Merging redux (onramp, lane reduction, junction)

So many drivers don't seem to understand how to merge properly... meaning
that either they are trying to aggressively cut in front of thru traffic, or
else thru traffic is trying to aggressively run merging traffic off the
road.

I've seen these problems daily during my commutes to and from work even when
they don't actually happen to me. This also seems to occur at any speed,
regardless of whether the traffic speed is single-digit speeds in
bumper-to-bumper traffic, or free-flowing at (or above) the posted speed
limits.

So, let's review--merging due to an onramp, lane reduction, or freeway
junction.

It's clear to me that when traffic is merging from the right or the left due
to a junction, onramp, or lane reduction...

The thru traffic car must--

Maintain their current speed as much as possible without sudden speedups or
slowdowns, while at the same time, if they cannot pass a merging car in
safety before the merge point ends, they must back off and allow the car to
merge in front.

(However inconvenient it may be, *someone* has to even allow
the sloth merger in at some point.)

The merging car must--

Maintain a constant acceleration as much as possible without sudden
acceleration surges or slowdowns, while at the same time, they must not
attempt to cut in front of thru traffic when the merge point ends if a
suitable gap exists to merge behind the thru traffic car.

(This means that the sloth merger should not be cutting in just as soon as
the solid line ends and becomes the dashed line if there is more room to use
the merge lane until it starts to force-join into the thru traffic lane.)

In both cases, for both the merging car and the thru traffic car--

If either car is forced to suddenly change lanes or suddenly bail out over
to the shoulder of the road, because the cars become almost parallel to each
other and would otherwise collide, then the blame is as follows:

* If the merging traffic car's rear bumper was ahead of the thru traffic
car at the point the merge lane lines ended, then the fault is with the thru
traffic car that tried to run the merger off the road. Since it could not
complete a pass in safety, it must back off.

* If the merging car's front bumper was behind the thru traffic car at the
point the merge lane lines ended, then the fault is with the merging car
that tried to cut in front of the thru traffic car. Since it could not
complete a pass in safety, it must back off.

And then--

There's the additional scenario of a car in the next lane over trying to cut
into the same gap that merging traffic is moving into, in that case, it is
perfectly clear that the fault goes 100% to the lane changer who merged into
the open gap that merging traffic was entering, since merging traffic
already has to deal with thru traffic.

Discuss...

On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 13:50:23 -0700, "Daniel W. Rouse Jr."
> wrote:

>It's clear to me that when traffic is merging from the right or the left due
>to a junction, onramp, or lane reduction...
>
>The thru traffic car must--
>
>Maintain their current speed as much as possible without sudden speedups or
>slowdowns, while at the same time, if they cannot pass a merging car in
>safety before the merge point ends, they must back off and allow the car to
>merge in front.

LOL!!

Actually, judging from their behavior, most MFFYs believe that through
traffic MUST allow the MFFY to merge IN FRONT of them ALWAYS. Sadly,
the JLEDIs that are already on the freeway are perfectly happy to slow
down and accommodate the MFFY's wishes.

All of these incompetents have forgotten (or choose to ignore) the
actual law, which clearly states that the merging driver must yield
the right-of-way to any and all vehicles already on the freeway (or in
the lane that they wish to merge into). They act as if the fact that
their turn signal is some magic hand that will automatically clear out
a space for them to merge into.

Glossary (for the newbs):
MFFY == Me First, **** You
JLEDI == Just Let 'Em Do It

Scott en Aztlán wrote:

> All of these incompetents have forgotten (or choose to ignore) the
> actual law, which clearly states that the merging driver must yield
> the right-of-way to any and all vehicles already on the freeway (or in
> the lane that they wish to merge into).

How about the ****wads who, despite the ample space available, refuse to
move left to allow people to enter the highway? Whose fault is it if there
is a collision?

