538
That's a no (europe.pub)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world
287 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 4 months ago (1 child)

It's not about throughout. You want previous intersections and ramps to be free. The extra lane is car storage space. If one lane is stopped and the other is free you absolutely move up to the merge point. Safely, mind you. The speed limit is way too fast, 30-40 kph is enough. Merging early causes shockwaves that turn into full blown stops upstream. Plus you block the whole lane until you've merged.
I've done traffic control systems for almost a decade so I actually know a little about the subject.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -3 points 4 months ago

    In some situations, it's not all about throughput.

    Though traffic congestion is ALWAYS about throughput. You want less congestion? Then don't rush to the end of a closed lane and cram in. That ALWAYS hurts throughput, which ALWAYS increases congestion. Period.

    Sure, if traffic IS backed up to other roads, then absolutely, fill up the closing lane and get off those other roads, though understand that filling up that lane will, always, always hurt congestion if throughput is already struggling.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent