Poll: Merge in turn - why does nobody get it?

[Six6siX]

I thought it was a merge in turn scenario but friend who works in temporary traffic management just said this:

"...this is not a merge in turn scenario due to the fact that black on yellow signs on the verge are distance plates until the lane is shut, this called your lane change zone whereby all traffic should be in the correct lane well before they approach the arrow and taper...Minimum distance should 200yds before the arrow with the ideal distance being 800yds before...The cone from start of taper to finish extends another 137yds but the idea behind an advance lane change zone is to reduce potential risk to driver and road worker by given them plenty of advance notice regarding the lane being shut the idea being that if the miss one sign they will see the next in plenty of time to change lane."

I personally would have merged closer to 200 yards rather than sooner.

Is there anything in the highway code to support this statement?

The highway code states that merging in turn is proper behaviour at road works.

Road Works: 288
Where lanes are restricted due to road works, merge in turn (see Rule 134)

 

[Howard]

Yep quick google, it's because they use PWM to regulate brightness as you can't dim them by dropping voltage

PWM is primarily used in order to get them as bright as possible without them overheating. You can dim LEDs by dropping the voltage if you wanted to.

They flicker because the PWM frequency is slower than the shutter speed of the camera.

 

[Kenai]

I thought it was a merge in turn scenario but friend who works in temporary traffic management just said this:

"...this is not a merge in turn scenario due to the fact that black on yellow signs on the verge are distance plates until the lane is shut, this called your lane change zone whereby all traffic should be in the correct lane well before they approach the arrow and taper...Minimum distance should 200yds before the arrow with the ideal distance being 800yds before...The cone from start of taper to finish extends another 137yds but the idea behind an advance lane change zone is to reduce potential risk to driver and road worker by given them plenty of advance notice regarding the lane being shut the idea being that if the miss one sign they will see the next in plenty of time to change lane."

I personally would have merged closer to 200 yards rather than sooner.

Don't recall anything in Chapter 8 suggesting that the traffic should start merging that early, be interested in seeing it pointed out, as there is a lot in there to remember

edit - I know it doesn't stipulate Merge In Turn signage unless in close proximity to something that may be blocked but I didn't think that effectively meant the traffic should merge 800 yards up the road.

 

[iaind]

Huh, neat. I always knew it would be some sort of flickering - it's obvious just looking at it. Didn't know that was the reason though, pretty cool

 

[Kenai]

They flicker because the PWM frequency is slower than the shutter speed of the camera.

I thought usually the PWM frequency is higher? i.e. potentially into the kHz range, whereas your average camera is going to top out at 60Hz most of the time, as PWM frequencies as low as 50Hz would produce visible to the eye flickering.

 

[Howard]

In case you or anyone cares, PWM (Pulse width modulation) basically means the voltage is applied and cut many times per second, and can be sped up or slowed down to vary the brightness in the case of an LED. If it's a bright day and the camera's shutter speed (exposure time per frame in the case of digital video) is faster than the number of times per second the PWM is operating at, they'll get "out of sync" hence the flickering


Kenai, the shutter speed will be into hundredths of a second if you're shooting outdoors for a specific effect (a sort of choppy staccato style in the case of Top Gear). The PWM can be 1-200hz and be steady to the naked eye but still slower than the above shutter speed.

Note that the frame rate (24hz, 30hz etc) has no bearing on this.

 

[Kenai]

Yeah, i'm aware of that, it was just the frequency being slower comment that caught my eye, as typically I thought the PWM frequency used on LEDs is far in excess of what a camera will be operating at, as otherwise they'd visibly flicker.

 

[mattyg]

Unless you're prepared to quote something specific, I think you'll find I'm right and you're wrong

The highway code actually states exactly what I'm saying:





Basically, it says that it is ok for traffic to move slightly faster in the left-hand lane, during queueing traffic. But the lanes should be moving at similar speeds.

Then it basically says that during congestion, you should stay in lane as long as possible and only change when necessary - using merge in turn when safe and appropriate.

