Definitely. I personally merge earlier, knowing it’s less efficient and will put me back relative to zipper merging - just to avoid the stress of trying to get in between potentially uncooperative mergees. But I also don’t get too mad at the mergers - maybe they’re in a legit hurry
You do, though, depending on where you live. It’s the law in plenty of countries, and for good reason. Lanes are meant to be used until they end, and the best strategy with traffic is a zipper merge. Every-other car should be from the ending lane, assuming there are cars in the ending lane. If you aren’t letting the next person in to the continuing lane, you are an asshole, and a dangerous driver.
Only because of dumbasses who won’t let everyone zipper merge. If we could actually educate people on how to zipper merge, we wouldn’t need to pull off a heist to get out of an ending lane.
If only. But as things stand, I’d rather merge early than have to stop next to a moving lane. Less dangerous too than to try to merge from zero to however fast the other lane is going.
“Early” being relative to the specific vehicles involved. Lorries/tractor-trailers need a LOT more time to find an opening before a merge than a “four-wheeler” does, for example.
Besides, it’s long been proven that “zipper merging” - which is basically waiting up to almost the last second to merge - is the more efficient method.
I said “basically” to imply it was being stated in a simplistic manner for expediency. The article I linked to gave the full story, and I’d rather they read that along with proof it provided. You’re nit-picking, which isn’t surprising considering your other responses.
That’s a training issue more than anything else. People have never been taught how to merge well, and so inevitably everybody has their own “camp” when it comes to best practices. Those who complain about “fairness” typically have a more myopic view than those who take “the big picture” into account (or they have a faulty “big picture” in mind). I’ll grant that a good number of those “cheaters” are indeed just being selfish pricks, but statistics still show that zipper merging is best in the end. Far too many people care more about their illogical feelings than the facts, tho.
Zipper merging is ideal in certain situations but not all of them. It reduces the total “length” of traffic the choke point, but doesn’t necessarily increase the total throughout. It’s primarily meant to prevent traffic from backing up to other lights and intersections on the road. The throughput optimum for lighter traffic is to merge earlier (though not miles back) to maintain speed, and people who force their way in at the last second cause the standard “traffic wave” problems. That’s why it isn’t quite as clear cut as people make it - the optimum behavior is situational and that level of complexity is not well gasped by your average person who is profoundly uncurious of the world around them.
Then there’s the issue of people wanting to zipper merge in places where it is completely inappropriate because it blocks a travel lane. This was a weekly debate on our local subreddit when I was still using it. Enough people insisted that a highway interchange should be treated as a zipper, despite that blocking the main road, is high enough that I am convinced that the zipper narrative has been a net negative. Though I also concede that most of these people would still be idiots about it without the plausible justification for bad behavior.
Zipper merges are always more efficient, though the problem is idiots don’t understand what they are. They are not racing up to the last moment you need to merge. Ever. They are never that. Ever.
They are ONLY two rules:
If you need to merge, roughly match speeds with through-traffic once you’ve identified an opening, line up with that opening, and merge.
If you’re in the through-lane, make room for roughly 1 to 1 cars to be able to merge in.
It is a whole different matter to occupy all of closing lanes or merge lanes. Solves a totally different problem. The people insisting it’s part of zipper merging are idiots that do not understand zipper merging.
It always makes sense to merge at the last safe moment, but only if everyone else is doing that which requires everyone to trust each other and I can trust myself but I can’t trust any of you fuckers, etc.
Yeah, it would take a concerted, long-running campaign to reeducate drivers on the topic, as well as a nearly unified backing from those in a position to deliver it. Considering how political issues have been going downhill for so long that we’ve effectively sunk well past unheard of new lows, I’m not holding my breath on that one even though it really shouldn’t matter that much to them to be worth fighting over.
I’d say a fair amount to have at least some idea that they’re doing things they really shouldn’t, but just DGAF. It feels like the majority of the populace have become significantly more selfish over the years, but will never admit that to themselves - let alone anyone else. It’s the dog-eat-dog mindset inching towards its inevitable end.
