Merging lanes - hyperthetic question

almillar

I know what you mean neilmcl and I couldn't think of how to word it well. I guess the same principle applies anyway, the driver behind shouldn't have sped up, whether it was an overtake or a merge.
During a normal dual carraigeway overtake, there's not as much pressure to pull in, whereas during a merge, where all cars MUST come together at one point, co-operation is needed.

anotherbaldrick

almillar wrote: »

I know what you mean neilmcl and I couldn't think of how to word it well. I guess the same principle applies anyway, the driver behind shouldn't have sped up, whether it was an overtake or a merge.
During a normal dual carraigeway overtake, there's not as much pressure to pull in, whereas during a merge, where all cars MUST come together at one point, co-operation is needed.

Always assume when coming into close proximity with another vehicle that the other driver may be a psychotic maniac, they are out there somewhere and it might be your day to get to know one.

prowla

almillar wrote: »

The OP wasn't performing an overtake - we're talking about a merge here - two lanes into one. If he's travelling faster than the traffic on the inside lane on the dual carraigeway, he has every right to be there. So he's not completing an overtake, he's merging. As the car in front, he merges first, but according to his story, the 'lady' behind didn't like this.
No, he shouldn't have to pull into the other lane, and I also don't like the idea of straddling the lanes as defensive driving. If the 'lady' behind saw the straddling, I bet she would be antagonised by it, the opposite effect from what you want. You should merge at the merge point. Doing anything else is just changing lane. If you really thought you were going to be hit, floor the throttle and stay out as wide as you can for as long as you can, the driver behind has to yield some time...

I wasn't talking about straddling the lane for half a mile up the road; I simple meant a short distance to the point where the lanes merged.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

reminds me of the road in pontypridd heading toward hopkinstown.


its a 30MPH merge in turn road arrows point both lanes to merge into one the RH land then ENDS to a big island.


many in the left lane on this road will simply close the gap to the car ahead and not let anyone in the RH lane merge at all.


accidents on this stretch is mostly down to pure ignorance and or malice of not allowing a the RHS to merge in because someone in the RH lane has overtaken the que of merging traffic.


in a accident case like this it would almost likely be a case of 50/50 because both drivers are responsible for merging together in a safe and controlled manor, unless you can prove with witnesses or police attendance and the person got a ticket for something that they did wrong that led to that accident.


I always make sure I leave ample gap infront of me for people to merge in like a zip, if someone over take in the left lane cuts in that's fine its a one way system and you can over take on both sides if the person behind want to hang on my bumper and stop anyone merging in and the car in either lane cuts in he hits me its his/her problem.


I understand the frustration with merge in turn layouts, one thing in peoples mind is I want to be ahead and get to the single lane first, if that means cutting in the que from the left or right or blocking a car in either lane from getting there first then albeit but that's stupidity behavior and can result in both insurers coming to the conclusion that blame lies on both parties for not merging safely and a controlled way.

londonTiger

Seen it plenty of times. You indicate to change lanes. Driver does not speed up or slow down and just maintains speed. Car is a bit too close so you decide to let it pass to slip in behind. So you slow down.

Then the driver of the vehicle looks at you like you're an idiot for not cutting in.

almillar

prowla - I know, I meant even for a short distance.
londonTiger - no indicating required for a merge. Indeed, indicating looks like you're asking for something you shouldn't have to ask for.

WTFH

almillar wrote: »

londonTiger - no indicating required for a merge. Indeed, indicating looks like you're asking for something you shouldn't have to ask for.

Is that not only where two lanes merge together. If you have an outside lane ending, then you should indicate your intention of pulling in.

Even if it is not required, that does not mean that it isn't good practice - it advises other vehicles of your intention to move out of your lane into the other - whether those cars are in your lane, or in another.

almillar

WTFH - every comment I made is based on your first scenario - which I call a merge. This is what I assumed from OP's description. I would call your other scenario a lane closing or ending. Difference being when you have to cross lines on the road.
I do understand that sometimes it looks like one land has priority over the other (usually the inside lane, with the outside lane drivers having to change their course, and maybe a curved arrow painted on the road), but even in this situation, drivers must give way to EACH OTHER, not outside lane to inside, or vice versa.
And I think that the good practice that you mention above, to indicate, is actually bad practice, and may be why OP had a problem with the woman behind him - she may have been annoyed because he went into HER lane, possibly without indicating.
When what I'm saying is, it's not her lane, her lane has ended, and she has to co-operate with other drivers to enter a new, merged lane. OP's intentions are perfectly clear without indicating, he's going to continue to drive along the road, just ahead of the woman. He'll merge, then she'll merge. It's perhaps the attitude that the outside lane driver has to ask permission to get in (and in general that they're bunking) that causes aggro that he experience, IMO.

WTFH

Yes, if it's a case of both lanes ending and both are merging together, I agree, indicating would not help. If, as you say, there is a line to be crossed, then you should indicate.

But we still haven't heard back from the OP as to why he didn't pull in after he had passed the other driver - he said he was ahead for some time.

Zero_Gravitas

When I was learning to drive, the rule was that you should give way to traffic merging from the right. This might be in a one-way system, for example, where you might join the system in the RH lane, but need to exit from the left-hand lane. This has always seemed sensible and consistent to me


However, I can't find a mention of this in the current version of the Highway Code - and in any case, defensive driving takes precedence (i.e. there's no point in crashing and being right, if you can not crash at all...)


Best Regards,


ZG.