USE BOTH LANES TO MERGE POINT

[Laffo IBA#34115]

That's what the sign said twenty miles shy of Wheeling, WV. I was travelling to Indiana via I-70W and making good time until someone in the WVDOT decided to interrupt my ordinarily pleasant trip by scheduling some repaving.

 

After coming to a stop behind a tractor trailer my sight distance was limited by a hill and a left hand curve so I could not see in front of the truck. Upon rounding the curve I saw at least a mile of clear right lane ahead of the truck so I took to the shoulder and filled in the gap to the back of the next truck. I passed a bright orange sign that read "USE BOTH LANES TO MERGE POINT" and I wondered why nobody else was obeying this sign but me. Up hill again and a curve to the right I saw yet another gap of at least a half mile ahead of that truck so I took to the shoulder again and continued on my way. This opening involved an exit toward the end of the free right lane. Checking the rear-view I noticed several other cars follow my lead of bypassing the self-appointed lane control constables (typically truckers) and while approaching the exit (I had not decided whether I was exiting or not but was prepared to) and staying to the right a small car came out of the left lane intending to block the cars coming up on the right. His movement was so abrupt and erratic the only move I could make was to accelerate and pass him on the left. My other option was to be squeezed to the guard rail and that was only dependent on how serious this guy was going to be to stop cars from getting ahead of him. Glancing back I saw the line of cars exit while I continued to the merge point. Kamikaze car went back to his spot in the left lane. I continued on to merge safely and finish my ride without any other incidents.

 

OK, now I ask why do truck drivers do this? I know that some members of this board drive truck. It seems to me that picking a merge point and having traffic zipper together makes more sense than corralling all cars to the open lane early.

 

I have experienced this often before and the blocker is always a trucker. Passing on the right shoulder seems to be acceptable to them for motorcycles but I have seen them cut cars off attempting to pass on the shoulder.

 

I'll add that I think Kamikaze car was an oddity in the grand scheme and I hope he was embarrassed for trying to cut off several cars that had actually exited. I would have out of courtesy except that I was forced back into active traffic.

 

I feel I made the right moves here although I acknowledge it is unlawful to ride on the shoulder to pass a vehicle. It is also unlawful to lane-split in WV. What could have been a 1 hour delay was traversed inside of 10 minutes.

 

Anybody? Truckers?

[jpsmith]

There has been a few rough spots in this section of road for a couple years, I think that they are rebuilding a some bridges. We make that trip from Southern Maryland to Ohio every 6 weeks to check in on my Mom. Just about the time the PA turpike got finished.... move on down the road to I-70. I like I-68 and I-79 in the fall. Trucks... Don't get me started on 80,000lb .... hard headed ....I own the road because that's where I make my livin'... Physics , what's that? Doesn't apply to trucks! .. Ok, You got me started......JP

[AnRSguy]

While I understznd your frustration and am not a trucker, look at how the traffic flows.

 

If a single car moves to the head of the line, and then cuts in, the guy he cuts in front of has to slow slightly. This may seem trivial but multiply it by a number of cars and soon someone will have to come to a complete stop. This wreaks havoc on the cars farther back and leads to massive traffic jams. It's called Immaculate Congestion, you creep along and then poof you're moving again with no apparent reason for the slow down.

 

I think probably truckers have figured this out and feel that if everyone would just get in line when they approach the end of the line, kind of like you do at the movies or the grocery store, the line would move much better.

 

I saw a piece on TV once about this and it was actually quite fascinating.

 

The sign to use both lanes though is a bit puzzling.

[NEOHMark]

FWIW - I've found that the lane that 'disappears' usually tends to travel the quickest toward the merge point. I have NO idea why or how this happens, but invariably, it seems that if 'X' lane is 'closed ahead', then 'X' lane is the one that moves along better than the other lane(s).

[BUSTED]

If every driver would, as soon as possible, merge into the lane not closed, as signs warn ahead, traffic should never stop in these situations. The stop and go begins when drivers take it upon themselves to move to the front of the line. At that point their only recourse is to "cut in" on the lane with the right of way. That's how stopped traffic and back-ups begin. I've been in huge highway parking lots where the truckers are the only ones that helped the congested traffic start moving again.

[ShovelStrokeEd]

Busted,

You couldn't be more wrong.

 

The best way to handle a merge like this is for both lanes to continue right up to the merge point and then practice alternate merge. By so doing, the number of merges required is much less and traffic will most easily procede through the bottleneck. It breaks down when folks attempt to merge at random points in the process, in particular if there is much backup at the merge point due to volume.

 

As to the self appointed merge meisters, they are just displaying typical kindergarden behaviour. "It's not fair, he got ahead of me."

