zella
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,884 
|
Post by zella on May 24, 2015 6:06:10 GMT
I do believe there was a study done on this very issue. When merging into a reduced number of lanes, according to the State of MI, if people continued to use all the available lanes and then let cars merge when the lanes ended, traffic would not be as congested and would not back up the way it does when everyone crams into a lane miles before it is the only lane available. Sometimes I go up the side, sometimes I don't. I guess it depends on which lane I am in when I see the reduction sign. This exactly. I tend to be the person who stays in that traffic lane, but in fact it is better for traffic flow to drive until you have to merge. So if we all stay in the slow/not moving lane, it may take even longer than we think to get where we're going. |
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on May 24, 2015 10:46:42 GMT
I had a similar scenario when I was commuting; the key phrase is "if you're on this road you know where the lanes separate and merge." In my scenario, there were signs and ample warning of the lane merge, prompting drivers to move over. Knowing this, I would stay in the left lane with all the other cars. Nothing used to piss me off more than those rogue drivers who considered their time more valuable than everyone elses and would shoot into the right lane and then wait until the very last second to try to barge in and merge before the right lane ended. Not only did it piss people off, but it was dangerous as well and delayed traffic even more. Periodically, a semi would pull halfway into the right lane, blocking it from those types, which was lovely. One time, a police car was in line waiting like everyone else when a car tried to pull in front of him; he promptly pulled the dude over and gave him a ticket! People literally cheered! It was sweet! lol I agree If the right lane is closed up ahead because of an accident or construction-and it's obvious. I refuse to let those people in front of me. |
|
