once. That stupidity seems to have died down, but once a car has zip merged ahead of me, I normally move to the side a little to indicate to cars behind that Admission is over.
Biker here. Those people are asshats that achieve nothing. Move out to “block” me all you like, you can even come _fully_ out into my lane if you like. I’ll still get past you, and I’ll very likely be able to filter long past the merge point (depending on the road layout). It’s not my fault your micropenis is making you angry. Although I’d never advocate retaliating by smashing off wing mirrors or punching windows. You’re still in a vulnerable position and smashing their mirror off, or smashing their window, will only push people to retaliate in the only way they can: with their car. It doesn’t matter if someone doesn’t even _realise_ that they’re doing something dangerous enough to kill you, and I don’t care how good a rider you think you are. If someone is prepared to do something dangerous enough to risk your life then you need to treat that kind of person as if they are _actively trying to kill you_. Just drop back and leave The Micropenis Road Warrior alone.
Here’s an interesting question for you to ponder, in a situation where both lanes are being used and everybody is merging in turn what difference would it make if one vehicle took up both lanes? They’d have to be going at exactly same speed anyway right? The reason for doing it(only appropriate in certain circumstances,) is because the queue forms at the merging point, by doing that the merging point moves from in front to behind them, once everyone in front gets into same lane the traffic starts flowing freely. The reason you move faster in right lane is because people don’t use it as intended, meaning they use it when it’s moving faster, but they merge before merge point, so car A, B and C are in a line, I’m level with car A, A starts indicating to move left and I let them in, B now moves into gap left by car A. But I’ve got an extra car in my lane so I effectively move back 1 slot, B Is now level with A and I’m level with C, 10 yds further along and now B wants to move left so A gives way, C now moves past me. A and B and the process repeats continuously, after about 15-20 minutes patience wears thin.
This isn't interesting at all. It's bullshit. Why does that one person get to decide the queue forms behind them? It's also not just about capacity through the bottleneck, but about the side effects the tailback can have on other roads.
That’s where the (only appropriate in certain circumstances comes in.)
These weird personal caveats you have to the written rules will be different from person to person. Where one person decides on an arbritrary place that the merge should happen will be wildly different to the other misinformed people around them. The only sensible place to merge is at the merge point, where people should expect merging traffic. Anything else is dangerous and ill-advised.
I agree, this is exactly point I made at start, in this scenario both lanes would be queuing and they both be moving at exactly same pace. Now all we have to do is tell the other 60 million people in country. I know what it’s like from both sides of this, in my car I’m in right hand lane, In lorry I’m the person everybody targets as the best place to cut in front of. I’ve been in situations where there’s been an incident in roadworks and queue is moving so slowly that the cars in right lane move then change lanes leads to me not moving at all for minutes at a time, I’ve got places to be and limited time to get there as well. Let me ask you this, see if we agree on another point. So, you’re almost at merging point, the cones in right hand lane that close it are just feet away, the last car in right hand lane has just merged about 4 car lengths back, what would be the correct place for the car that now becomes the last vehicle in right lane to merge? Don’t think I did the best job of explaining that, did you manage to make sense of it?
Merge in turn would work really really well if everyone was moving and stayed at a steady pace with a decent gap then the merge could occur. The fact that usually it's stationary, and usually so because a bottleneck at the final merge point right before the end of the road , and everyone is stuck, and cars are still driving down trying to force their way in , meaning the others who are in the queue as no where else to go just see these drivers as twats. I see it from both points, the queued stationary people, and the queue jumping ones that want to get 8 cars further ahead.
There is no single queue and queue jumpers. There are two separate queues
This is definitely the case. Merge in turns where both lanes are equally as full and rolling along can zip together quite nicely. A bottle next where a queue extends usually backing up into the more car-heavy left lane, means everyone in the right lane is overtaking and merging ahead. But therefore everyone in the left lane is stuck with all the right hand lane people cutting far up ahead. Therefore the only way to allow this left lane queue to move is for a vigilante to block the right hand lane from merging up ahead. I'd say it's poor road design or over crowded road that cause this anyway, as opposed to people "not merging properly"
The ones "cutting in ahead" are _merging_ like they're supposed to lol
Yes exactly. In principle it works. In theory it works , just not so well in the real world.
If there's no sign saying merge in turn, there's no merge in turn. If there's an arrow on there road, curving to the left or right, that shows you who has the driving line, the driver in the lane that's ending has to find a safe merge
Are we allowed to just make our own Highway Code up now? I've made it illegal to join the longest queue at a merge in turn, and now everyone has to join the shortest one.
