With the recent zombie about lanes merging, I thought I’d get the straight dope on right practice to avoid the “changing into same lane” problem.
(in the below description I use “fast lane”, “middle lane” and “slow lane”: I know those aren’t the right names, it’s just simpler in this description)
Red car driver is in the fast lane. She has been checking her mirrors at regular intervals and knows it’s safe to signal and move into the middle lane.
Blue car driver is in the slow lane. He has been checking his mirrors at regular intervals and knows it’s safe to signal and move into the middle lane.
They both try to change lanes at the same time and are then on a collision course.
So what were the error(s) made here, and what technically should happen if this situation does occur (e.g. does one car have right of way)?
Googling around the answers are somewhat equivocal.
And many of the answers say you should be aware of cars two lanes over, but that’s something of a big ask in real world situations. At the time of the maneuver the other car is neither in your field of view (without looking over your shoulder) nor visible in your mirrors.
We might say that since red driver was likely travelling faster than blue driver she must have seen him up ahead at some point and so been aware that he was level with her even if at that point she can’t see him. But it’s easy to conceive of situations where there was never any forewarning like that e.g. coming out of traffic, or there are more than 3 lanes and the cars have already moved over one or more lanes prior to the situation occurring.
When I am changing lanes I make myself very aware of any other cars in the vicinity and their possible moves that might interfere with my lane change. I don’t think this is terribly difficult to do.
mmm
If a crash happened, then apparently once they started to change lanes they both stopped looking for other cars and made the change too rapidly.
When I’m on a three+ lane road and need or want to move over, I keep an eye on ALL the cars nearby because you never know when some idiot is going to just wander over a lane without signalling, or gun it to try and get in the spot before you do, or do something equally dumb. I also use those antiquated devices called turn signals, and I put mine on well before I actually start my lane change or turn. One little blip of turn signal as you are moving over is not enough, and you get what you deserve if someone is there before you.
I have often wondered the same thing. But I’ve never seen this happen when both cars signaled first (actually signaled, not just the blip that saje mentions) – in every case, at least one of the cars didn’t signal. Usually the situation is resolved by one of the cars swinging back into their original lane before completing the move, or by one of the cars speeding up/slowing down to accommodate the other driver who has seemingly decided that the laws of physics don’t apply to them.
However, regardless of who did or didn’t signal/look, I’m curious about whether either car technically has the right of way. However unlikely this may be, if I’m in lane 1 (the OP’s fast lane) signaling right and a car in lane 3 (slow lane) is signaling left and we both seem to be eyeing the same space in lane 2, who legally gets to move first?
(Something in the back in my brain tells me it might be the guy in lane 3, because he may be trying to pass someone and I have a vague idea that they get the right of way in that case. I have no idea where this came from or if it’s true, though.)
Apparently, neither driver had any such knowledge as the facts immediately thereafter demonstrate.
Liability is not always 100% attributable to one driver or the other, and this is a good example of both drivers being equally at fault. Right of way in cases involving lanes is resolved by assessing “who owned the lane,” or, who had already established themselves with all four wheels in the single lane. In the example, the answer is: neither. If one driver is ahead of the other, let’s say left fender hits right quarter panel, then the car with damage to the left fender would be slightly more at fault because they at least had an opportunity to directly see the other car and abort the lane change.
The way you avoid this type of collision is to drive defensively. Although you’ve been checking your mirrors and watching the traffic around you for a while, you still can never assume you’re in the clear until the lane change is completed. You’ve got blind spots, people make sudden changes that can happen during the brief time you’re not paying attention, etc.
There are many situations on the road for which an absolute “safe” or “not-safe” assessment is impossible to make in under real-life circumstances, yet a decision has to be made regardless or the roads would be hopelessly choked with over-cautious motorists crawling along driving in circles waiting for a perfect opportunity to change lanes or make a turn. In a lot of cases we usually make a quick assessment of * how* safe a given choice is, and proceed from there. In fact I’d say the majority of decisions and facts we assume on the road fall along some spectrum of likelihood of safety; shades of grey rather than either black or white (though of course when something does happen we’ll claim we did know for certain we were in the right… blame the way the legal system works for that).
For me changing lanes with other vehicles driving at about my own speed and positioned to my sides in a zone not completely visible through my front or rear windshields is quite risky. You need to keep your eyes on the road ahead of you for all but quick glances to the sides or into mirrors, and you often don’t have the several consecutive seconds you need to detect whether the car 2 lanes to your right is slowly moving into the spot you want to move into, or to find his turn signals (if he even has any) located on the side of the vehicle to see if he’s signalling his intent to move there (it’s a lot easier to see someone’s turn signal when they are in front or behind you than to your left or right). And even if you can spot no signal light on and that he’s holding steady in his own lane, as soon as you take your eyes off that car to look forward again and start your own lane change, he could start his lane change just as you look away and you’d still miss it.