If you have 30 miles of ending lane warnings, you should still ride it until the actual end. It’s best for congestion. Leaving a whole lane unused is pointless. It’s better for everyone if you wait to merge.
Pushing people to seek a detour is the only effective way of actually reducing the effects of a traffic jam.
We all zipper merged back when we were traveling close to full speed. We would continue through the closure at nearly full speed, except some jackass has decided to run up to the end and come to a complete stop before attempting to merge.
Now, we all have to zipper merge at 5mph instead of full speed, because some jackass couldn’t figure out how to do it at the right time.
Anybody who has played Factorio should be able to recognize the problem. If the lane is obstructed anywhere, the capacity of the roadway is the capacity of the remaining open lanes. Filling the closed lane before the obstruction maximizes the duration of the traffic jam.
Ideally, zipper merging should start immediately after the last exit before the obstruction. It should be used to push as many people as possible to exit and seek a detour. The lane should be effectively closed from the exit before to the exit after the obstruction.
No, this “solves the problem” in the same way that moving the baggage carousel further away from the gate reduces complaints. It isn’t actually improving traffic flow; it’s making people complain about it less.
The article actually mentions zipper merging isn’t as effective at full speed.
People utilizing the closing lane up to the end frees up space at the rear, which allows more people who can take advantage of an exit shortly beforehand to actually do so.
Your stated ideal of closing the lane from the prior exit onwards isn’t practical if said exit isn’t within a reasonably short range. Never mind you’d definitely increase the number of people needlessly exiting and causing further problems on several other local roads, thereby expanding the impact rather than reducing it.
Your premise also seems to be built upon the notion of stopped traffic rather than just a forced merging into fewer (or one) lanes where traffic still can flow reasonably well once past the merge point.
I’m assuming Factorio is a factory simulation, and that would involve mechanical & physical concerns, but that’s much more consistent than the wide variety of human responses and actions in such situations.
#1 is simply false. All merging is more effective at full speed.
#2 demonstrates a lack of comprehension. With the right lane closed ahead, the slowed traffic in the left lane indicates the effects of the obstruction ahead, and informs drivers that they should exit.
If the left lane isn’t backed up, the effects of the obstruction are not severe, and there is no need to exit.
Allowing both lanes to back up introduces the worst delay, and doubles the number of vehicles needlessly exposed to that delay.
#3 correctly identifies that the load is spread among more routes, but fails to comprehend that those other routes are normally underutilized and have considerable excess capacity available to ameliorate the problem. Diverting excess traffic to routes with excess capacity is a solution, not a problem.
#4, stopped traffic is inevitable with zipper merging immediately before the obstruction. Anyone with more than a million miles of highway experience can corroborate that assertion.
To prevent further troll responses, I’ve got an unexpected few minutes so I’ll try to reply.
Once again you’re ignoring context. Zipper merging is not significantly more effective at reducing any sort of backup at full speed than other methods. You are essentially saying the same thing I did — whether you just weren’t keeping the full context in mind, or you treated it separately just so you could be argumentative is something only you can say.
Once again, ignoring context. I was obviously referring to what those PAST the exit could do to help those behind them. The traffic is needlessly stopped by the inconsistent response to the merge - if both lanes kept going at a slightly reduced speed (mainly for safety) and spaced themselves appropriately in the leadup to the merge itself, then they could easily merge without stopping. Once again, you’re seemingly basing your argument upon the concept of a stoppage — the very thing zipper merging is designed to avoid.
Wow, what a fucking assumption. Even if those other routes were that underutilized (exceedingly unlikely), they won’t be for long with the amount of traffic you’d quickly fill them with. They would likely be “underutilized” for a reason, or people would be using them - especially the locals would would actually benefit the most from taking that exit and who likely would already be doing so if it were normally more beneficial.
It’s “inevitable” mainly because of the inconsistent response of those involved. Once the motoring public at large understands the method and utilizes it, the only way it doesn’t minimize the likelihood of a stoppage is if the roadway is at full capacity already - not impossible, but it’d be bad planning by traffic control to have required that merge at times when that would be the case, which is a different problem entirely.
Now, with this troll-induced (not you) response complete, I’m done with this.
