As so many members and other drivers don’t know how to do it and claim that those using the road correctly are “barging in”, here is how it should be done, with official word from the IAM and also diagrams.
IAM:
IAM Chief Examiner Peter Rodger said: "Driver etiquette means that ‘zip merging’ can be frowned upon by drivers in long queues of traffic, but if all available lanes are used, right up to the bottleneck, it is perfectly acceptable for vehicles from each lane to take it in turns to merge into the single lane. This reduces the length of road the queue stretches along and prevents blocked junctions.”
More bs from the lot who have’nt got a clue when it comes to using a gearbox properly or knowing how to avoid jams at lane closures.
You’re actually supposed to get in lane before the cones which is why we’ve got wicket lane closure signs.But the problem is that the idiots who set the distances seem to think that it’s more important for us to know that there’s roadworks or whatever a mile ahead but they only tell us which lanes are closed at 800 yds.
Which in practice means that even if we use zip merging it’s all done too late at too slow speeds when it should have been done much sooner,much further back,at much higher speed.
If the IAM were as ‘advanced’ as they’d like to think they are they’d be calling for wicket signs put out at 2 miles before the obstruction and anyone who has’nt merged long before the obstruction should face points on their licence for failing to obey traffic signs.
Carryfast:
More bs from the lot who have’nt got a clue when it comes to using a gearbox properly or knowing how to avoid jams at lane closures.
You’re actually supposed to get in lane before the cones which is why we’ve got wicket lane closure signs.But the problem is that the idiots who set the distances seem to think that it’s more important for us to know that there’s roadworks or whatever a mile ahead but they only tell us which lanes are closed at 800 yds.
Which in practice means that even if we use zip merging it’s all done too late at too slow speeds when it should have been done much sooner,much further back,at much higher speed.
If the IAM were as ‘advanced’ as they’d like to think they are they’d be calling for wicket signs put out at 2 miles before the obstruction and anyone who has’nt merged long before the obstruction should face points on their licence for failing to obey traffic signs.
Is the half here on drugs or something, you use the whole road till the last moment and if both lanes drive the same speed merging /zipping goes smoothy with the shortest hold-up
They do it on the continent already years and it works, for the simple reasons if you have 2 lanes of 5 mile of traffic, if you squeeze it in one lane you have 10 mile traffic, if you create a narrow bit in the road, you want to be on that bit a short as possible.
Butr for the same reasons as everybody hit the brakes here full stop if the Matrix says traffic jam at junction 31, …while they are only at junction 2, for that same stupid reason they want al to be in that lane as soon as the signs come up, if they told them 5 mile before which lane would close they would be in one lane 5 mile before.
If what you preach Curryfart would be right, than we need to make the Motorways single lanes, because in your theory would that speed up the traffic.
One tip, whatever you smoke, STOP IT, it’s not good for you
The motorway signs give guidance to merge long before you can even get sight of any cones in the distance. Is the IAM advocating ignoring these signs and only merging with the other traffic when you get right up to the cones?
ROG:
At fast flowing speeds then getting in the open lane early is the safest way
At slow speeds then using all free lanes to the cones is the safest way as it makes the queues shorter by utilising all available road space
Carryfast:
You’re actually supposed to get in lane before the cones
If you were supposed to merge earlier, they would have put the cones further back
I agree. Only today I’ve had two complete tools in trucks blocking lanes, despite merge in turn signs. One of them was 800 yards from e closed lane.
And yes Carryfast I think we all realise your supposed to get in lane before the cones, that’s a remarkably daft statement. After all 1 foot from the cones is before them.
Carryfast:
You’re actually supposed to get in lane before the cones
If you were supposed to merge earlier, they would have put the cones further back
You are both correct
At fast flowing speeds then getting in the open lane early is the safest way
At slow speeds then using all free lanes to the cones is the safest way as it makes the queues shorter by utilising all available road space
But the slow speeds and jams are actually caused by the latter idea.As we all know the outside lanes are for overtaking not for ‘utilising’ the space contained within them and in the case of those lanes being closed there’s no way that they can be used for overtaking if the things are shut and in the case of the inside lane/s being closed then lane/s 2 and/or 3 cease to be overtaking lanes either.
