ADUK Archive

I was in a queue on the motorway this morning (M4 Easbound between J19 and J18). Signs showing lane 3 closed ahead, which was due to a collision. I do what I consider to be the sensible thing and stay in lane 3 being prepared to zip-merge at the pinch point. So far, all is well and I crawl along with the traffic.

Then some Yorkie-munching twit (spelt with an a) in a lorry decides it would be a good idea to cut in front of me and straddle lanes 2 and 3 in an attempt to block the traffic in lane three. As there was still room to pass, and taking a gamble that crushing me into the central barrier would result in him having a lot of explaining to do, I gave a headlight flash to alert him of my presence and passed him followed by the car behind me (the hand signal he gave me wasn't one I recognised from the Highway Code, so I ignored it ). He then moved further across, blocking lane 3 completely so no one else could follow our lead.

When I got to the pinch point, the traffic was zip-merging without a problem - no doubt aided by the watchful eye of Her Majesty's finest - and we were all on our way. All the lorry was doing was making the problem worse as the obstruction was now about half a mile long instead of a few hundred yards.

It's not even as if this is a one off as it seems to happen all the time in these situations. Do they all meet up at the transport café, eating fried cholesterol and drinking mugs of grease, discussing new ways to replace the Highway Code with their own rules?

Professionals?

Good truckers now frown on this type of action and the police will often prosecute those doing it

SARP = self appointed road police - is what those doing it are termed as

Well...it's a tricky one in my view. Sure the HWC mentions zip-merging and using the available road space and it would be fine if everyone knew the advice and did it but...they don't. It's often seen as 'rude' and possibly 'aggressive' not to queue in lane 2 awaiting your chance to get past the obstruction in an orderly, British fashion.

I don't buy the argument that zip-merging at the point of the pinch means the traffic flows better...it does from your perspective (being in lane 3) when overtake loads of vehicles queuing in lane 1 and 2 but ultimately the same number of vehicles pass through whichever method you choose. Granted the queue in lane 1 & 2 would be longer but they would move faster. The only advantage I can see is if the queue is close to a junction...keeping it short may mean traffic can leave quicker.

They should use the Variable Message Signs (VMS) when lanes are closed to encourage zip-merging.

martine wrote:
I don't buy the argument that zip-merging at the point of the pinch means the traffic flows better..

The advantage is that it significantly reduces the length of the queue (by up to 1/2) . Why does this matter? Well sometimes it does not, but as you hint, if a queue becomes long enough it can back up across junctions or spill onto other routes potentially inconveniencing road users who do not even plan to pass through the pinch point.

On balance it is probably not useful for short queues, but with longer queues the knock on effects can be quite extensive and not always apparent to people joining the queues.

Both sides of the discussion have merit.
I prefer the stoic British approach which is to take your position and queue, unless it'll maroon me or others on a roundabout/junction/blind bend/etc.
In a past life and as a less mature driver I would become irrationally outraged by 'selfish oafs taking advantage' of we orderly, patient types. Much to my chagrin today, I may even have taken a similar position to the truck driver above on the odd occasion.

They should do what happens on the continent, close both lanes and force the zip in the centre of the carriageway then neither lane has priority over the other!

When I learn my lane is closed or blocked ahead then I will merge as soon as it is safe to do so. Technically you are right that you could wait until the actual blockage and merge in turn there, and this is sanctioned in the Highway Code, but it does wind people up a treat. Even at locations where signs encourage people to 'Merge In Turn', people still drive inches from the car in front and refuse to yield.

I'm all the for easy life and whatever causes less stress all round. I will happy queue with majority (although I won't stop others from merging in front of me if they decide to exercise their right either).

I do like the idea of merging both lanes into the centre of the carriageway though. I have often wondered why that was never done, and wasn't aware it was practised on the continent.

No problem with using all available lanes or with zip merging as long as the manner in which it is done shows a certain level of caution in case those queueing decide to change lanes and with a level of humility for those who choose to cause massive and unnecessary queues. This is because anyone who decides to queue when they don't need to, requires a level of cautious avoidance Incase they suddenly reach another bizarre conclusion and do something rash.

As for the lorry driver, full details should be passed to relevant authorities and whoever he/she works for.

In order to support reasonable behaviour, signs stating that zip merging at the merge point is perfectly okay would help.

Simple rules -
merge early if traffic free flowing
use all available space and merge near pinch point if traffic is slow moving

Kimosabe wrote:In order to support reasonable behaviour, signs stating that zip merging at the merge point is perfectly okay would help.

Makes little or no difference from what I have seen.

Merge at the pinch point. Isn't this what AD's call "progress"? Exactly the same as choosing the least queued applicable lane at a set of traffic lights.

Slink_Pink wrote:Exactly the same as choosing the least queued applicable lane at a set of traffic lights.

But what is it with people who do that, then refuse to accelerate promptly away once they go green and instead trundle off staying absolutely in line with traffic in the other lanes causing problems when the merge happens 300m later /thinking of Bristol ring road/Hambrook lights in particular.

jont wrote:But what is it with people who do that, then refuse to accelerate promptly away once they go green and instead trundle off staying absolutely in line with traffic in the other lanes causing problems when the merge happens 300m later /thinking of Bristol ring road/Hambrook lights in particular.

For those that don't know Bristol intimately...here

Could be worse pinch points... Mansfield to be precise, sometimes the right hand lane merges into the left one, sometimes the other way round, bloody awful place.

Dom

ROG wrote:Simple rules -
merge early if traffic free flowing
use all available space and merge near pinch point if traffic is slow moving

I agree. If the traffic is light enough to be below the capacity of the motorway with one fewer lane, then it doesn't really matter how long the obstruction is.

It also depends on the obstruction. if it's an RTA, then the pinch point will almost certainly be "supervised" and drivers will be more likely to behave themselves.