3 was not much of an assumption. Roads are very rarely exposed to their peak capacity. 99.9% of the time they have substantial capacity to absorb excess traffic. Your assumption that they cannot is that 0.1%.
Once the motoring public at large understands the method and utilizes it, the only way it doesn’t minimize t
False. Patently false. The degree of control required to prevent stoppages is not available to individual drivers. To avoid hitting cones, drivers near the end of the closing lane have to make rapid changes in speed to ensure they are lined up for a zipper merge. That means hard braking, and that braking ripples through to everyone behind, in both lanes. Zipper merging is the root cause of stop and go traffic.
That hard braking isn’t required when zippering at the beginning of the closure, because there is no hard obstacle to hit in the open lane.
At best, this zipper-at-the-end method “works” not by achieving any traffic benefit, but by setting the expectation for other drivers behavior.
The alternative to zipper-late is “no passing in work zones”. Your position is established at the time you enter the zone; you have between that time and the obstruction to merge, but you may not pass someone in the adjacent lane. There is no longer any benefit to racing ahead to the end of the lane. The zipper merge occurs shortly after the lane closure.
The upside of zipper-late is that there are fewer opportunities to be pissed off at “cheaters”. It is psychologically better. It reduces road rage.
The downside of zipper-late is everything related to traffic. It introduces far more disruption. It needlessly turns free-flowing traffic into stop-and-go. It endangers workers at or near the closure.
“No passing” is objectively better for traffic before and during the closure. It increases speeds and thus throughput. But it also makes it easy for everyone to identify and be pissed at “cheaters”. Those cheaters induce road rage, so we can’t have the superior traffic method. Instead, we have to normalize cheating and tolerate worse traffic.
We tolerate slower baggage handling and longer walks through the terminal when they move the baggage carousel further away from the gate, but we complain much less when they do that. Zipper-late works much the same. It worsens traffic, but trains us to be more tolerant of worse traffic.
I actually have that 1MM+ as a professional driver - you’re wrong, but too stubborn to admit it. I’m too tired to bother arguing with you - especially since I’ve got some more of that same work to do in the morning. I’m done. Gnite.
Some people think that if there’s a hwy lane closure in 30 miles, you’re the asshole of you don’t immediately merge over
I don’t mind personally, but don’t assume that your blinker means I HAVE to let you in
Definitely. I personally merge earlier, knowing it’s less efficient and will put me back relative to zipper merging - just to avoid the stress of trying to get in between potentially uncooperative mergees. But I also don’t get too mad at the mergers - maybe they’re in a legit hurry
You do, though, depending on where you live. It’s the law in plenty of countries, and for good reason. Lanes are meant to be used until they end, and the best strategy with traffic is a zipper merge. Every-other car should be from the ending lane, assuming there are cars in the ending lane. If you aren’t letting the next person in to the continuing lane, you are an asshole, and a dangerous driver.
If there’s a lot of traffic it makes sense to try and find room to merge early though
Only because of dumbasses who won’t let everyone zipper merge. If we could actually educate people on how to zipper merge, we wouldn’t need to pull off a heist to get out of an ending lane.
If only. But as things stand, I’d rather merge early than have to stop next to a moving lane. Less dangerous too than to try to merge from zero to however fast the other lane is going.
“Early” being relative to the specific vehicles involved. Lorries/tractor-trailers need a LOT more time to find an opening before a merge than a “four-wheeler” does, for example.
Besides, it’s long been proven that “zipper merging” - which is basically waiting up to almost the last second to merge - is the more efficient method.
Nope. Waiting until the last second is not zipper merging.
I said “basically” to imply it was being stated in a simplistic manner for expediency. The article I linked to gave the full story, and I’d rather they read that along with proof it provided. You’re nit-picking, which isn’t surprising considering your other responses.
It’s more efficient if people let you pass in front of them. Which they might not
Not very efficient if you have to stop next to a moving lane lol
That’s a training issue more than anything else. People have never been taught how to merge well, and so inevitably everybody has their own “camp” when it comes to best practices. Those who complain about “fairness” typically have a more myopic view than those who take “the big picture” into account (or they have a faulty “big picture” in mind). I’ll grant that a good number of those “cheaters” are indeed just being selfish pricks, but statistics still show that zipper merging is best in the end. Far too many people care more about their illogical feelings than the facts, tho.
