Remove yield signs from freeway ramps

[yand]

It seems to me that removing yield signs from on ramps can improve safety and efficiency.
Zipper merging is an efficient way to merge. Adopting zipper merges at most freeway on ramps would discourage inefficient and unsafe behaviors - of both stopping/slowing to a crawl at the on ramp (which now increases the gap in traffic needed to merge), and tailgating each other while passing the merge point (which is unsafe in itself and forces merging traffic to stop).
Treating yield signs as conditional stop signs is only for roads without acceleration lanes. In practice the only time freeways that have acceleration lanes should be "at capacity" is when traffic slows to the point where a safe (2+second) following distance falls below 2 cars.
In addition to safety and efficiency benefits, we also save money on signs.

[hotdogPi]

Yielding would still apply even if the signs were removed, right?

[webny99]

Unfortunately, it is not as easy as simply removing the yield signs. In most cases, yield signs are placed at substandard ramps where they would need to build acceleration lanes to justify eliminating the yield.

[jeffandnicole]

Sorry - not the same thing as a lane-ending issue.  Those on the highway have the right-of-way.  They should *never* be slowing down to allow someone on the highway.  Unfortunately, many people must skip over this lesson in Drivers Education training, because they feel that they are entitled to get onto the highway and those already on the highway must yield to them.

[yand]

The idea is more to make it official policy that drivers on the main road have to cooperate with ramp traffic and let them in.
Instead of the standard for eliminating yield signs being that ramps have excellent geometry and visibility, I would suggest an alternative standard: regardless of how good the ramp is or how long the acceleration lane is... is ramp traffic expected to stop? I can think of several less than ideal interchanges that have yield signs where the effect on traffic could be catastrophic if someone stopped to give way. I've never encountered a ramp with such poor visibility and geometry that I couldn't let someone in if I wanted to.

Sorry - not the same thing as a lane-ending issue.  Those on the highway have the right-of-way.  They should *never* be slowing down to allow someone on the highway.  Unfortunately, many people must skip over this lesson in Drivers Education training, because they feel that they are entitled to get onto the highway and those already on the highway must yield to them.

You forgot some other lessons:
1) Never stop on the ramp
2) Defensive driving
3) The only difference between an ending lane and an ending acceleration lane is... very little. If you want to argue legal right of way, any time you have a sign that says "lane ends merge right/left", those on the non-ending lane have the right of way.

[billpa]

The idea is more to make it official policy that drivers on the main road have to cooperate with ramp traffic and let them in.
Instead of the standard for eliminating yield signs being that ramps have excellent geometry and visibility, I would suggest an alternative standard: regardless of how good the ramp is or how long the acceleration lane is... is ramp traffic expected to stop? I can think of several less than ideal interchanges that have yield signs where the effect on traffic could be catastrophic if someone stopped to give way. I've never encountered a ramp with such poor visibility and geometry that I couldn't let someone in if I wanted to.

Sorry - not the same thing as a lane-ending issue.  Those on the highway have the right-of-way.  They should *never* be slowing down to allow someone on the highway.  Unfortunately, many people must skip over this lesson in Drivers Education training, because they feel that they are entitled to get onto the highway and those already on the highway must yield to them.

You forgot some other lessons:
1) Never stop on the ramp
2) Defensive driving
3) The only difference between an ending lane and an ending acceleration lane is... very little. If you want to argue legal right of way, any time you have a sign that says "lane ends merge right/left", those on the non-ending lane have the right of way.

Never stop on a ramp? Never?

At certain times and situations 'someone' may have to stop and it shouldn't be the motorist already on the freeway.

Pixel 2

[Brandon]

[Yield signs at end of freeway ramps]

Remove them?  Many states (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin) don't even post them anyway for most ramps.  I've only seen them used on every ramp in a minority of states, like Iowa.

[Brandon]

Sorry - not the same thing as a lane-ending issue.  Those on the highway have the right-of-way.  They should *never* be slowing down to allow someone on the highway.  Unfortunately, many people must skip over this lesson in Drivers Education training, because they feel that they are entitled to get onto the highway and those already on the highway must yield to them.

You forgot some other lessons:
1) Never stop on the ramp
2) Defensive driving
3) The only difference between an ending lane and an ending acceleration lane is... very little. If you want to argue legal right of way, any time you have a sign that says "lane ends merge right/left", those on the non-ending lane have the right of way.

Merging requires one to get up to freeway speed on a ramp, but that also means you do the following:

1. Match your speed to those on the freeway so as not to inhibit their travel (i.e. do not enter at 35 mph in front of them).
2. Yield to those already on the freeway as they have right-of-way (i.e. do not cut them off).

Thus, you can seamlessly merge into traffic.

[Big John]

Wisconsin tells drivers on the freeway to pull over to the next lane when there is a merge.  Page 42 of https://wisconsindot.gov/Documents/dmv/shared/bds124-driverbook.pdf

[yand]

The idea is more to make it official policy that drivers on the main road have to cooperate with ramp traffic and let them in.
Instead of the standard for eliminating yield signs being that ramps have excellent geometry and visibility, I would suggest an alternative standard: regardless of how good the ramp is or how long the acceleration lane is... is ramp traffic expected to stop? I can think of several less than ideal interchanges that have yield signs where the effect on traffic could be catastrophic if someone stopped to give way. I've never encountered a ramp with such poor visibility and geometry that I couldn't let someone in if I wanted to.

Sorry - not the same thing as a lane-ending issue.  Those on the highway have the right-of-way.  They should *never* be slowing down to allow someone on the highway.  Unfortunately, many people must skip over this lesson in Drivers Education training, because they feel that they are entitled to get onto the highway and those already on the highway must yield to them.

You forgot some other lessons:
1) Never stop on the ramp
2) Defensive driving
3) The only difference between an ending lane and an ending acceleration lane is... very little. If you want to argue legal right of way, any time you have a sign that says "lane ends merge right/left", those on the non-ending lane have the right of way.

Never stop on a ramp? Never?

At certain times and situations 'someone' may have to stop and it shouldn't be the motorist already on the freeway.

Pixel 2

As long as traffic is moving normally, nobody should have to stop.

Sorry - not the same thing as a lane-ending issue.  Those on the highway have the right-of-way.  They should *never* be slowing down to allow someone on the highway.  Unfortunately, many people must skip over this lesson in Drivers Education training, because they feel that they are entitled to get onto the highway and those already on the highway must yield to them.

You forgot some other lessons:
1) Never stop on the ramp
2) Defensive driving
3) The only difference between an ending lane and an ending acceleration lane is... very little. If you want to argue legal right of way, any time you have a sign that says "lane ends merge right/left", those on the non-ending lane have the right of way.

Merging requires one to get up to freeway speed on a ramp, but that also means you do the following:

1. Match your speed to those on the freeway so as not to inhibit their travel (i.e. do not enter at 35 mph in front of them).
2. Yield to those already on the freeway as they have right-of-way (i.e. do not cut them off).

Thus, you can seamlessly merge into traffic.

Our laws are currently set up to minimize inhibiting those on the freeway in theory.
Speeders, tailgaters, short acceleration areas and slow vehicles/drivers all mean that theory doesn't work so well in practice. It is easier and safer for the car on the freeway to "inhibit" himself slightly than to put all the responsibility on the entering car. Net efficiency is also greater than if the entering vehicle had to come to a stop.
The merits of zipper merging apply regardless of the initial distance/separation between the two merging lanes.

[jemacedo9]

PA has several substandard ramps where they will actually place a STOP sign on the ramp instead of a yield sign.

On the Schuylkill Expwy (I-76), there are long-range (medium range) plans to assign variable lane control...and it was stated on the webpage for that where a mainline right lane may be closed off to allow the on-ramp to effectively not merge.  The place where I see this working pretty well is the merge from US 202/US 422 into I-76 east...where many times, there is a larger volume coming from US 202/US 422...closing the right lane of I-76 before that may effectively work.

But to make that a blanket statement for all ramps?  Urban and rural?  High traffic or low traffic? 

[yand]

PA has several substandard ramps where they will actually place a STOP sign on the ramp instead of a yield sign.

On the Schuylkill Expwy (I-76), there are long-range (medium range) plans to assign variable lane control...and it was stated on the webpage for that where a mainline right lane may be closed off to allow the on-ramp to effectively not merge.  The place where I see this working pretty well is the merge from US 202/US 422 into I-76 east...where many times, there is a larger volume coming from US 202/US 422...closing the right lane of I-76 before that may effectively work.

But to make that a blanket statement for all ramps?  Urban and rural?  High traffic or low traffic? 

Any ramp where you don't want traffic to stop on the ramp, which is most ramps.

[roadman]

Unfortunately, it is not as easy as simply removing the yield signs. In most cases, yield signs are placed at substandard ramps where they would need to build acceleration lanes to justify eliminating the yield.

Per the MUTCD, the lack of adequate acceleration lanes is the only reason why Yield signs should be placed on entrance ramps to freeways.  Unfortunately, there are DOTs who feel it is necessary to provide Yield signs on ALL entrance ramps in either specific Districts or statewide.

[kalvado]

Our laws are currently set up to minimize inhibiting those on the freeway in theory.
Speeders, tailgaters, short acceleration areas and slow vehicles/drivers all mean that theory doesn't work so well in practice. It is easier and safer for the car on the freeway to "inhibit" himself slightly than to put all the responsibility on the entering car. Net efficiency is also greater than if the entering vehicle had to come to a stop.
The merits of zipper merging apply regardless of the initial distance/separation between the two merging lanes.

Biggest problem for the merge in heavy traffic is space available for merge - and those who insist on keeping right no matter what. Full speed zipper may be a good idea, but it assumes that the right lane is half empty, with 4+ seconds intervals between vehicles. 

[1995hoo]

I know some people who are absolutely adamant that the traffic already on either the highway or the C/D road should slow down to allow people coming down the ramp to have a clear shot to accelerate up to highway speed, regardless of who has the yield sign or anything else. I suppose I understand their thinking, although I definitely disagree with it if there's no C/D road and I think it's unnecessary if there is one (because the C/D road is where you accelerate up to speed).

I do think if it's possible and reasonable to do so safely, traffic in the lane adjacent to the onramp should move over a lane to let people merge onto the highway.

[Mergingtraffic]

The idea is more to make it official policy that drivers on the main road have to cooperate with ramp traffic and let them in.
Instead of the standard for eliminating yield signs being that ramps have excellent geometry and visibility, I would suggest an alternative standard: regardless of how good the ramp is or how long the acceleration lane is... is ramp traffic expected to stop? I can think of several less than ideal interchanges that have yield signs where the effect on traffic could be catastrophic if someone stopped to give way. I've never encountered a ramp with such poor visibility and geometry that I couldn't let someone in if I wanted to.

Sorry - not the same thing as a lane-ending issue.  Those on the highway have the right-of-way.  They should *never* be slowing down to allow someone on the highway.  Unfortunately, many people must skip over this lesson in Drivers Education training, because they feel that they are entitled to get onto the highway and those already on the highway must yield to them.

You forgot some other lessons:
1) Never stop on the ramp
2) Defensive driving
3) The only difference between an ending lane and an ending acceleration lane is... very little. If you want to argue legal right of way, any time you have a sign that says "lane ends merge right/left", those on the non-ending lane have the right of way.

Never stop on a ramp? Never?

At certain times and situations 'someone' may have to stop and it shouldn't be the motorist already on the freeway.

Pixel 2

This is the thought process I can't stand.  People think they can just bully their way onto the highway from the ramp.  In a perfect world, ramp traffic should be up to highway speed by the time they merge in.  Many cases there are substandard ramps with no merge time.  At those cases, what if youre going down the ramp and hit the end and there is a car in the mainline?!  What would you do?! Slam on the breaks to avoid hitting them?  Hit them?  Run off the road?  Or yield to them like you're supposed to do?  That's why there's YIELD and STOP signs at those type of ramps.

I've been in the mainline and almost hit several times by people who bully their way on from these substandard ramps.  They have to yield to me.

An example...there should actually be a stop sign here to stop people like that when they just move right in.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.331028,-73.0904076,3a,75y,351.06h,64.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sCGAzzZybMRqDuDvoApEZGw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

[kphoger]

Remove them?  Many states (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin) don't even post them anyway for most ramps.

This.

There are bazillions of on-ramps with no yield sign that function perfectly well.  I think they're mostly pointless.  If someone is going to slow down or move over to let someone in, then they're going to do so whether there's a yield sign on the ramp or not.  If someone is not going to slow down or move over, then they're likewise going to not do so whether there's a yield sign on the ramp or not.

