Re: merge in turn
- From: Adrian <toomany2cvs@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 19 Dec 2005 16:10:53 GMT
Brimstone (brimstone@xxxxxxxxxxx) gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying :
>>>> Except that they're not adding to the delay and merging earlier will
>>>> only move the queue backwards.
>>> If all the traffic keeps moving there won't be a queue will there?
>> Why is all the traffic more like to "keep moving" if it merges over
>> there <---------- compared to it merging over there -------->
> Becaus it will merge at speed not at a slow crawl.
Why? If there's any significant volume of traffic, the point at which you
cease to be cruising at speed will rapidly move back to WAAAAY before the
warning signs for the hazard - so people will be slowing down without
knowing they need to merge into one lane.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Brimstone
- Re: merge in turn
- References:
- merge in turn
- From: Tim S Kemp
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Knight Of The Road
- Re: merge in turn
- From: SteveH
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Knight Of The Road
- Re: merge in turn
- From: David Knowles
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Brimstone
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Cessna172
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Brimstone
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Mark Hewitt
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Brimstone
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Cessna172
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Brimstone
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Mark Foster
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Brimstone
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Adrian
- Re: merge in turn
- From: Brimstone
- merge in turn
- Prev by Date: Re: merge in turn
- Next by Date: Re: merge in turn
- Previous by thread: Re: merge in turn
- Next by thread: Re: merge in turn
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|