Cheeky Driver's or Not?!

alastairq

Exactly, confrontational driving is to be avoided and as I tried to point out to Strider whilst you have to merge at some point he could have timed it more correctly. Anyway enough from me, signing out of this one

he was 'correct' in a sense.....in that, there was nothing inherently 'wrong' with what was done....


correct is perhaps not the right word...and I'm damned if I can think of a more appropriate one...

cyclonebri1

alastairq wrote: »

he was 'correct' in a sense.....in that, there was nothing inherently 'wrong' with what was done....


correct is perhaps not the right word...and I'm damned if I can think of a more appropriate one...

Cheeky??,:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

alastairq

:ppffffffffft!

Lum

alastairq wrote: »

correct is perhaps not the right word...and I'm damned if I can think of a more appropriate one...

I think the word you want is "valid"?

almillar

skiddlydiddly - can't see money being spent on an ad campaign to teach the finder points of driving to people who have a driving licence and are already meant to know. The campaign starts here...

cyclonebri - yes, if the outside lane is EMPTY then it does look like you're cheating. But if EVERYONE followed the system, not just Strider and I, then BOTH QUEUES WOULD BE THE SAME LENGTH AND NO-ONE WOULD BE CHEATING! As Strider says, the people on the inside are wrong for creating a queue twice the length, it should be twice the width. Leaving it to the last minute isn't relevant to queuing, it's relevant to free flowing traffic.
Who would come of worst in a claim from an accident from a 'late merge' - whoever is behind - if there's damage to the sides of the cars it would go towards the person from the right. You do understand that it's '2 lanes into 1' and not 'that other lane into yours' don't you?
Confrontational driving - that would be driving on the inside lane with no braking distance in my book...
Please remember that the OP asked about a different question and we are now talking about MERGING which is different. It's not a matter of opinion cyclonebri - it's a matter of fact and driving standards, you, and so may others on the roads, are driving up to merging queues in the wrong way, and with the wrong attitude. How's this - if you can't beat us, join us?!

cyclonebri1

almillar wrote: »

skiddlydiddly - can't see money being spent on an ad campaign to teach the finder points of driving to people who have a driving licence and are already meant to know. The campaign starts here...

cyclonebri - yes, if the outside lane is EMPTY then it does look like you're cheating. But if EVERYONE followed the system, not just Strider and I, then BOTH QUEUES WOULD BE THE SAME LENGTH AND NO-ONE WOULD BE CHEATING! As Strider says, the people on the inside are wrong for creating a queue twice the length, it should be twice the width. Leaving it to the last minute isn't relevant to queuing, it's relevant to free flowing traffic.
Who would come of worst in a claim from an accident from a 'late merge' - whoever is behind - if there's damage to the sides of the cars it would go towards the person from the right. You do understand that it's '2 lanes into 1' and not 'that other lane into yours' don't you?
!

Sorry, but thats absolutely not the case.
Before these holdups there is always a clear sign showing which lane or lanes is about to end.
It's the driver in the blocked lane who has the responsibility to merge or blend in to a clear lane carefully and not at the last moment either.

Another perspective, and in reply to the 1st bit I highlighted, considering the people who are queueing on the left;
Regardless of the length of queue, only the same number of cars per minute/hour etc can pass the obstruction. Folks merging or bullying their way in are trying to cheat the system as it puts the folks who are queeing orderly later in the queue and that's what annoys people.
They are warned early enough, ie, lane blocked 400 yds, 200 yds 1...If there are wide gaps fine but once the traffic has bunched that's not merging, it's barging in and it is "cheeky" ;)
We've all done it by mistake and are very gratefull when someones lets you in, you only have to view Striders commets in his video to see even he realises this.:A

Strider590

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Regardless of the lentgth of queue, only the same number of cars per minute/hour etc can pass the obstruction.

Is true, but if the stretch of road is 1.5 miles long, with a major traffic island at one end.... Then two queue's 1 mile long is better than a 2 mile queue blocking two or more major roads, leading then to blockages across the entire county just because people don't know how to drive properly.
I see this every single single day in my local town centre, the entire ring road becomes blocked and the town centre crawls to a halt because of people sitting single file on a dual carriageway ring road. They shouldn't block traffic islands, but we all know that sometimes you've no choice if you want to move in the next 30 minutes.

Lum

There's a merge on the Leeds "Loop" road which always amuses me. It goes down to one lane for about 50 yards because of a narrow bridge or something.

Every time I've been there, people just ignore it and carefully form two queues in a single lane so as not to screw up the traffic flow. Only large vehicles need to take up the wdith of the lane by themselves.

Works really well, nice to see a bit of common sense applied. Nobody gets to "cheat" by "overtaking" in this section either.

almillar

As above, you're doubling the LENGTH of the queue and making it more likely it'll spill onto a junction behind.
It seems you've also forgotten the zipper system I was banging on about at the start. Queue in both lanes, join the shortest one (nobody can 'fly' past you), and at the merge point one from the left and one from the right merges. This is the whole point, because everyone knows where they stand, there are fewer jumps on the brakes and misunderstandings, and less attitude. It's simply impossible to get significantly ahead of anyone. Stop picking the bits out of the system that don't work because people like you want to tut at people who are actually doing the right thing.
Again, showing you which lane is closing only applies to free flowing traffic. If I'm driving at 70mph in the outside lane (obviously overtaking someone!) then I need to know well in advance to change. In a queue, it doesn't matter!

cyclonebri1

almillar wrote: »

As above, you're doubling the LENGTH of the queue and making it more likely it'll spill onto a junction behind.
It seems you've also forgotten the zipper system I was banging on about at the start. Queue in both lanes, join the shortest one (nobody can 'fly' past you), and at the merge point one from the left and one from the right merges. This is the whole point, because everyone knows where they stand, there are fewer jumps on the brakes and misunderstandings, and less attitude. It's simply impossible to get significantly ahead of anyone. Stop picking the bits out of the system that don't work because people like you want to tut at people who are actually doing the right thing.
Again, showing you which lane is closing only applies to free flowing traffic. If I'm driving at 70mph in the outside lane (obviously overtaking someone!) then I need to know well in advance to change. In a queue, it doesn't matter!

Highway code rule 134

"You should follow the road signs and get in lane as directed",
I wonder if that's why all the traffic was on the left??


Then we agree to disagree. I haven't forgotten the Zip, but this is Britain, not the USA and not Germany, it is not law here. Strider did not Zip, he passed the slow moving queued traffic after the dual carriageway had ended against the above HC rule.