POLICE OFFICERS (esp. HIGHWAY): I have a question for you!

[bbernardini]

Here in Southeastern Pennsylvania, there is a Business Route 30 bypass. They have been doing construction work on the westbound side, which often closes one lane in certain stretches. The sign indicating the upcoming lane closure, which occurs at an exit, is located two miles before the closure (at the previous exit). On different days, I have noticed a number of different vehicles (not official state or construction vehicles) purposefully driving slowing in the lane that is to be closed up to two miles before the closure in order to prevent others from using the lane. Not only are they causing a massive traffic jam, they are creating a safety hazard because people have to change lanes in a traffic jam in order to get around them. My question...is these even remotely legal? There are no signs saying that one must move to the non-closed lane immediately, and there are no indicators that the speed limit has changed. It seems to me that one should be able to use both lanes of traffic right up until the closure, and driving 25 MPH or less on a highway designed for 55 MPH travel is a ticketable offense. Am I totally wrong here?

[datasuspect]

1. it's because idiot morons

like to drive right up to the merge point of the closure thereby creating a bottleneck (everyone trying to beat each other right up to the last minute).

when i used to drive i would purposely straddle both lanes before the closure point to discourage those behind me from driving full speed right up to the merge point.

i'm all for bogarting a lane for traffic safety. people trying to bogart their way in, is a different story all together.

[bbernardini]

5. So instead you create a bottleneck two miles back?

Yeah, that makes sense.

[datasuspect]

6. not really

i take civic responsibility and unilaterally decide to become a traffic calming device.

that way all the jagoffs trying to beat out everyone else have to merge while the traffic is flowing instead of when it is stopped . . .

but then, i learned how to drive from a professional driver and not the high school football coach.

[Rabrrrrrr]

10. Absolutely! If the fuckbags would merge IMMEDIATELY

upon seeing the merge sign, traffic wouldn't have to slow down at all, and could easily merge into one lane and fly through the chokepoint still going 55 mph.

But asshole jagoffs have to drive 80 right to the choke, then slide in and force people to hit their brakes, which then causes a traffic to exist for as long as there are cars going through, until someone comes through slowly and cures the bubble.

[LostinVA]

20. BINGO BINGO BINGO It literally enrages me

when people do this. If I had a gun with me, I honestly think I would shoot them when they do this shit.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

38. I absolutely agree with you...

I learned from my dad, a trucker. I took driver's ed though with a football coach. Funny you should mention that. The truckers here are awesome and will slow down so people have to merge while traffic is flowing. Those douche bags who have to beat everyone else piss me off. It's not a race, fuckheads.
Duckie

[Rabrrrrrr]

8. It doesn't cause that - it would be a worse bottleneck

if the traffic were allowed to flow right up to the merge point.

I apllaud all truckers who block lanes this way before merge points. They actually HELP keep traffic flowing sensibly and safely.

[datasuspect]

11. you can learn a lot from a truck driver

the overwhelming majority are safety-conscious, defensive drivers (you have to be in a heavy freight- or hazardous materials-laden vehicle) on the road.

the WORST 4 wheeler drivers are the often the loudest complainers about truck drivers. especially the ones who do incessant "brake checks" on highways when there is no real reason to brake.

and yes, two lanes merging into one ALWAYS becomes a clusterfuck when you get yahoos who feel the need to go full throttle up to the merge point and then try and get in.

that's why they put up signs WAY BEFORE the merge point saying "LEFT LANE ENDS" or "RIGHT LANE ENDS" so you have enough time to get over.

duh.

[Rabrrrrrr]

19. I just LOVE the assholes who ride their brakes, esp. in slow areas

The car ahead of them gets a little too far ahead, so they slam the accelerator to catch up, then slam on their brakes, then slam on the accelerator, then slam on the brakes...

In slow traffic, when it's really slow, I just put it in first and, generally, can ride along with traffic without needing to brake while everyone poppin'-jays around me.