 

The truckers have another motive for the most part. If you have never driven a heavy truck, you might not understand but, the deal here is to be able to keep moving at a relativly low speed, maintaining a large gap in front so that there is a flow to their movement rather than stop and go. They really do have the right idea. That being to maintain a bit of momentum. Look at it this way, say two lanes can safely handle the traffic volume at 60 mph, the same volume of traffic going in one lane can probably only handle about 35 mph. Now, if everyone began to slow to 35, well before the bottleneck, traffic could procede at a fairly brisk pace. Instead, what happens is everyone contiinues at 60 till the merge, slams on their brakes and then engages in a merge battle, greatly slowing the process. The early mergers contribute to the slow down as well forcing the high volume into one lane far sooner than is necessary.

[Mike]

As to the self appointed merge meisters, they are just displaying typical kindergarden behaviour. "It's not fair, he got ahead of me."

 

That's the way I've always seen it--it's not a carefully-reasoned effort to serve the motoring public; it's simply an expression of their desire to prevent anyone else from making better time than them. I think the term of art is "asshats."

[Calvin (no socks)]

I usually obey the rules...stay in my lane and let all the other guys go flying by to the front in the blocked lane...

 

This one time in Tennessee on I-40 during El Paseo I did pass the blocker truck and kept 1/4 mile ahead of him. I had a free pass... and never saw another car until 10 miles later. I could have burned up the road and bumped into the traffic ahead again...it was too hot to play that game...

[BUSTED]

Your opinion, . The lane that isn't closed has "right of way" over any merging traffic. 2 lanes of traffic at a loss of lane point, known by some here as merge point, will have conflict and be out of necessary pavement. You will not convince many to alternate at this point. Now, you have started backups and stoppages. The states that I like are the ones with signs reading, "MERGE NOW" as opposed to the moron,(drive to merge point), that wants 2 lanes to drive up to a point of no mas. As far as driving heavy trucks, I put 175,000 on my GMC General in 18 months. Vehicles merged at earliest opportunity is the best way to maintain moving traffic.

[Paul Mihalka]

In Europe I have seen official signs recommending the "zipper" method. It takes some driving discipline and courtesy. In each of the two lanes drivers leave enough space to the guy in front for one of the other lane to merge in. It doesn't stop, it moves smoothly, like a zipper. This system avoids that some guys shoot up in the empty lane and take advantage of others who were waiting a longer time.

[Gregori]

In order to merge without problems, everyone needs to SPEED UP, not slow down.

 

If three lanes of traffic are moving along fine at 60 MPH and one lane goes away, if everyone would simply speed up to about 90 at the merge, they'd all fit nicely...

 

At least - that's the way that water flow works. So it seems that water molecules are far smarter than the average driver...

 

G

[Davis]

Vehicles merged at earliest opportunity is the best way to maintain moving traffic.

 

If that is truly the case, we wouldn't need two lane roads anywhere. There is a lane closure for about 500 ft 60 miles ahead, which is quicker: everybody move to the non-closed lane and drive 60 miles behind the slowest vehicle or drive 59.9 miles at a normal pace and seamlessly zipper together at the barrier and continue on?

 

The problem is 98% of the drivers have no concept of what merge really means and instead of driving to the end, adjusting their speed and slipping into the gaps of the open lane, they drive up to the merge point and stop, waiting for somebody to slow to a crawl so they can accelerate into the open lane. This is then compounded by the fact that not everybody drives up to the end to stop, some of the morons stop a half mile from the merge and wait for somebody to stop and let them in, some stop a mile from the merge point, and some stop at the first lane closed ahead sign

[MysticRed]

Trucker here. What's irritating is that we leave a gap in front of us so we DON'T have to change speeds and gears all the time and guess where the cars passing pull in? After a while it seems like you're going backwards. Now I've never encountered the signage that tell you to "use both lanes to merge point." It'll just say, "Left lane closed ahead." When I see a sign like that, I get in the right ASAP cause you know the cars aren't going to let me in after passing them all! Not without some force, anyway!

[ShovelStrokeEd]

Mystic,

You and Paul have it right. If drivers in the open lane would maintain speed and only increase spacing a bit, drivers in the closed lane would be free to drive up to the merge point and then smoothly and seamlessly blend in with the flow. It really only requires a small increase in spacing, about 2 cars worth, to make this work.

 

Instead, what we get is people tying up the merge by driving bumper to bumper in the open lane forcing those in the closed lane who also don't have a clue as to the concept to stop at odd points along the way and attempt to merge in.

