this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2023
331 points (73.7% liked)

memes

10311 readers
1573 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] czech@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This does not address my point at all. I agreed that your suggestion would not necessarily negatively impact the total throughput on your route.

My point was that your route does not exist in a vacuum and the utility of the open lane may not be obvious without having the same information available as the traffic engineers who designed the closure.

[โ€“] Fermion@feddit.nl 4 points 1 year ago

Matching speed does a better job of filling both lanes evenly and reduces the amount of backed up traffic. The slow lane is what backs up to prior intersections. Matching speed is what allows the slow lane to clear up and prevent affecting upstream intersections. You're point isn't actually relevant to what I've described because the lane is fully utilized in a proper zipper merge with speed matching.

So I'm not ignoring the purpose of the merge lane, and I'm not advocating early merging. I'm describing the key aspect of zipper merging that the cruise ahead people are missing.