I really do wish people were more intelligent.

[alarimer]

40. When I was on I-10 in LA the other day

There were no signs indicating which lane was closed. At least until you got very close to the closure. I am not sure if the highway department always does that there or if it was just a mistake but it sured screwed things up.

[LostinVA]

21. I love it when truckers do this!

People should get TICKETS -- BIG ONES -- for not merging ASAP.

[bbernardini]

22. Actually, they should get the tickets for blocking traffic.

I've asked several law officers about this, and they said it's impeding traffic flow, a ticketable offense.

[LostinVA]

25. The selfish asses not merging are the ones impeding traffic flow

If they did what they are required to do, everyone would zip along.

And, I guess I deserve a ticket, too, because I've also done it.

[struggle4progress]

42. I agree: it generally improves traffic flow

[mark414]

39. it's not your job to enforce that

people will do what they do. no need for vigilante traffic cops.

[Road Scholar]

2. There is a book entitled "Manual on Uniform Traffic Control". It

is to put uniformity in traffic control nationally for all motorists, no matter which stste they are from. It is law. That ain't in it.:shrug:

[miss_american_pie]

3. Aren't there any

"use both lanes to merge point" signs up? We have those in a a lot of the contruction zones out this way, but the truckers seem to ignore them. :shrug:

[Road Scholar]

4. The length of taper to close a lane is the speed times the width

of the lane. For instance 55mph X 10' lane the taper is 550'. Most high speed lanes are 12' wide. No partial lane closures. No interference.I'm not a cop, but a highway engineer for 30 years.
Oh and I did spend the night in a Holiday Inn Express.:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Hosnon]

9. Quick question: What does the width of the lane have to do with it? Why

is that one of the main factors in deciding how long the taper is?

[Road Scholar]

35. There are other factors, for instance, sight distance, horizontal

and vertical, but the lane width and posted speed are the main two. Usually
interstates have twelve feet lanes and secondary would have 10 feet and wouldn't require as long a taper. It's a rule of thumb and is accepted as an industry wide standard. I do a lot of forensic work on these also.

[Rabrrrrrr]

7. No, it actually makes sense and is much safer then letting assholes

drive 55 right up to the end of the merge area, and THEN try to swing in.

If people were intelligent and not dumbass fuckbags, we wouldn't have a problem in traffic with merging or anything.

If we had intelligent people, we could easily have two lanes merge into one with no one needing to slow down from 55 mph at all.

But we have mostly ignorant shitbags who don't understand math, physics, or how to solve a problem logically, and so we need some slow vehicles once in a while to force a more pleasurable and sane merging.

[Cygnusx2112]

12. I've done exactly the same thing...

And on roughly the same stretch of highway the OP is talking about (but I've done it in Wayne, where 202 merges from 3 to 2 lanes :) :hi: )

I get over into the lane people are zooming up, try to get the person next to me's attention and let them know what I'm doing.

He and I and everyone else is waiting in an orderly line. Why should these people zoom up in front of 50 (100?) other cars who are waiting?


But now I telecommute so :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cygnusx2112]

14. Interesting...

I always considered it more "Republican" to zoom in front of tons of other people who are patiently waiting in line...

But hey, I guess you can look at it your way too.

[datasuspect]

15. they could drive in the shoulder?

oh, that's right, the same shoulder the assholes are zipping down at 80 mph to beat out other traffic.

you said: "There is never a bottleneck at the merge point because people are polite and let the other lane in."

that sounds like a magical fantasy land, i wish i lived there.

[Cygnusx2112]

16. This is exactly the point here and it bear repeating

If people were intelligent and not dumbass fuckbags, we wouldn't have a problem in traffic with merging or anything.

If we had intelligent people, we could easily have two lanes merge into one with no one needing to slow down from 55 mph at all.

