M50 traffic tops boom

Schadenfreudia

Irish Steve wrote: »

Some driver education won't come amiss, the M50 could take more traffic if the lanes were correctly used, there are more than a few occasions when the clearest lane is Lane 1, and Lane 3 is almost at a standstill.

Indeed. I do much of my driving and "undertaking" in the inside lane!

SeanW

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Indeed. I do much of my driving and "undertaking" in the inside lane!

Yeah, coming home on the on the M4 (J5) where it becomes the N4, I noticed (M4) lanes 1 & 2, continuing on as (N4)lanes 2 and 3 were chok-o-block. Speed, 60kph max, probably less. Lane 1 on the N4 totally empty.

No points for guessing what happened next :pac:

Still think its stupid to create lanes that way :mad: The main driving lane should ALWAYS be Lane 1 as far as I am concerned.

SeanW

SeanW wrote: »

Yeah, coming home on the on the M4 (J5) where it becomes the N4, I noticed (M4) lanes 1 & 2, continuing on as (N4)lanes 2 and 3 were chok-o-block. Speed, 60kph max, probably less. Lane 1 on the N4 totally empty.

No points for guessing what happened next :pac:

Still think its stupid to create lanes that way :mad: The main driving lane should ALWAYS be Lane 1 as far as I am concerned.

Yes, there really should be a merge into the two lane motorway and then a third lane start.

Or erect signs that order drivers to use the "new lane 1".

L1011

Lane additions stop merging related backups on the joining road, that's the logic for using them.

Considering how bad the mainline gets at other merges it may be needed for both

SeanW

I think that could be solved we used the UK approach of requiring main line traffic to try to accommodate merging traffic. I try to do that, if I see someone who looks like they might have trouble merging in, I will often move temporarily into the overtaking lane, or failing that slow down to match their movement. On rare occasions I am on the other side of that equation and am likewise shown the same consideration. It's just basic co-operation and manners really should be in the Rules of the Road.

Also on J5 on the M4/N4 there is another bug bear of mine, that appears to be all to common throughout the network (I see it a lot on access roads to the M1/M50 as well) where the driving lane ends and you have to merge out of it to continue. VS. if you stay in the overtaking lane, you approach the junction in a much better position. WTF?

Driver education may be part of the problem, but I think our road layouts are as big a part of the problem. They seem to be designed to induce middle-lane-hogging.

AugustusMinimus

SeanW wrote: »

I think that could be solved we used the UK approach of requiring main line traffic to try to accommodate merging traffic. I try to do that, if I see someone who looks like they might have trouble merging in, I will often move temporarily into the overtaking lane, or failing that slow down to match their movement. On rare occasions I am on the other side of that equation and am likewise shown the same consideration. It's just basic co-operation and manners really should be in the Rules of the Road.

Also on J5 on the M4/N4 there is another bug bear of mine, that appears to be all to common throughout the network (I see it a lot on access roads to the M1/M50 as well) where the driving lane ends and you have to merge out of it to continue. VS. if you stay in the overtaking lane, you approach the junction in a much better position. WTF?

Driver education may be part of the problem, but I think our road layouts are as big a part of the problem. They seem to be designed to induce middle-lane-hogging.

I can think of instances in the past where climbing lanes were lined out, so that the normal lane continued into the overtaking lane on the climbing section. People wouldn't move left foolishly thinking the overtaking lane was the driving lane.

Thankfully most of these have been long relined.

Tea drinker

veryangryman wrote: »

3 words. "Enforced Lane Disclipline"

Even 2 garda cars running up and down M50 and pulling motorists who take the p1ss over would sort this out.

It would at least take longer for us to get to peak and we would get off peak sooner. It's basically throwing away money when some lad decides the middle/outside lane is his to crawl along in. Treasonous behaviour ;-)
Raising the speed limit would also help delay the onset of congestion as the traffic is getting off the mway quicker.

I'm a bit worried over the amount of construction planned for cherrywood, huge amount of houses and offices planned. I don't know how the current infra will handle it...

paulbok

SeanW wrote: »

I think that could be solved we used the UK approach of requiring main line traffic to try to accommodate merging traffic. I try to do that, if I see someone who looks like they might have trouble merging in, I will often move temporarily into the overtaking lane, or failing that slow down to match their movement. On rare occasions I am on the other side of that equation and am likewise shown the same consideration. It's just basic co-operation and manners really should be in the Rules of the Road.
.

