Am 16.08.2010 08:34, schrieb scott:
>> that gap open for you. The only thing that would change would be that
>> the following traffic on /your/ lane wouldn't be tempted to overtake
>> you after you have merged.
>
> This is exactly the problem why you shouldn't merge too early, yet it
> seems it is the ones who merge early that then blame the other drivers
> for merging later. In fact it's the ones merging early that are causing
> the problem.
>
>> As a matter of fact, in Germany there is a rule that in comparatively
>> slow and dense traffic you /must not/ merge early, and instead drive
>> on to the end of the lane, where both lanes are to merge in an
>> alternating fashion (think of a zipper being closed).
>
> Yes, it's a good rule as this also means people don't get annoyed if you
> wait until the end to merge. In the UK when the sensible and efficient
> thing to do is merge at the end of the lane, you see all sorts of stuff
> with people getting annoyed (blocking other cars, staying 1cm from the
> car ahead, etc.) Because of this a lot of people then merge way early
> (like several miles if there is a stationary queue) leaving a huge
> stretch of unused road, then obviously if someone uses this they are
> seen as "jumping the queue" and again people get annoyed.

Used to be exactly the same here in Germany, until they clarified the 
rule. Originally, it just stated that you have to merge "zipper style", 
but didn't explicitly say /where/. I used to be an "early merge" driver 
myself, so when they clarified the rules (some 10 years ago I guess) I 
wasn't too happy about it, but it has proven to be the right decision, 
making low-speed lane merging a pretty relaxed thing.

Post a reply to this message