Those two points are exactly what I have been saying.

If you can produce evidence to the contrary I'll consider handing my licence in - otherwise perhaps you should take your own advice and spare all those children whose lives you're recklessly endangering with your inadequate knowledge of the rules of the road

What you quoted is for overtaking. Not passing on the nearside. Overtaking on the left (undertaking) can be used to back up careless driving passing on the nearside wont (unless your a muppet)

 

[Howard]

Yeah, i'm aware of that, it was just the frequency being slower comment that caught my eye, as typically I thought the PWM frequency used on LEDs is far in excess of what a camera will be operating at, as otherwise they'd visibly flicker.

Next time you see some LED DRLs or brake lights, move your eyes around as fast as you can. You'll probably see the flicker.

 

[div0]

The only thing the Merc was doing wrong was arguably driving too quickly.

That's a tad generous! He did also attempt to use the hard shoulder to overtake.

 

[MooMoo444]

That's a tad generous! He did also attempt to use the hard shoulder to overtake.

Hardly surprising when someone is blocking him deliberately.

 

[div0]

What you quoted is for overtaking. Not passing on the nearside. Overtaking on the left (undertaking) is an offence passing on the nearside isn't

And passing on the nearside is only permitted under certain circumstances, such as slow moving queueing traffic where lanes should be moving at similar speeds.

The difference between passing on the nearside and overtaking on the left is exactly what that quote is aiming to clarify.

 

[div0]

Hardly surprising when someone is blocking him deliberately.

That's an even more shocking mentality than the Renault driver's thought process.

The Renault driver is wrong to do what he did. The Merc drivers reaction is inexcusable.

 

[[TW]Fox]

That's a tad generous! He did also attempt to use the hard shoulder to overtake.

I meant up until the point at which he encounters the half-wit in the Renault.

 

[mattyg]

And passing on the nearside is only permitted under certain circumstances, such as slow moving queueing traffic where lanes should be moving at similar speeds.

The difference between passing on the nearside and overtaking on the left is exactly what that quote is aiming to clarify.

the HC isn't the law and it only says Do not. Doesn't the HC Say Must Not when its Law

 

[Frozennova]

Some very strange logic from those who agree with the Renault drivers actions

In a similar vein I enjoy the look on peoples faces when I do a lap of a roundabout because there's a huge queue to go left and nothing in the right hand lane, I suppose the people who think the Mercedes was wrong think I'm doing something wrong too

 

[[TW]Fox]

Some very strange logic from those who agree with the Renault drivers actions

In a similar vein I enjoy the look on peoples faces when I do a lap of a roundabout because there's a huge queue to go left and nothing in the right hand lane, I suppose the people who think the Mercedes was wrong think I'm doing something wrong too

That seems somewhat different and admitting to doing that is only going to add to the case of those who support the Renault driver. Going right the way around the roundabout to gain priority over those correctly queuing in the left hand lane isn't good practice as per highway code, is it?

 

[Frozennova]

That seems somewhat different and admitting to doing that is only going to add to the case of those who support the Renault driver. Going right the way around the roundabout to gain priority over those correctly queuing in the left hand lane isn't good practice as per highway code, is it?

I suppose looking at it from that perspective then no its not particularly the right thing to do, but as I come back around one/two cars sat in the left lane now have a gap to pull out into that they may not have had in the first place

 

[[TW]Fox]

I suppose looking at it from that perspective then no its not particularly the right thing to do, but as I come back around one/two cars sat in the left lane now have a gap to pull out into that they may not have had in the first place

You can't defend it - it's cheeky and inpatient, the end. We've all done it, but we've done it knowing it's a bit of a **** move.

Thats why it's different to merge in turn and not queuing next to a completely empty lane for 800 yards pretending we know better than the guy who designed the damn lane closure and set the merge point in the first place.

 

[ironman]

I've found this thread really interesting, I think the scenario in the OP is the best way to find out if someone truly is special.

Adam, you really do have a few screws loose and it's slightly worrying that you can actually live your daily life in a normal/sane way....