OPINION - Butting In At the Last Second

... makes nothing but sense, for all the reasons you have mentioned.

And when all is said and done, the difference in lost time between having half a dozen or whatever more vehicles ahead of you is inconsequential.

Drivers in Vancouver have been merging alternately on the approaches to the Lions Gate Bridge for decades because - it works!

For what it is worth, here is my take on this issue.

mylittledaddy is correct in that late merging (a.k.a. zipper merge) theoretically gives the optimum utilisation of the available road. However, I imagine that early merging would have to result in a considerable distance of unutilised road before it would result in a significant effect.

But mylittledaddy's argument does make the important point that early merging does not automatically entitle one to a feeling of moral superiority over late mergers. It would also mean that deliberately blocking late mergers is wrong in that it shows lack of consideration, perhaps to the point of aggression.

Perhaps sometime in the future all vehicles will be remotely controlled by a super-computer and lanes will then zipper merge smoothly. But, in the meantime, each vehicle is independently controlled by a human who is subject to all manner of preconceptions, misconceptions, instincts, biases and misunderstandings. This makes the present reality more complex than the ideal traffic flow model.

First there is the perception that whenever confronted with a choice of line-ups, whether at the grocery check-out or in traffic, the other lines or lanes almost always seem to be move faster than the one chosen. Perhaps an explanation for this effect is as follows. Time seems to pass more quickly when I am moving because I am focusing on where I am going, When my lane is stationary time seems to pass more slowly since I have nothing to do but think about myself and my hard luck at being stuck while all those cars in the other lane are getting closer to their journey's end. Thus I have the perception that I spend more time waiting and less time moving than do vehicles in the other lanes even when that is not the case.

Secondly there are the drivers who, not content with staying in a chosen lane, keep pushing in to whichever lane is moving at the time and so switch from lane to lane in order to gain an advantage in their average speed of travel. If one thinks about those times when one is driving in normally flowing traffic on a major highway and the traffic suddenly slows or stops and bunches up for no apparent reason. It has been shown that this effect often begins with a single vehicle slowing down slightly causing a vehicle following too close behind to brake suddenly. This results in a ripple effect that becomes magnified causing the bunching of a lot of vehicles. This leads me to suspect that drivers who repeatedly and aggressively change lanes in a traffic line-up do cause a decrease in the average speed of all vehicles in the line-up in a similar way. Of course, they also cause annoyance for a number of other human reasons.

I will not claim that my approach to merging is superior to any other. But it suits me and is as follows. When lanes are merging, I like to merge fairly early because I find it more relaxing to know that I am positioned where I will need to be a little way down the road. When other drivers want to merge, I never try to block them. I expect that any small advantage they may gain in travel time by switching lanes is hardly enough to enhance their life significantly and the increased stress of lane switching may be shortening their life. Having chosen to merge earlier rather than later because that is more relaxing why would I then choose to get stressed over late mergers and lane switchers? I'll still get to my destination soon enough and I won't be exhausted and stressed when I get there.