For those reasons I’ll try to alter my speed a bit to either let the car a couple lanes over get further ahead of me or further behind me so I can keep an eye on them as I start to change lanes. When I can’t, I’ll check as best I can first, put my signal on for a few seconds, then slowly change lanes with the idea that if another car has decided to also move into that spot, I’m moving slow enough that I’ll have time to hear his horn honk and avoid him (or him me)… or if he doesn’t alert me than we’d just gently bump/scrape rather than metal-bending collide as might happen with a quick lane change.
We all have to take risk on the road… I’d rather place that risk in a slow-moving shift to one side with moderate uncertainty of what other vehicle might appear there than in a high-speed collision that occurs when I’m focusing too much on what’s happening beside me rather than in front of me and I miss seeing the brake lights and rear-end the guy in front of me. I’d pretty much be guaranteed to be found at fault for rear-ending someone, whereas I’d at least have a chance of getting out of a lane change fender bender either in part or in whole.
“Be aware of other cars” is obvious and easy to say, but we’re talking here about a situation where a car may never have entered your field of view. So we have to ask the question how specifically, can you be aware of that car?
Answering my own question, any time I’m changing lanes and I’m not 100% confident there is no car moving into that lane (e.g. such as one of the examples I gave, where traffic was much denser a moment ago, and I didn’t have a clear view of the whole road), I’ll take a quick look over my shoulder.
This makes sense to me, but there are plenty of driving guides that say you should only ever look over your shoulder when initially pulling away from stationary; never while the car is already in motion.
I think one generally shouldn’t change lanes into a space adjacent to another car two lanes over, and think that other car is of course easily noted. In a situation where one must change lanes promptly, for example if an emergency vehicle approaching rapidly from behind, then I think it’s best to change lanes smoothly and not too quickly, meanwhile pulling as far forward as practical to be more visible to the driver two lanes over.
This is a good example of “driving defensively”, and of the principle that the fact your car did fit wherever you tried to drive it is not proof the choice was necessarily a wise one.
In Michigan, the standard crash report form has two sides, one for both parties involved. I would guess that in your scenario, both could be assigned a hazardous action (shared fault) of either “improper passing” or “failing to yield right of way.” Both could also probably be cited for a 2650 “Change Lanes w/o Observation.” as for insurance, MI is a “no fault” state so your own insurer pays to repair your car.
When you begin to change lanes your forward speed drops, so I always step on the gas at that time. Likely the guy in the blue car isn’t aware that he’s actually slowing down some so he’s very likely to see me. Besides, as I move into the other lane I’m still watching it in that mirror. I ride a Harley too and am VERY aware of what’s around me. Maybe that’s why I’ve lasted 55 years behind the handlebars.
If you are both trying for the same space in lane 2, then the faster car should be somewhat behind the slower car. And the car ahead has priority. If you are driving at the same speed and are exactly side-by-side, then whoever signaled first.
Cite? (IOW, is this your opinion or a truth that is codified somewhere? Are you a police officer? A DOT employee who specializes in traffic? A driver’s ed instructor? OMG ARE YOU THE STIG?)
Also, this still doesn’t really address my question. What if both drivers signaled at the same time? (It might be unlikely, but not completely out of the question.) Many driving situations involve inherent (or explicit) rights-of-way: traffic in lanes that are ending must yield to traffic in existing lanes, the four-way-stop thing, etc. Is there any inherent right-of-way in *this *situation?
In my commute this would mean that no one would ever change lanes.
Mostly people pay attention and look for lane-changing behavior two lanes over, but when it happens I’ve noticed that both cars retreat back to their original lane and don’t try to decide who has right of way.
In MA ‘right of way’ is something you yield not something you have. Even at a four way stop parties must ‘agree’ to who goes first.
In your perfect scenario the ‘law’ is unlikely to get involved in an accident. The insurance companies will probably just find 50/50 fault.
You’re responsible for not hitting things even if the other party is ‘wrong’ You aren’t allowed to ram someone because they ran a red light, you need to yield right away if able.
In the OP I’m talking about a situation where a car two lanes over was never in your field of view.
Are you saying that’s impossible? In which case I can break down the hypotheticals I mentioned.
Otherwise you’re just ignoring the OP.
Good points.
I’m not sure though that in the extreme case of two cars being exactly level (let’s just say other guy has similar lane-changing practice to you), the other car will appear in your mirror before it appears in your peripheral vision.
Wish I had a driving simulator program or something to play it out and see what everyone sees.
I ride a bike in Shanghai. You don’t need to tell me the importance of staying alert and second-guessing when a car is going to turn across me at speed without looking or signalling…
You live in Thailand?
That’s where they both go wrong. You signal well before changing lane, not as you do it. There’s also failing to use the Mk1 eyeball: mirrors show what’s behind you; to see what’s beside you, you need to look.
Actually that’s what I meant. Signal, and then subsequently move.
Yep and that’s what I do.
I’m just saying some driving advice guides imply that if you’re regularly checking your mirrors, then there’s no chance of a car moving into your blind spot without you being aware of that happening, so no need to physically turn your head.
I can’t look for examples right now, I’ll take a look later.