[yand]

Remove them?  Many states (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin) don't even post them anyway for most ramps.

This.

There are bazillions of on-ramps with no yield sign that function perfectly well.  I think they're mostly pointless.  If someone is going to slow down or move over to let someone in, then they're going to do so whether there's a yield sign on the ramp or not.  If someone is not going to slow down or move over, then they're likewise going to not do so whether there's a yield sign on the ramp or not.

Currently, on-ramp traffic (especially in situations with poor visibility) face a dilemma:

If you choose to treat the yield sign as a conditional stop sign, crawl along the ramp and only speed up at the end of the ramp when you have full view of the main road and made sure there is a gap, you will be starting from a lower speed and as a result need to wait for a much larger gap in traffic to merge. This is inefficient and starts a chain reaction where every car behind you now also needs a large gap to merge.

If you start accelerating early, you will arrive at the merge point with a small speed differential and only need a small gap to merge with traffic. But, since you do not have right of way, traffic on the mainline can choose to not let you in or close a previously available gap, at which point you will have to slow down to a crawl. Once you slow down you've likely already used up most of your acceleration area, and now require a much larger opening that you must accelerate again to enter.

With the zipper merge method, all ramp traffic has to worry about is getting up to speed and not passing any car on the mainline. The only sacrifice required of cars on the mainline is some light braking. Spreading out the workload is better for safety than putting all the workload on one car.

If both lanes are legally considered to have equal right of way, it would definitely make a difference and discourage the unsafe behavior of passing at the merge area. Ramp traffic would also more confidently accelerate if they know the law is on their side.

[hotdogPi]

If both lanes are legally considered to have equal right of way, it would definitely make a difference and discourage the unsafe behavior of passing at the merge area. Ramp traffic would also more confidently accelerate if they know the law is on their side.

Removing the yield sign won't do that, though. Traffic on the freeway still has right of way.

[yand]

If that is true, then what is even the point of yield signs? 

[hotdogPi]

If that is true, then what is even the point of yield signs? 

1. As a reminder.
2. If it's not clear which direction has the right of way.
3. To determine priority at roundabouts and sometimes rotaries and traffic circles.
4. (mostly used outside the US) In place of a 2-way stop to determine who has the right of way without requiring stopping.

[webny99]

If that is true, then what is even the point of yield signs? 

1. As a reminder.
2. If it's not clear which direction has the right of way.
3. To determine priority at roundabouts and sometimes rotaries and traffic circles.
4. (mostly used outside the US) In place of a 2-way stop to determine who has the right of way without requiring stopping.

I think he meant specifically at the end of freeway ramps, not in general, so only #1 would apply.

[johndoe]

If I were king of the world yield signs would never be used in an add-lane situation (be it a short acceleration or weaving segment-like the cloverleaf below)

IMO this may be leading to some of the confusion of "failure to yield" at roundabouts.  The same sign is used to say "merge at 70 mph" so no wonder people don't prepare for a stop at the approach.

Sadly I am not king of the world

[bzakharin]

Here is a prime example of where you're likely to need to stop (and then merge with the fast lane of traffic!)
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9482358,-75.1863577,3a,75y,43.65h,76.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgiPQs7FP8kcCwY3ycYUPnA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Honestly, I seldom see any onramps where merging traffic reaches the speed of highway traffic before merging. Usually it's pretty much impossible. The one exception in my regular travels is the merge from Garden State Parkway North to Atlantic City Expressway West with the long acceleration lane. Usually, I move leftward to avoid merging traffic from the right. If that's impossible, then slow down. What's the alternative? Hitting merging cars?

[kphoger]

Here is a prime example of where you're likely to need to stop (and then merge with the fast lane of traffic!)
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9482358,-75.1863577,3a,75y,43.65h,76.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgiPQs7FP8kcCwY3ycYUPnA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Honestly, I seldom see any onramps where merging traffic reaches the speed of highway traffic before merging. Usually it's pretty much impossible. The one exception in my regular travels is the merge from Garden State Parkway North to Atlantic City Expressway West with the long acceleration lane. Usually, I move leftward to avoid merging traffic from the right. If that's impossible, then slow down. What's the alternative? Hitting merging cars?

And Chicago's answers with no yield signs:

Added lane
Merging lane (with ramp meters that weren't there back when I live there)