I always thought that was 'the done thing'.
It's not like letting someone trying to change lane on the mainline, if you don't accommodate them (the rights and wrongs of doing so not the point in this situation), they can still stay in their own lane. Merging traffic has nowhere else to go, if you don't let merging traffic in on the 1st mainline lane, then they have to stop causing a tailback.
I've always been baffled by driver not doing this or merging in turn on a road where two lanes become one.

Carawaystick

When the M50 was widened, the nra said there were auxilliary lanes to "reduce weaving" so traffic joining could merge over a much longer distance.

Then then built the road and built onramps that were shorter than before, preventing joining traffic from using these new auxilliary lanes...

Carawaystick

Carawaystick wrote: »

When the M50 was widened, the nra said there were auxilliary lanes to "reduce weaving" so traffic joining could merge over a much longer distance.

Then then built the road and built onramps that were shorter than before, preventing joining traffic from using these new auxilliary lanes...

Joining traffic usually has a choice short merge or aux lane merge.
The real problems occur when drivers in the aux lane try to merge the same way as they do in the short merge lane, totally pointless and dangerous!

Carawaystick

Deleted User wrote: »

Joining traffic usually has a choice short merge or aux lane merge.
The real problems occur when drivers in the aux lane try to merge the same way as they do in the short merge lane, totally pointless and dangerous!

There's no choice from R110 -> M50 N
or from R148 -> M50N
or from the R147 -> M50N
or from the R135 -> M50N ...

For other movements, there should be no short merge, traffic should use the aux lane. It's traffic using the short merge, not yielding to traffic on the mainline causing a lot of the mainline delays.

ardmacha

Carawaystick wrote: »

For other movements, there should be no short merge, traffic should use the aux lane. It's traffic using the short merge, not yielding to traffic on the mainline causing a lot of the mainline delays.

These short merges might have metering, ensuring that vehicles arriving from the slip road are well spaced out. The slips leading on to the auxiliary lanes shouldn't need it.

hardCopy

paulbok wrote: »

I always thought that was 'the done thing'.
It's not like letting someone trying to change lane on the mainline, if you don't accommodate them (the rights and wrongs of doing so not the point in this situation), they can still stay in their own lane. Merging traffic has nowhere else to go, if you don't let merging traffic in on the 1st mainline lane, then they have to stop causing a tailback.
I've always been baffled by driver not doing this or merging in turn on a road where two lanes become one.

In Australia it's a rule and it's signposted at the merge



People here do tend to be fairly good once traffic is near stationary but if there's any bit of clear road people will just speed up and let "somebody else" let you in.

Carawaystick

ardmacha wrote: »

These short merges might have metering, ensuring that vehicles arriving from the slip road are well spaced out. The slips leading on to the auxiliary lanes shouldn't need it.

Then you have all of the other on-ramps with 2 lanes, one leading to the aux lane and the other leading to another short on-merge....

hardCopy

The Australians seem to be quite good at placing reinforcing information signs, we could learn a thing or two from them.

hardCopy wrote: »

In Australia it's a rule and it's signposted at the merge



People here do tend to be fairly good once traffic is near stationary but if there's any bit of clear road people will just speed up and let "somebody else" let you in.

highdef

On a number of occasions on short merges, I've had a drivers that either won't pull into a free lane 2 or else if there is nowhere for them to pull into lane 2, they still do not give me an opportunity to merge. In these cases, rather than come to a halt at the end of the slip, I will continue in the hard shoulder until such time that I can safely merge.
The reason I do this is that I consider this safer than coming to a stop at the end of the slip (and therefore forcing other cars on the slip behind me to stop and be in the same predicament as me) and then having to start moving from 0 kmph into moving traffic, quite often very fast moving relative to little old stationary me.
It may be illegal but in those cases, I am putting my safety ahead as the highest priority.

Middle Man

highdef wrote: »

On a number of occasions on short merges, I've had a drivers that either won't pull into a free lane 2 or else if there is nowhere for them to pull into lane 2, they still do not give me an opportunity to merge. In these cases, rather than come to a halt at the end of the slip, I will continue in the hard shoulder until such time that I can safely merge.
The reason I do this is that I consider this safer than coming to a stop at the end of the slip (and therefore forcing other cars on the slip behind me to stop and be in the same predicament as me) and then having to start moving from 0 kmph into moving traffic, quite often very fast moving relative to little old stationary me.
It may be illegal but in those cases, I am putting my safety ahead as the highest priority.

I totally get what you're saying - zip style merging should be legally compulsory - especially on the busy roads.