But we have mostly ignorant shitbags who don't understand math, physics, or how to solve a problem logically, and so we need some slow vehicles once in a while to force a more pleasurable and sane merging.

I've mentioned this to other people IRL before, but never so eloquently.

[datasuspect]

17. i agree wholeheartedly

there is a tremendous lack of courtesy on the roads.

[hedgehog]

18. Not to be boasting, but I just got back from a trip to Germany

We did a lot of driving on the vaunted Autobahn, and I'll take our interstates any day. We may have a few jerks, but it seems that no one over there has figured out how to take turns merging lanes at a construction zone. As a result, every work site means a half hour or more of excruciating stop and go traffic. It was the same thing in England.

[bbernardini]

23. So I got a message deleted, but the question remains...

What if there was an emergency, and somebody who needed to get through as quickly as possible was not able to do so because somebody is blocking an empty traffic lane?

[Rabrrrrrr]

24. So then tell me - if a lane wasn't blocked,

how would they get through any more quickly anyway? Magic?

And if there was an emergency, the emergency vehicle would have flashers on, thus forcing all motorists off to the side, anyway.

And if the vehicle with the emergency DOESN'T have flashers, all they will lose (at worst) is a minute or two getting to the merge point, at which point they are stuck in one lane of traffic anyway, and thus will still be forced to go the speed of whatever is in front of them.

I don't see how your hypothetical strawman has any weight in the argument.

[LostinVA]

27. It is scary

I didn't read your post first, and answered it almost exactly the same!!!

[bbernardini]

29. The merge point is at an exit. nt

[Rabrrrrrr]

31. And therefore....

:shrug:

[LostinVA]

26. Who the heck wouldn't move aside for an emergency vehicle?

You have to do it anyway, regardless of which lane you're in. If you're a "regular" driver, how is that any different than driving on a road with other cars? It isn't. Good try, though.

Not a legit question. STRAWMAN.

I suspect you're one of the drivers who feels like they have a right to get in front of two miles of drivers who correctly merged when told to. Nice. People who do that are selfish, arrogant, and breaking the law in many places. As well as obstructing traffic flow and helping to cause accidents AND waste fuel.

[LSK]

36. dont emergency vehicles have these things called sirens?

:shrug:

[LostinVA]

28. I am sooo tired of drivers who think they are the most important

being on the road. It is arrogant and selfish for drivers to think they have a right to cut in front of two miles of drivers at the merge. It also impedes traffic flow. It also wastes fuel. It also is illegal in many areas -- because in many areas, you are to merge ASAP as soon as you are told of an upcoming merge, unless a sign tells you you can use BOTH lanes.

Bah.

Excuses, excuses. People need to leave some driving safety and courtesy.

Kudos to those slow-moving vehicles.

[benEzra]

30. Because they got tired of morans passing all the people who merged

and then cutting in on them at the merge point.

What happens in that scenario is that the good drivers who merged over immediately, get to sit and wait for an hour while every moran from fifty miles back passes them in the lane that's being closed, thereby beating all the good drivers to the merge point, where they can then muscle their way in at the front of the line. The guy blocking traffic in the OP is keeping the bad guys (non-mergers) from breaking into line ahead of the good drivers.

I've been there. Sitting in the right lane of the interstate for half an hour or more, creeping forward, while 500 cars pass me on the left and cut in line a quarter mile ahead, thereby making me wait. Very frustrating.

Now, I have to say that the left-lane blockers that bother ME are the ones who hog the left lane on roads that AREN'T merging, because they think the left lane is for Important People, or Rich People, or People Who Drive SUV's, or People Who Drive Exactly the Speed Limit, or People Who Just Like to Drive on the Left Side of the Road. The left lane is for passing, people...if you aren't passing, UN-ASS THE PASSING LANE!!!!
:rant:

(Unless the lane is being closed for construction, in which case you need to un-ass the left lane regardless.)