If we take the IAM’s idea to it’s logical conclusion we just start/cause a jam in the usual way because of the speed differential that builds up between the open lane/s ande the closed one which is caused by cars running up to the cones and having to go slower the closer they get until they get so close they have to slow to a crawl.At which point the traffic in the open lane/s also has to slow to a crawl to match the speed differentials for zip merging to keep working.
Which is why in most countries they put out no overtaking signs before lane closures sometimes followed by wicket signs sometimes not.But the key issue is to inform traffic early enough to allow space and time to merge into as many lanes as remain open before traffic in the closed lanes gets too close to the obstruction and in which case has to then slow down at an increasing rate relative to the open lane/s causing the start of the tailback.
caledoniandream:
Is the half here on drugs or something, you use the whole road till the last moment and if both lanes drive the same speed merging /zipping goes smoothy with the shortest hold-up
They do it on the continent already years and it works, for the simple reasons if you have 2 lanes of 5 mile of traffic, if you squeeze it in one lane you have 10 mile traffic, if you create a narrow bit in the road, you want to be on that bit a short as possible.
Butr for the same reasons as everybody hit the brakes here full stop if the Matrix says traffic jam at junction 31, …while they are only at junction 2, for that same stupid reason they want al to be in that lane as soon as the signs come up, if they told them 5 mile before which lane would close they would be in one lane 5 mile before.
If what you preach Curryfart would be right, than we need to make the Motorways single lanes, because in your theory would that speed up the traffic.
One tip, whatever you smoke, STOP IT, it’s not good for you
How the zb can traffic in a closed lane keep going at a faster,or the same speed,as traffic in an open lane until the last minute because if they did that they’ll run into the cones and then a zb great big hole in the ground.
Which in practice means that by leaving it ‘until the last minute’ just means that everyone has to slow up to an eventual crawl to let all those idiots,who leave it until the last minute,merge safely.
Carryfast:
You’re actually supposed to get in lane before the cones
If you were supposed to merge earlier, they would have put the cones further back
You are both correct
At fast flowing speeds then getting in the open lane early is the safest way
At slow speeds then using all free lanes to the cones is the safest way as it makes the queues shorter by utilising all available road space
But the slow speeds and jams are actually caused by the latter idea.As we all know the outside lanes are for overtaking not for ‘utilising’ the space contained within them and in the case of those lanes being closed there’s no way that they can be used for overtaking if the things are shut and in the case of the inside lane/s being closed then lane/s 2 and/or 3 cease to be overtaking lanes either.
If we take the IAM’s idea to it’s logical conclusion we just start/cause a jam in the usual way because of the speed differential that builds up between the open lane/s ande the closed one which is caused by cars running up to the cones and having to go slower the closer they get until they get so close they have to slow to a crawl.At which point the traffic in the open lane/s also has to slow to a crawl to match the speed differentials for zip merging to keep working.
Which is why in most countries they put out no overtaking signs before lane closures sometimes followed by wicket signs sometimes not.But the key issue is to inform traffic early enough to allow space and time to merge into as many lanes as remain open before traffic in the closed lanes gets too close to the obstruction and in which case has to then slow down at an increasing rate relative to the open lane/s causing the start of the tailback.
That is putting the world upside down, there is a speed difference because all these numpties want to sit in one lane and desert the lane that is gone be closed, if they stay in the lane, both lanes are filled, run the same speed and can fluently zip together.
It can not be that difficult? The reason for the traffic jams is because they start merging 7 miles before and than try to block near the cones people with more than one working braincell, because they didn’t drive in one lane because there where more available, that is the whole reason why the marker for the distant are there. Ottherwise they could put the sign up, "Lane Closed…NOW!!!
Carryfast:
You’re actually supposed to get in lane before the cones
If you were supposed to merge earlier, they would have put the cones further back
You are both correct
At fast flowing speeds then getting in the open lane early is the safest way
At slow speeds then using all free lanes to the cones is the safest way as it makes the queues shorter by utilising all available road space
But the slow speeds and jams are actually caused by the latter idea.As we all know the outside lanes are for overtaking not for ‘utilising’ the space contained within them and in the case of those lanes being closed there’s no way that they can be used for overtaking if the things are shut and in the case of the inside lane/s being closed then lane/s 2 and/or 3 cease to be overtaking lanes either.