 

I try to set an example by just letting whoever is next in line to move ahead of me and kinda demanding that the guy behind me in the opposite lane let me in as well.

 

People never seem to get the idea that a heavy truck is only out to maintain some semblence of momentum and act as if the truck is doing the blocking when the driver sees that the real average speed of the traffic is like 10 mph and crawls along at that speed just so he won't have to come to a full stop at any point. They see it as him blocking rather than him (a) trying to maintain a safe stopping distance, (b) trying to avoid 12 shifts in the next 1/4 mile.

 

It really is just another example of how poor the drive training is in this country.

[Mike]

It really is just another example of how poor the drive training is in this country.

 

I was just about to make that observation, before I got to your final sentence. I have to say that the quality of driving in Europe seems to have slipped quite a bit in recent years, but this is one of those fundamental concepts that should be--and isn't--addressed in what passes for driver training in the U.S.

[nrp]

It is not well recognized but the maximum capacity (vehicles per hour per lane) of a freeway is at about 40 mph. Faster than that and drivers need disproportionately more space for comfort to the point of reducing capacity. Higher speeds are not the answer, because Grandma just isn't going to follow the vehicle in front of her as close - and you don't want her to if that's you.

 

That's also why as a freeway becomes congested, it will gradually slow to about 40 mph and then suddenly come to a grinding halt, seemingly for no reason. Poor sight lines (how far you can see ahead) will exacerbate these velocity jumps.

 

A closed lane is a freeway choke point, thru which you want to pass as many vehicles per hour as possible. The 2-lanes to-the-choke-point concept introduces turbulence in the flow process at a point of maximum driver taskload, This reduces capacity, and is asking for an accident, which will really shut the whole works down.

 

Yes it does give the aggressive driver a way to beat the system, but at what cost?

 

Assuming no last minute merging or other turbulence in the process, a strict 40 mph speed for the thru-lane will get the maximum number of vehicles per minute thru the choke point.

[Vrex]

An interesting perennial question, with the two opposing viewpoints seemingly more a matter of personal philosophy than anything else.

 

With that said, I'm firmly in the camp of those who think it's fine to use all the lanes available as long as they are available -- that's what they are there for, after all. Leaving an open lane unused ultimately just makes the traffic jam longer than it needs to be.

 

I do appreciate the explanation of why truckers act the way they do in those situations. I'm not sure that's always the full explanation, but it does make a fair amount of sense.

 

Lee in Ky

[Gregori]

It is not well recognized but the maximum capacity (vehicles per hour per lane) of a freeway is at about 40 mph. Faster than that and drivers need disproportionately more space for comfort to the point of reducing capacity. (...)

 

You've clearly never driven in California.

 

Outside of rush-hour, traffic flow averages 80-90 MPH on the freeway, with maybe a car-and-a-half length between. Perhaps in Minnesota they use a 2-second following distance (or more at higher speed) but here, if you leave more than a 1-second gap, someone else will happily fill it for you. And the faster traffic moves, the smaller the 'time' gap, as the physical distances stay very much the same.

 

I seem to recall it being much this way in the northeast (NY/CT/MA) as well...

 

I'm not sayin' it's right, I'm not sayin' it's wrong.

I'm just sayin' that it IS.

 

G

[AnRSguy]

Another thing that has not been mentioned is that fact tht when people get past the choke point, they should accelerate briskly, I always get behind the guy or lady that wants to save some gas be accelerating from 30 to 60 in about two minutes, this also slows the process dramatically.

 

The problem with the zipper method is that when someone comes flying up "the soon to not exist lane", hits the brakes and cuts in, the person that got cut in front of generally will hit the brakes too and that will cause the "ripple effect" and about 1/4 to 1/2 mile back, traffic will stop.

 

I would love for a traffic engineer to chime in on this as traffic flow and management has become a science, especially with the way we Americans drive.

[ShovelStrokeEd]

Flow is flow, doesn't matter if it is cars on a highway or water in a pipe. The flow will be most efficient and create the least turbulence if the merge is smooth.

 

The key to a smooth merge is really in the hands of the drivers in the unblocked lane, not the blocked lane. In a perfect world, the drivers in the unblocked lane should increase spacing while maintaining as much speed as possible, thus allowing the drivers in the blocked lane room to smoothly merge without having to slow overmuch to find an opportunity.

 

Good luck with that one though. As speeds drop, drivers bunch up even more and on a two into one merge, you are limited by the slowest driver in the choked portion of the road. Now add rubberneckers, timid drivers (often the lanes are narrower), a big truck trying to get back up to speed, the fact that all too many drivers feel there is some sort of contest to get to the other side first and you have our typical mess.