Zipper merging is ideal in certain situations but not all of them. It reduces the total “length” of traffic the choke point, but doesn’t necessarily increase the total throughout. It’s primarily meant to prevent traffic from backing up to other lights and intersections on the road. The throughput optimum for lighter traffic is to merge earlier (though not miles back) to maintain speed, and people who force their way in at the last second cause the standard “traffic wave” problems. That’s why it isn’t quite as clear cut as people make it - the optimum behavior is situational and that level of complexity is not well gasped by your average person who is profoundly uncurious of the world around them.
Then there’s the issue of people wanting to zipper merge in places where it is completely inappropriate because it blocks a travel lane. This was a weekly debate on our local subreddit when I was still using it. Enough people insisted that a highway interchange should be treated as a zipper, despite that blocking the main road, is high enough that I am convinced that the zipper narrative has been a net negative. Though I also concede that most of these people would still be idiots about it without the plausible justification for bad behavior.
Zipper merges are always more efficient, though the problem is idiots don’t understand what they are. They are not racing up to the last moment you need to merge. Ever. They are never that. Ever.
They are ONLY two rules:
If you need to merge, roughly match speeds with through-traffic once you’ve identified an opening, line up with that opening, and merge.
If you’re in the through-lane, make room for roughly 1 to 1 cars to be able to merge in.
It is a whole different matter to occupy all of closing lanes or merge lanes. Solves a totally different problem. The people insisting it’s part of zipper merging are idiots that do not understand zipper merging.
Came here to find this argument.
Well done everyone!
It always makes sense to merge at the last safe moment, but only if everyone else is doing that which requires everyone to trust each other and I can trust myself but I can’t trust any of you fuckers, etc.
Yeah, it would take a concerted, long-running campaign to reeducate drivers on the topic, as well as a nearly unified backing from those in a position to deliver it. Considering how political issues have been going downhill for so long that we’ve effectively sunk well past unheard of new lows, I’m not holding my breath on that one even though it really shouldn’t matter that much to them to be worth fighting over.
We all were supposed to be taught it in drivers ed.
The problem is most people are shit drivers who don’t know the law or the rules or even the guidelines.
I’d say a fair amount to have at least some idea that they’re doing things they really shouldn’t, but just DGAF. It feels like the majority of the populace have become significantly more selfish over the years, but will never admit that to themselves - let alone anyone else. It’s the dog-eat-dog mindset inching towards its inevitable end.
Some people eat up rage bait like a fine meal
That implies taking the time to appreciate its finer qualities. I’d say it’s more like feeding time at the trough.
Something something milk before cereal something…
And some people think inflating numbers proves their point.
Plus, If you have 30 miles of signs telling you to get over and you wait until you are forced by the actual lane closure, yes you are the asshole.
I will not be taking questions.
If you have 30 miles of ending lane warnings, you should still ride it until the actual end. It’s best for congestion. Leaving a whole lane unused is pointless. It’s better for everyone if you wait to merge.
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2014/07/the-beauty-of-zipper-merging-or-why-you-should-drive-ruder/
Pushing people to seek a detour is the only effective way of actually reducing the effects of a traffic jam.
We all zipper merged back when we were traveling close to full speed. We would continue through the closure at nearly full speed, except some jackass has decided to run up to the end and come to a complete stop before attempting to merge.
Now, we all have to zipper merge at 5mph instead of full speed, because some jackass couldn’t figure out how to do it at the right time.
Anybody who has played Factorio should be able to recognize the problem. If the lane is obstructed anywhere, the capacity of the roadway is the capacity of the remaining open lanes. Filling the closed lane before the obstruction maximizes the duration of the traffic jam.
Ideally, zipper merging should start immediately after the last exit before the obstruction. It should be used to push as many people as possible to exit and seek a detour. The lane should be effectively closed from the exit before to the exit after the obstruction.
No, this “solves the problem” in the same way that moving the baggage carousel further away from the gate reduces complaints. It isn’t actually improving traffic flow; it’s making people complain about it less.
