Merge In Turn, why does no one do it properly!

Avocet · 6 Mar 2025

Brigadier said:
Apart from the part I made bold, I would have done exactly as you did.

Leftmost lane, unless you can't.

In the case of lane reduction though, it's wrong, and we should try to force ourselves to use both, but human nature is a peculiar thing! Traffic would flow better and more cars would get through the bottleneck in a given time, but we Brits just aren't wired like that!

dishman · 7 Mar 2025

Brigadier said:
Apart from the part I made bold, I would have done exactly as you did.

Leftmost lane, unless you can't.

This is true, but it was a while ago, so I can't actually remember how long I stayed in the left lane before moving to the middle expecting the merge (which never came). The left lane may have actually been been X'd. I can't quite remember.

dishman · 15 Jul 2025

Well, it happened again!

Travelling up the M1, and the gantry indicated that the outside three lanes were closing.

As I was already travelling in the inside most lane already, I initially ended up in the inevitable queue.

But after rechecking the signs, I realised that all the other lanes were still live and it was actually a merge in turn at some point ahead.

So after sitting for in the queue for about 30 seconds, I pulled out and travelled past about 2 miles or so of single lane queue and sure enough, there was a gradual merge at the closure point.

I think I only received one angry beep and a passive aggressive flash along the way. But it saved me about 20 minutes of ghost queuing.

The gantry sign was not exactly the best I have seen as it did not actually properly communicate there was a merge. But the lanes were not X'd, which is why I took a moment to be sure.

freddiemercurystwin · 15 Jul 2025

What symbol was showing in the gantry signs?

dishman · 15 Jul 2025

It was essentially one of these, but on a gantry

dishman · Saturday at 2:16 AM

Interesting conundrum recently regarding lane merges on motorways and poor gantry signage.

Twice now I have come across a situation where lane closed X's have been shown on gantries, only for it to end up being a normal graduated merge lane closure.

The older gantry I experienced above showed the correct signage, with "lane closing ahead" images.

The two recent instances I have experienced had the modern gantry just showing X'd lanes for a few miles, before it ended up being a merge type situation for standard roadworks.

This frustration was compounded by the fact that, ironically, a large number of people were ignoring the X'd lanes.

On one occasion the X'd lanes on the gantry were contradicted by signs on the side of the road similar to the one in the post above, showing lanes closing ahead.

But, needlessly X'ing the lanes caused unnecessary delay as it forced people correctly following the signage to get into a single lane far earlier than needed. It also has the effect of making people less likely to heed the importance of not being in an X lane in the future.

Thoughts? Were the lanes poorly X'd?

johnny2007 · Saturday at 8:36 AM

Yes, on the M25 I regularly find lanes X'd when in fact there's nothing ahead.
They either forget to update the electronic signs or do it deliberately to issue fines and generate revenue.
My friend was caught by such trap and despite having dash cam footage showing that there was no obstruction or roadworks on the X'd lane, they refused the appeal and he had to pay.

yorksbuilder · Saturday at 9:04 AM

Us Brits love rules. Also love queuing.

It's a lack of common sense to all use the left lane and make the queue there twice as long as it needs to be... And then giving aggro to the sensible drivers who use the merge lane is dumb, they just want to shorten the queue, reduce congestion etc..

Do it in Sweden for example, everyone uses both lanes, then just merge one at a time, calmly. No one loses out!

Merge lane misuse and rage is one of the worst things about driving in UK. The number one thing is the state of the road surfaces themselves...

fixitflav · 2026-03-04T14:32:02+0000

Murdochcat said:
Because its not in the highway code - but IIRC it does appear in the Channel Islands rules

IMO the problem is that merge in turn hasn't yet got into the consciousness of the motoring public. Where there is a sign, most drivers obey it, but otherwise they see drivers overtaking the queue as an attempt to gain an unfair advantage - not British!
It would help if a sign were provided in all such cases, after all there are plenty of signs with various messages, a few more wouldn't be a problem.

fixitflav · 2026-03-04T14:39:10+0000

dishman said:
If the "misuse" is aggressively speeding, then sure...it's not a great thing to do. Dangerous and stupid.

But they are not actually misusing the open lane, that is on everyone else for not using it in the first place.

Slightly different if the closure is the left lane, so the queue is in the right one. Going up the left lane could be considered undertaking, apart from the "traffic moving slowly in queues" argument.

dishman · 2026-03-04T14:40:14+0000

Highways replied to my query and stated they have to initially X all the lanes while they set out the merge.

This was my expected response, and it does make sense. But It seemed the merge had been well established by the time I got there, and the lanes had been X'd a good 5 miles out from the merge, which seemed an excessive length of empty lanes.

I don't know why they don't replace the X'd signs with <- arrows in of the lanes to indicate move over to lane 1.

Do that for 5 miles rather than just X'ing.

Brigadier · 2026-03-04T15:40:07+0000

dishman said:
I don't know why they don't replace the X'd signs with <- arrows in of the lanes to indicate move over to lane 1.

Do that for 5 miles rather than just X'ing

Probably because, after the first couple of < signs (and no sign of upcoming lane closures) , some drivers would think the gantries were faulty and completely ignore them anyway?

Possibly then, the least worst solution?

Harry Bloomfield · 2026-03-04T15:57:22+0000

fixitflav said:
IMO the problem is that merge in turn hasn't yet got into the consciousness of the motoring public. Where there is a sign, most drivers obey it, but otherwise they see drivers overtaking the queue as an attempt to gain an unfair advantage - not British!
It would help if a sign were provided in all such cases, after all there are plenty of signs with various messages, a few more wouldn't be a problem.

It works well, where it works well! I remember one place, where two lanes permanently reduces to one lane - never any problems, everyone naturally filled both lanes, up to the merge - always a well-behaved merge. Where it seems not to work, is where there is a temporary reduction in width.

dishman · 2026-03-04T16:46:55+0000

Brigadier said:
Probably because, after the first couple of < signs (and no sign of upcoming lane closures) , some drivers would think the gantries were faulty and completely ignore them anyway?

Possibly then, the least worst solution?

Probably right, I am likely over-estimating the intelligence and competence of most drivers.....

The additional issue with the X'd lanes, and I forgot this at the time, is that they also activate the speed cameras for those lanes.

So if you are caught unawares and don't have time to make it to the open lane before you hit the gantry, there is a chance you get a ticket for being in a closed lane. I expect the regular drivers know which gantries have cameras on.

JBR · 2026-03-04T22:57:40+0000

It occurs to me to suggest that where the merge takes place, there could be traffic lights going to green for each lane in turn, staggered for a couple of minutes per lane perhaps. Preferably with cameras to pick out the BMWs who don't worry about traffic lights!
I'm not joking; I think such a thing would work well.

Merge In Turn, why does no one do it properly!

Similar threads