If we take the IAM’s idea to it’s logical conclusion we just start/cause a jam in the usual way because of the speed differential that builds up between the open lane/s ande the closed one which is caused by cars running up to the cones and having to go slower the closer they get until they get so close they have to slow to a crawl.At which point the traffic in the open lane/s also has to slow to a crawl to match the speed differentials for zip merging to keep working.
Which is why in most countries they put out no overtaking signs before lane closures sometimes followed by wicket signs sometimes not.But the key issue is to inform traffic early enough to allow space and time to merge into as many lanes as remain open before traffic in the closed lanes gets too close to the obstruction and in which case has to then slow down at an increasing rate relative to the open lane/s causing the start of the tailback.
That is putting the world upside down, there is a speed difference because all these numpties want to sit in one lane and desert the lane that is gone be closed, if they stay in the lane, both lanes are filled, run the same speed and can fluently zip together.
It can not be that difficult? The reason for the traffic jams is because they start merging 7 miles before and than try to block near the cones people with more than one working braincell, because they didn’t drive in one lane because there where more available, that is the whole reason why the marker for the distant are there. Ottherwise they could put the sign up, "Lane Closed…NOW!!!
No there’s a speed differential because all the traffic that would have been using an open lane suddenly,at 800 yds,finds out that it can’t keep running at the speed it was going at because the lane is closed .In which case the traffic in the open lane/s then also has to slow up at the same increasing rate to allow the zip merging to continue.
Whereas if everyone merges further out and further away from the closure there’s no need for the traffic to slow up at all while it’s merging.
The bit you need to understand is that it’s the reduction in speeds,required by leaving the merging late, that causes the jam not having more traffic,running faster,in less lanes,sooner.
Carryfast:
You’re actually supposed to get in lane before the cones
If you were supposed to merge earlier, they would have put the cones further back
I agree. Only today I’ve had two complete tools in trucks blocking lanes, despite merge in turn signs. One of them was 800 yards from e closed lane.
And yes Carryfast I think we all realise your supposed to get in lane before the cones, that’s a remarkably daft statement. After all 1 foot from the cones is before them.
So try merging at 55 mph when you’re a foot away from the zb cones.
Carryfast:
So try merging at 55 mph when you’re a foot away from the zb cones.
That does not fit in with the advice below
ROG:
At fast flowing speeds then getting in the open lane early is the safest way
At slow speeds then using all free lanes to the cones is the safest way as it makes the queues shorter by utilising all available road space
Near to me there is a very busy major roundabout that has a major road coming off it
That major road starts as a 50mph dual carriageway for half a mile and then goes to one lane single carriageway where they merge in turn - well, might not be excatly merge in turn but there abouts
Both lanes are filled in peak times but if they followed the advice of someone on here then they would use one lane and totally block the major roundabout
Carryfast:
You’re actually supposed to get in lane before the cones
If you were supposed to merge earlier, they would have put the cones further back
I agree. Only today I’ve had two complete tools in trucks blocking lanes, despite merge in turn signs. One of them was 800 yards from e closed lane.
And yes Carryfast I think we all realise your supposed to get in lane before the cones, that’s a remarkably daft statement. After all 1 foot from the cones is before them.
So try merging at 55 mph when you’re a foot away from the zb cones.
Oh dear no need to swear old bean, do calm down. I was just pointing out that we all know your supposed to get in lane before the cones, not after, and that your stating the blindly obvious.
Whilst it is ‘merge in turn’ it doesn’t work out like that. As large vehicle drivers you should get into the lane earlier than later and then let all the faster vehicles merge. You may think that I am wrong but you can’t stop on a penny like smaller cars can you and if you’re supposed to be manoeuvring safely surely that is the better advice?
Alternatively, you get right up to the cones and indicate. Eventually there will be a suitable gap for you to pull into…
Whilst I don’t have a LGV licence I do have 7.5t experience as well as 2.5 years on the buses, and those cargo units complain with harsh manoeuvring and not just to the driver, but management.
