The situation I’m talking about I drive every day.
It goes like this -
Traffic is flowing a smooth 50mph (the speed limit). You reach a BIG ASS SIGN that says Left Lane Ends in 1500 feet. This is where people need to start thinking about moving to the right. But no, some idiots take this as an indication that everyone is getting out of their way and stay in the left lane all the way till the end. By that time there is often no more spaces to merge into and they have to force their way into a spot that is too small, causing other people to brake all down the line disrupting what could have been and WAS a smooth flow of traffic.
If the late-merger is in the lane that is ending, proceeding along until he gets to the merge point, then he is not a line-cutter. Ideally, there would be a whole line of drivers ahead of him doing the same thing, but if everyone else is determined to jump over early, then so be it.
And you are absolutely wrong to state that late-mergers are “actively harming the rest of the line.” It’s the early-mergers who do the harm. Studies have shown that the early-mergers are the ones who create the traffic back-up in the first place!
Ideally, you wouldn’t need signs. Everyone would use both lanes up to the merge point, and then merge.
I should clarify this. Early mergers cause backups if they cause drivers in the adjacent lane to have to brake to let them in.
If traffic is light enough that nobody has to brake at all, then it doesn’t really matter where people merge.
However, as traffic volumes increase and traffic slows down, it is far preferable for everyone to merge at one, consistent point. The optimal point is where the lane ends.
EmAnJ There is really no reason to shift to neutral because you’re on ice and snow. Just as long as you are not aggressively downshifting. It is always best to match the gear you are in with the speed you are going. Even when you are slowing down.
And, automatics will help you slow down if you don’t put it in neutral.
The late merger gets to the point where there is no more road. That is what is causing him to brake. The early mergers then have to brake to let him in.
Outside of people jumping out of line and forcing themselves back in, I also see folks that are late mergers seeing this as an opportunity to pass people going the speed limit. Often, once the late merger gets to the choke point, there is no room to merge into. Once again they force their way in, making the early mergers brake and slowing the free flowing traffic all down the line.
I’m not trying to force an optimal solution on anyone. You want to merge early? Fine. You are an idiot. I just want a shot at a (sub-)optimal solution for myself without one of those idiots who also happens to be self-righteous whipping their car into my lane like they are the merge police.
One that gets me, especially in DC (Southbound Mass Ave right turn onto the Rock Creek Parkway) is the right turn on a RED ARROW. The turn has a separate RED ARROW for the right turn lane which is there to induce otherwise perky drivers to refrain from running over joggers and bikers. It does NOT prevent the right turn on red allowed by law (and no sign is there refuting it) but since there is a signal light there almost no-one will turn until it goes green.
I believe you are wrong. If there is a red ARROW, and it is on, this precludes the right on red law. Perhaps you where not clear. But when the red arrow is lit, there is no right on red. Same with a red left arrow.
If the traffic is heavy enough, then people are going to have to brake to let them in no matter where it takes place.
However, with early-mergers doing their thing, you get lots of cars all changing lanes at random points over the mile or so between the warning and the end of the lane. If everyone were a late merger, you would get a consistent stream of traffic merging together at one, consistent point. Ideally, people take turns, so you get a zipper effect.
If people were to use both lanes up to the merge point, you wouldn’t have the issue of people trying to jump into an empty lane, nor, if both lanes were filled, would you get people in the lane that’s ending going any faster than the adjacent lane.
. :Shrug: I think we are talking past each other. You are going to be hard pressed to get a ‘zipper’ effect at 50-60 miles an hour.
I’m talking about traffic that is going the speed limit. And about a specific lane ending. So that there is now a single through lane. So it’s not so much a merging of lanes. It’s a lane ending. If the people that had their lane ending would pay attention and move into the through lane ahead of time a bit, people would not have to brake for them and let them in when the late mergers have no other options open to them.
Alternatively, instead of electronic signs, you could just teach people to merge at any point if traffic is unimpeded, and to use both lanes and a designated merge point if traffic is backed up and moving slowly.
Nope, in DC it is clearly marked with a sign when the turn is not permitted, arrow or no. If not, right turn on red applies. I had an open discussion with a DC cop on this…
