Since when do they still make these merge ramps?

[tolbs17]

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.775183,-78.0612167,3a,44.8y,302.92h,74.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1speuMpfGwEdbWrci9Sq5xuw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.7755088,-78.0620153,176m/data=!3m1!1e3

I just know these will disappear soon when this part gets upgraded to interstate standards.

I-95 in Rocky Mount has them too.

I think these were kind of risky, and the merge lane is relatively short.

[JoePCool14]

Those don't seem that bad. Looks like there's plenty of room to merge. The striping is odd, but otherwise it's a fine acceleration lane.

[SkyPesos]

The triangle gore ending before the two lines touch each other? Ohio does this a lot; go randomly find an interchange that wasn't built or reconstructed in the past 10 years in the state, and there's a good chance the lines for the ramp left shoulder and through lanes right shoulder would end before meeting touch each other.

[tolbs17]

Those don't seem that bad. Looks like there's plenty of room to merge. The striping is odd, but otherwise it's a fine acceleration lane.

I'm guessing cause the speed limit used to be 55 back in the 70s.

[tolbs17]

The triangle gore ending before the two lines touch each other? Ohio does this a lot; go randomly find an interchange in the state, and there's a good chance the lines for the ramp left shoulder and through lanes right shoulder would end before meeting touch each other.

Ew.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4988342,-82.7133682,3a,75y,178.42h,75.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbMhqW9PO_s9FxRHqlVunvA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

As I see here, they don't put the dots until the acceleration lane ends.

[1995hoo]

I always liked those in North Carolina. Lets you get over if it's clear.

[tolbs17]

I always liked those in North Carolina. Lets you get over if it's clear.

They stopped making them. Do you think they should continue?

[Scott5114]

1956

[kphoger]

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.775183,-78.0612167,3a,44.8y,302.92h,74.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1speuMpfGwEdbWrci9Sq5xuw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.7755088,-78.0620153,176m/data=!3m1!1e3

I just know these will disappear soon when this part gets upgraded to interstate standards.

I-95 in Rocky Mount has them too.

I think these were kind of risky, and the merge lane is relatively short.

Those look like normal merge ramps to me (other than the striping, which may just be a NC thing for all I know).

??

[tolbs17]

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.775183,-78.0612167,3a,44.8y,302.92h,74.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1speuMpfGwEdbWrci9Sq5xuw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.7755088,-78.0620153,176m/data=!3m1!1e3

I just know these will disappear soon when this part gets upgraded to interstate standards.

I-95 in Rocky Mount has them too.

I think these were kind of risky, and the merge lane is relatively short.

Those look like normal merge ramps to me (other than the striping, which may just be a NC thing for all I know).

??

Yeah but it always makes me think that an extra lane adds up.

[Urban Prairie Schooner]

It could always be worse. A lot worse.

https://www.google.com/maps/@30.4494013,-91.1806728,3a,28.6y,176.39h,84.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0E0zaIkJ7XKQRgP57GScGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

[thspfc]

On newer WI freeways the double white lines at merge points take extremely long to come together, to the point where I see a lot of people disregard them completely. I would rather they be like the ones in the OP.

[RobbieL2415]

On-ramps would still work if people actually got up to speed on them.

[US20IL64]

On-ramps would still work if people actually got up to speed on them.

There are still many "fraidy-cats" that learned to drive in the 55 era, and are timid of acceleration forces, 

[Bruce]

Meanwhile there's this merge I deal with every so often: https://goo.gl/maps/cf6gUDADZpp5ZMhX7

Traffic bombs down the hill and cuts off cars coming from the much busier SR 204, who are required to yield but sometimes don't. I've seen some nasty wrecks here.

[Ned Weasel]

A dashed line extension of the channelizing line from the on-ramp used to be in the MUTCD for tapered merges.  However, the 2009 edition omits the dashed line extension, but it does include the dotted line extension of the channelizing line from the mainline.  See 3B-9, Drawing C.

[ran4sh]

A dashed line extension of the channelizing line from the on-ramp used to be in the MUTCD for tapered merges.  However, the 2009 edition omits the dashed line extension, but it does include the dotted line extension of the channelizing line from the mainline.  See 3B-9, Drawing C.

That seems to explain why Georgia is restriping its tapered merges

[rower155]

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.775183,-78.0612167,3a,44.8y,302.92h,74.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1speuMpfGwEdbWrci9Sq5xuw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.7755088,-78.0620153,176m/data=!3m1!1e3

I just know these will disappear soon when this part gets upgraded to interstate standards.

I-95 in Rocky Mount has them too.

I think these were kind of risky, and the merge lane is relatively short.

This one was built per the NCDOT Roadway Design Manual Chapter 8-11. It has the full 1200' taper. I don't know how often they still use it vs the parallel entrance, but the angular entrance is still in the current manual as an option.

[jeffandnicole]

The NJ Turnpike used this type design...without the skip lines as shown in Tolbs' examples...in their Interchange 6 - 9 widening project from 2009-2014.

[NoGoodNamesAvailable]

Tapered entrance lanes are just as safe as parallel if you know how to drive. But of course most Americans don't.

[ran4sh]

Tapered entrance lanes are just as safe as parallel if you know how to drive. But of course most Americans don't.

I read somewhere that tapered is sometimes preferred because it more accurately reflects how drivers usually merge onto freeways. I know that I change lanes at the dashed line if I'm already moving at freeway speed

[Revive 755]

Tapered entrance lanes are just as safe as parallel if you know how to drive. But of course most Americans don't.

Tapered merges - particularly those resembling Figure 3B-9 Case B in the 2009 MUTCD - don't work well when one is behind a driver who refuses to use the accelerator until after merging.

[interstatefan990]

I also don't like when there's a modern parallel acceleration lane but the solid, thick white line doesn't become dotted until the very end, as if you're supposed to sit there waiting when there's a perfectly open gap for you to move in.

[tolbs17]

This almost looks like two lanes to the right and yet it's just one.

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0794977,-78.7888633,3a,75y,207.07h,63.16t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJr928ttneA4jGR525_YHDg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DJr928ttneA4jGR525_YHDg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D315.401%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

[SkyPesos]

The triangle gore ending before the two lines touch each other? Ohio does this a lot; go randomly find an interchange in the state, and there's a good chance the lines for the ramp left shoulder and through lanes right shoulder would end before meeting touch each other.

Ew.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4988342,-82.7133682,3a,75y,178.42h,75.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbMhqW9PO_s9FxRHqlVunvA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

As I see here, they don't put the dots until the acceleration lane ends.

That's pretty common. Most of the time when a lane ends, It's just blank, rather than dots.