The article actually mentions zipper merging isn’t as effective at full speed.
People utilizing the closing lane up to the end frees up space at the rear, which allows more people who can take advantage of an exit shortly beforehand to actually do so.
Your stated ideal of closing the lane from the prior exit onwards isn’t practical if said exit isn’t within a reasonably short range. Never mind you’d definitely increase the number of people needlessly exiting and causing further problems on several other local roads, thereby expanding the impact rather than reducing it.
Your premise also seems to be built upon the notion of stopped traffic rather than just a forced merging into fewer (or one) lanes where traffic still can flow reasonably well once past the merge point.
I’m assuming Factorio is a factory simulation, and that would involve mechanical & physical concerns, but that’s much more consistent than the wide variety of human responses and actions in such situations.
#1 is simply false. All merging is more effective at full speed.
#2 demonstrates a lack of comprehension. With the right lane closed ahead, the slowed traffic in the left lane indicates the effects of the obstruction ahead, and informs drivers that they should exit.
If the left lane isn’t backed up, the effects of the obstruction are not severe, and there is no need to exit.
Allowing both lanes to back up introduces the worst delay, and doubles the number of vehicles needlessly exposed to that delay.
#3 correctly identifies that the load is spread among more routes, but fails to comprehend that those other routes are normally underutilized and have considerable excess capacity available to ameliorate the problem. Diverting excess traffic to routes with excess capacity is a solution, not a problem.
#4, stopped traffic is inevitable with zipper merging immediately before the obstruction. Anyone with more than a million miles of highway experience can corroborate that assertion.
To prevent further troll responses, I’ve got an unexpected few minutes so I’ll try to reply.
Now, with this troll-induced (not you) response complete, I’m done with this.
3 was not much of an assumption. Roads are very rarely exposed to their peak capacity. 99.9% of the time they have substantial capacity to absorb excess traffic. Your assumption that they cannot is that 0.1%.
False. Patently false. The degree of control required to prevent stoppages is not available to individual drivers. To avoid hitting cones, drivers near the end of the closing lane have to make rapid changes in speed to ensure they are lined up for a zipper merge. That means hard braking, and that braking ripples through to everyone behind, in both lanes. Zipper merging is the root cause of stop and go traffic.
That hard braking isn’t required when zippering at the beginning of the closure, because there is no hard obstacle to hit in the open lane.
At best, this zipper-at-the-end method “works” not by achieving any traffic benefit, but by setting the expectation for other drivers behavior.
The alternative to zipper-late is “no passing in work zones”. Your position is established at the time you enter the zone; you have between that time and the obstruction to merge, but you may not pass someone in the adjacent lane. There is no longer any benefit to racing ahead to the end of the lane. The zipper merge occurs shortly after the lane closure.
The upside of zipper-late is that there are fewer opportunities to be pissed off at “cheaters”. It is psychologically better. It reduces road rage.
The downside of zipper-late is everything related to traffic. It introduces far more disruption. It needlessly turns free-flowing traffic into stop-and-go. It endangers workers at or near the closure.
“No passing” is objectively better for traffic before and during the closure. It increases speeds and thus throughput. But it also makes it easy for everyone to identify and be pissed at “cheaters”. Those cheaters induce road rage, so we can’t have the superior traffic method. Instead, we have to normalize cheating and tolerate worse traffic.
We tolerate slower baggage handling and longer walks through the terminal when they move the baggage carousel further away from the gate, but we complain much less when they do that. Zipper-late works much the same. It worsens traffic, but trains us to be more tolerant of worse traffic.
I actually have that 1MM+ as a professional driver - you’re wrong, but too stubborn to admit it. I’m too tired to bother arguing with you - especially since I’ve got some more of that same work to do in the morning. I’m done. Gnite.
lol You’re wrong and too stupid to understand, and too stupid to understand how bad a shitty appeal to authority is. Fucking sad.
Well, how can I possibly argue with a mature and obviously impeccably spot-on response like that?
🙄
ETA: Here’s the response you prompted (which proves you wrong as well), goodbye.