Daniel W. Rouse Jr. wrote:
> So many drivers don't seem to understand how to merge properly... meaning
> that either they are trying to aggressively cut in front of thru traffic, or
> else thru traffic is trying to aggressively run merging traffic off the
> road.
>
> I've seen these problems daily during my commutes to and from work even when
> they don't actually happen to me. This also seems to occur at any speed,
> regardless of whether the traffic speed is single-digit speeds in
> bumper-to-bumper traffic, or free-flowing at (or above) the posted speed
> limits.
>
> So, let's review--merging due to an onramp, lane reduction, or freeway
> junction.
>
> It's clear to me that when traffic is merging from the right or the left due
> to a junction, onramp, or lane reduction...
>
> The thru traffic car must--
>
> Maintain their current speed as much as possible without sudden speedups or
> slowdowns,

good so far

> while at the same time, if they cannot pass a merging car in
> safety before the merge point ends, they must back off and allow the car to
> merge in front.
>

No, they don't. The merging car must back off and take the next space
behind.

> (However inconvenient it may be, *someone* has to even allow
> the sloth merger in at some point.)
>

No, they don't. They can sit on the shoulder until the heat death of
the universe for all I care.

> The merging car must--
>
> Maintain a constant acceleration as much as possible without sudden
> acceleration surges or slowdowns, while at the same time, they must not
> attempt to cut in front of thru traffic when the merge point ends if a
> suitable gap exists to merge behind the thru traffic car.
>
> (This means that the sloth merger should not be cutting in just as soon as
> the solid line ends and becomes the dashed line if there is more room to use
> the merge lane until it starts to force-join into the thru traffic lane.)
>
> In both cases, for both the merging car and the thru traffic car--
>
> If either car is forced to suddenly change lanes or suddenly bail out over
> to the shoulder of the road, because the cars become almost parallel to each
> other and would otherwise collide, then the blame is as follows:
>

It's always the merging car's fault, unless the through car accelerated
or braked. Period. All this talk of the through car having to back
off is the exact mindset that causes traffic to slow down and
eventually grind to a halt.

nate

223rem wrote:
> Scott en Aztlán wrote:
>
> > All of these incompetents have forgotten (or choose to ignore) the
> > actual law, which clearly states that the merging driver must yield
> > the right-of-way to any and all vehicles already on the freeway (or in
> > the lane that they wish to merge into).
>
> How about the ****wads who, despite the ample space available, refuse to
> move left to allow people to enter the highway? Whose fault is it if there
> is a collision?

Still the fault of the merging vehicle. Through traffic has the right
of way and moving over a lane is an optional courtesy, not an
obligation.

nate

N8N wrote:
>
> It's always the merging car's fault, unless the through car accelerated
> or braked. Period. All this talk of the through car having to back
> off is the exact mindset that causes traffic to slow down and
> eventually grind to a halt.

What about this scenario:
Merger: rusted pickup or old pimped caddy
Through car: shiny new Lexus.

Who's gonna blink first?

N8N wrote:

> Still the fault of the merging vehicle.

Legally, yes.

> Through traffic has the right
> of way and moving over a lane is an optional courtesy, not an obligation.

True, but it is very common behavior. Only a real asshole would not do that.

223rem wrote:
> N8N wrote:
>
>> Still the fault of the merging vehicle.
>
>
> Legally, yes.
>
>> Through traffic has the right
>> of way and moving over a lane is an optional courtesy, not an
>> obligation.
>
>
> True, but it is very common behavior. Only a real asshole would not do
> that.

Not necessarily. I have deliberately not moved over before because it
would have caused me to hold up faster, passing traffic. Around here,
it's academic anyway because everyone seems to have given up on the
whole merging thing and very few people use the right lane at all.

nate

--
replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

"223rem" > wrote in message
news:qjA6f.507201$xm3.20191@attbi_s21...
> Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> How about the ****wads who, despite the ample space available, refuse to
> move left to allow people to enter the highway? Whose fault is it if
> there
> is a collision?

I was taught that, that was a courtesy one shouldn't expect.

On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 13:50:23 -0700, Daniel W. Rouse Jr.
> said the following in rec.autos.driving...



> Maintain their current speed as much as possible without sudden speedups or
> slowdowns, while at the same time, if they cannot pass a merging car in
> safety before the merge point ends, they must back off and allow the car to
> merge in front.
>

Cite, please?

--
"Take off that silly ass hat!"
--Chris Rock