EarlyAdopter
Active Member
We're going to have to agree to disagree.
It's the same principle. When the traffic engineers added a lane that ends, they didn't do it to cause more traffic, they did it to alleviate traffic so that people would use it.
I don't care what they think. I'm using the lane the way it was intended, your argument was that I'm causing more traffic, which I'm not based on the link I gave you. You still didn't give me any proof besides "I said so" that I'm causing more traffic.
- - - Updated - - -
Here's the situation I'm taking about, same concept. Click his links. Which are more scientific than a redditors opinion.
If you have any article for me to read as to why I'm wrong, I'll gladly do it. But I'm not going around waving my hands and saying "because I said so"
https://m.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/16tvks/would_traffic_move_better_when_a_lane_ends_if/
The answer is right there in the first link of the reddit post you quoted.
ZIPPER MERGE: Curing merging-lane traffic jams
When you zip up to the front of an already merged line of traffic and cut in, you cause the car behind you to hit their brakes. This speed differential on merge propagates all the way back through the line in a ripple, slowing the flow of traffic down even more. If everyone started doing as you do, it will only make things worse.
The ideal is to merge earlier, when there is no speed differential between the cars that are merging together. You simply can't do this at the very last moment, as the flow diagram at trafficwaves clearly shows.
You are espousing the left model. You should think in terms of the model on the right.