To wonder if I'm getting it all wrong re: lane closures

[Welshmaenad]

In situations on dual carriageways/motorways where a lane is being closed, it was my understanding that traffic should continue to use both lanes up to the point of closure where they should merge into the open lane - to prevent miles of backlogs in the open lane. Am I right? It's what I've always done if I happened to be travelling in the lane that was closing.

Driving home yesterday from a weekend away, dual carriageway, lane closure ahead - I was already in the lane staying open so I just stayed there and let people in that wanted to merge - but as we queued (with the closing lane blissfully empty bar the odd car driving up to the merge point) I noticed two cars in front pull out and straddle both lanes across the dividing lanes, effectively blocking cars from making it to the merge point.

Wtf is this batshittery? Why did they feel the need to police the situation? Have I been getting it wrong all these years??

Culture plays a surprisingly large part in road design. It is know that uk drivers dont like 'merge in turn' whether for roadworks or roundabouts even thought traffic modelling software and experience in many other countries show itis more efficient. Just like we dont do shared streets with marking very well. In general uk drivers focus on their needs not the greater good.

The 400 is about half way down the merge point - it usually starts at 800. If cars start to merge in turn from around that 800 point and keep their speed steady then you don’t get a bottleneck of the speedsters who fly up the affected lane trying to force their way into slower moving traffic (depends on how busy the lanes are obvs - 400 might be fine if it’s quieter). The OP was specifically talking about the point of closure - ie the point at which the cones appear closing off your lane. That’s just silly.