[Rabrrrrrr]

32. "un-ass" -

:rofl:

That's one of my major annoyances, the assholes who won't leave the left lane. The ones who are actually passing are okay, but the ones who just sit in the left lane, forcing people to pass them on the right...

I hang behind them and flash my lights at them until they move.

And then the assfucking roadfilth who pass in the left lane, but do it at 0.1 mph faster than the car they're passing, even if it takes ten minutes.

Or the assfucking roadfilth who are passing a number of cars, but between each pair of cars is plenty room for the passing person to pull the goddamn fuck over and let the 10 cars behind them, which obviously want to go faster (otherwise they wouldn't be right behind the passing car), pass.

I strive always, whenever I get a car right behind me, to pull over, even if I'm in the passing lane - whenever I can. Sometimes, natch, traffic is just too damn dense to do so; and sometimes it's because I have a car right in front of me. But whenever I can, I go for the path of COMMON FUCKING COURTESY, and pull over and let people pass.

[bbernardini]

33. Actually, there's evidence to the contrary.

The idea of using both lanes up to the merge point ("Late Merge") was developed in Pennsylvania, and tested with positive results in Texas. Some more info here:

http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/wz/workshops/accessible/Fontaine_ppt.htm

And here:

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=1185802 (note the "and truck drivers" part)

And here:

http://www.virginiadot.org/VTRC/main/online_reports/pdf/05-r6.pdf

But hey, these are only experts. I'm just a guy who apparently drives an SUV and cares about nobody about himself.

[benEzra]

34. That works, but it doesn't sound like your scenario in the OP

was set up and signed that way (with signs telling you NOT to merge until instructed to, and then a sign telling you Merge Here and Take Turns).

As I mentioned earlier, I've been in the scenario described in the OP WITHOUT people policing the left lane, in a scenario where the signs tell you to merge now, and if you do then 500 people pass you on the left, cut in line up ahead, and make you wait. In that scenario, the vehicle driving in the left lane at the same speed as those in the right lane makes it impossible for the unscrupulous to use the left lane to cut to the front of the line, and thereby ensures that BOTH lanes will be used until closer to the merge point (otherwise the left lane becomes the only travel lane).

The link you describe is one way to set up a merge zone to PREVENT people from cutting to the front of the line, making left lane blocking unnecessary. Which is a good thing all around.

Question - if no one was blocking the left lane in a merge zone set up for early merging, would you be one of those who would drive to the front of the line and cut in front of those who have been waiting 15 minutes longer than you?

[Rabrrrrrr]

37. Sure, that works so long as it is well-signed and people know

what they're doing.

But if it is NOT signed that way, you will get the jagoffs who will zip up to the merge point at high speed, slam on their brakes, merge (or force their way) into traffic most likely going a speed SLOWER than the cars around them forcing a traffic delay bubble (when the cars behind the merging jagoff have to slow down to accomdate him) that will sit on that merge spot until such time as there are no cars there.

I do agree, though, that the most efficient and perfect way for lane merging, that requires no braking and no dick behavior, is to have cars in both lanes up to the merge point and have them take turns in the merging, which they can do at high speeds if both lanes of traffic are smart enough to leave a big enough space between cars that the two lanes can come together like a zipper.

But that's pretty fucking close to impossible to achieve, because it depends on no one being a self-centered asshole, a clueless asshole, or a jagoff asshole.

Here is an engineer whose stuff I came across years ago, who taught me much about traffic and anti-traffic, waves , and other things that happen in traffic. This is his experiments and treastise on merging: notice the two graphics, one on the left and one of the right: the left is jagoff behavior, the right is what happens when you have utopian non-jagoff drivers.

http://amasci.com/amateur/traffic/seatraf.html

[struggle4progress]

41. Typically, if I leave merge space between my car and the car in front

of me, in such situations, the car behind me will throw a hissy-fit (tailgating / horn / headlights), speed around me, and plug the gap.