I make a habit of making life hard for queue jumpers (who call themselves merge-in-turners). Join the lane that won’t be closed, queue like a proper British person and do the car equivalent of tutting (crossing the middle line to be block the queue jumpers as soon and the closing lane narrows). If fewer selfish drivers kept using the closing lane then we’d all be a lot happier. Cheers up my journey when they flash and beep, the fools.
"Using the closing lane" therfore it's currently open and you're obstructing traffic which is against the law. While you think those other drivers are queue jumpers, they're actually driving properly, your not. If everyone actually used both lanes to the point of closure and actually merged in turn, the traffic would flow quicker, and that queue you love sitting in, would also clear quicker. Stop been a penis.
If more drivers used the closing lane in slow moving traffic, we'd all get where we want sooner.
Yes but those using the closing lane will get there faster than those who queue so no thank you.
Then why don’t you use the closing lane?
you know, if 4 people queue in 2 lanes, and take turns in merging, then everyone retains their original position in the queue.
This is the thing these people don't seem to understand. Just join the shortest queue, and then no one can "queue jump"
The ability to queue jump is *created* by the people who hate it the most, and merge early. It's one of life's most hilarious ironies.
So you would rather make your (and everybody else's) journey longer, in the misguided idea that it's fairer. You are on the left side of the curve my friend.
It's not que jumping? The point of the two lanes is to increase traffic flow and decrease congestion. Instead of one very long que you can have two smaller ques, this is useful if you want to avoid congestion
If both lanes were used, as designed, then nobody would be able to jump a queue, because the road would be fully utilised. The **only** reason that a queue can be jumped is because of pig headedness like this which sees people only use one lane. Use both, no space to jump a queue. Everyone wins.
Looks like we found an idiot!
Either that or a troll
No, I’m one of the people in the right who won’t let this American zipper nonsense take over our way of driving, or let the fools who update the Highway Code have any sway with those of us who prefer not to read it and use real common sense and justice for those who queue.
Troll it is
Or both! I'm getting strong idiot vibes from them.
Indeed, there is a strong correlation between the two.
You know when you see a sign that communicates the closing lane will close in 600 yards.. 400 yards… 200 yards. It doesn’t mean the lane closes right now, it means it closes in X yards. You’re clearly the wrong one.
You're causing more traffic and queues. If everyone sits in one lane, then the queue backs up further and causes issues at junctions and turnoffs before the lane closure. You can still queue politely in 2 lanes right up until the merge in turn.
Merge in turn is fine, but people do this when there's clearly a queue of traffic and someone decides to drive all the way to the front and push in. I haven't done it myself, but this is often the reason people block both lanes.
There’s only a queue that long because people aren’t using both lanes properly. That mindset causes the queue to be twice as long as it should be, which can cause it to back on to roundabouts or other junctions and then block other routes. Using only one lane to queue is irresponsible and blocking both lanes is stupid.
Often people can see two lanes are merging into one so they move over in plenty of time. But you always get that one person (probably a member of this sub) who think they're more important than everyone else and will try and get 10 cars ahead, even when there's plenty of other gaps they could merge into. Personally, I usually stick to the left hand lane because I'm not in a hurry.
They’re using the road properly. If there’s room for more cars in both lanes then both lanes should be filled to reduce the total queue length. If people start trying to merge early that just makes the left lane queue longer and slower earlier and causes more cars to “jump” in the right lane. You can’t jump if both lanes are filled properly.
if they wanted traffic to merge there, then they would close the road there. It is open further for a reason, what good does forcing everyone to merge in early do?
I usually see this behaviour close to where the two lanes merge into one. I haven't ever seen anyone blocking two lanes when there's hundreds of yards left of the two lanes. People tend to see the two lanes merging and start to merge one at a time. But you always get that person who will attempt to muscle their way right into the front. It's usually the same type of person who always has to go in the right-hand lane at the traffic lights and roundabouts, and believes they will get to their destination that much quicker if only they could get in front of everyone else.
No, it's nothing to do with muscling their way to the front, it is making the most efficient use of the space. There are 2 lanes to allow traffic to queue more effectively! I dont understand what's so difficult about this
It's also not even about "the front". It's about merging at the merge point, and not at some arbitrary point along the other lane. I'm not sure what people who drive most of the way down and then merge 5-10 cars back think they're doing. They're still pissing people off who think they're queue jumping, but getting no benefit from it? If I'm gonna piss someone off, it's gonna be the person at the merge point. At least they should expect me coming.
There can be no 10 cars ahead if 5 go in the left lane and 5 go in the right. If all 10 go in the left lane, I'm going down the right. You are **creating** the situation you hate so much with this attitude.