From: otterpower@xhotmail.com
On 12/16/2013 10:03 AM, Daniel W. Rouse Jr. wrote:
> "Arif Khokar" wrote in message
> news:eOYou.430003$B22.130265@fx01.iad...
>> On 12/06/2013 01:50 AM, Dave Head wrote:
>>> On Wed, 4 Dec 2013 17:06:27 +0000 (UTC), Brent
>>> wrote:
>>>>> Keeping totally to the right, this stuff happens:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Everyone else that merges into traffic when entering such a roadway
>>>>> does so at 45 mph. You either have to brake, or move left anyway.
>>>>
>>>> They shouldn't be doing that. Fix this problem instead of creating
>>>> another.
>>>
>>> Yep. But the only thing I have the power to do is to not get killed
>>> by it. The way to do that is to not be there - IOW, be a lane
>>> over...
>>
>> You're not going to get killed by it. IME, impaired mergers will not
>> ram your vehicle when trying to merge. They usually either fall in
>> behind you or actually accelerate and merge properly if you remain in
>> the right hand lane.
>
> Tell that to the thru traffic that SPEEDS UP to time it so they will
> collide with the merger--forcing the merger to speed up themselves or
> slow down and brake. If they were going faster than merging traffic,
> they could have changed one lane to the left (two or more lanes in the
> same direction).
>
> NO, I don't think forcing the merger to stop on the onramp is safe
> driving on the thru traffic driver's part.
Then you must have quite a time with the interval signals on the access
ramps.
>
> Oh and "finding" a gap in gridlock traffic usually means the lane
> changer has to risk rear-end colliding the vehicle in front of them
> because of the other driver that won't let them in.
Anticipation or even, heaven forbid, slowing down typically works in
those situations.
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus
protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
