Traffic Laws

For those who are just going to get a driver's license, and especially for those who are already studying at a driving school, reading this post is highly discouraged, because may result in incorrect answers on the theory exam.

Today we will focus on intersections, roadways and their intersections. Let me remind you that according to clause 1.2 of the SDA "Crossroads" is a place of intersection, abutment or fork of roads at the same level, bounded by imaginary lines connecting respectively opposite, the most distant from the center of the crossroads, the beginning of curving of carriageways. Exits from adjacent territories are not considered as intersections. “Carriageway” is a road element designed for the movement of off-road vehicles.

There is no definition of the term "Intersection of carriageways" in the traffic rules, just as there is no method for determining this intersection, therefore one has to be guided by the general meaning of the word "intersection". Thus, in the Great Soviet Encyclopedia, the definition of "Set intersection" is given: Set intersection is a set consisting of all those elements that belong simultaneously to all given sets.

So, the intersection of carriageways is a set of points that are carriageways of several roads at the same time. In driving schools, as a rule, they draw a simple intersection, like this:

Then shade the carriageway of the vertical road (red) and two carriageways of the horizontal road (yellow). The result is two intersections (orange). These are the intersections of the carriageways:

It would seem that everything is clear, it became clear what to answer in the exam tickets. However, there is one fundamental logical error in this explanation. The teachers, drawing the carriageways of the horizontal road, mentally continue the dividing strip (in our case, the lawn) to the entire intersection. And on what basis do they do this? To detect a logical error, it is enough to look at the following intersection:

How many crossings are there? There are two carriageways to the left of the intersection, and one to the right. If you mentally extend the dividing strip at an intersection, you will get two intersections of carriageways, if you do not extend - one. The answer to the riddle is simple: there is one intersection of carriageways at this intersection. And, what is most interesting, at the first intersection there is also one intersection of carriageways. Moreover, at any intersection of two roads, there is one intersection of carriageways. Sounds ridiculous? Now I will prove it.

Imagine a typical road with a lawn-like dividing strip. How many carriageways are there in the section marked with a rectangle? Obviously, and no one doubts that there are two:

Now imagine that this road has a break in the median strip (not yet an intersection, but just a gap). For example, for a reversal. And it doesn't matter how long this gap is. Maybe 5 meters, or maybe 5 kilometers:

How many carriageways are there in the section marked with a rectangle? One. After all, carriageways can only be separated from each other by a dividing strip (recall section 1.2 of the SDA: "Dividing strip" is a road element, structurally and (or) using markings 1.2.1, separating adjacent carriageways and not intended for movement and stopping Vehicle). There is no dividing strip on the indicated section of the road, which means that there is only one carriageway. If we consider the road as a whole, then at first it has 2 carriageways, then (in the gap) - one, and then - again two.

The last step remains: let's imagine that at the place of the gap our road intersects with a vertical road consisting of one carriageway:

At the intersection, obviously, there is no dividing line (otherwise, cars moving along a vertical road would crash into the lawn). That is, at the crossroads by the horizontal road, as we have already found out, there is one carriageway. And the vertical road has one carriageway. Consequently, there is exactly one intersection of carriageways.

Indeed, let us recall once again a drawing from a driving school:

What's the lot on it right in the middle of the red intersection? Obviously, it is part of an intersection. But an intersection is an intersection of roads. This means that the site must be part of both roads. What part of the horizontal road can this section be? Yes, no, except for the carriageway, because this is an element of the road designed for the movement of trackless vehicles. Well, if this rectangle is the carriageway of a horizontal road, above and below it the orange rectangles are also carriageways of a horizontal road, then all three rectangles together are one carriageway of a horizontal road, and, therefore, there is one intersection of carriageways at the intersection.

So, the conclusion: since there are no dividing stripes at the intersection, each road has one carriageway at the intersection. Consequently, the intersection of the carriageways is one.

What do these conclusions lead to?

1. Violations of traffic rules. When driving along an intersection, the driver, in principle, cannot violate the first paragraph of clause 8.6 of the SDA: "The turn must be carried out in such a way that when leaving the intersection of carriageways, the vehicle does not turn out to be on the side of oncoming traffic." Very often, traffic police inspectors draw up administrative material on drivers who turned around at an intersection around the dividing strip along a small radius, imputing them to enter the oncoming lane in violation of clause 8.6 of the traffic rules. Such actions of inspectors are illegal: firstly, in paragraph 8.6 of the SDA we are talking about turning to the left, not turning. The Inspector's argument that a U-turn is two turns is nothing more than a fantasy. Secondly, as it was proved above, there is only one carriageway at the intersection, and therefore it is simply impossible to leave the intersection of carriageways in the middle of the intersection.

2. Wrong answers to tickets. The exam tickets contain a lot of questions about the number of intersections of carriageways at intersections, as well as about the area of ​​action of signs 3.18.1 "No right turn", 3.18.2 "No left turn", 4.1.1 "Straight ahead", 4.1.2 " Driving to the right ", 4.1.3" Driving to the left ", 4.1.4" Driving straight or to the right ", 4.1.5" Driving straight or to the left ", 4.1.6" Driving to the right or left ", the action of which, according to traffic rules, applies to the nearest intersection roadways. If we assume that there is only one intersection of carriageways at the intersection, then the answers to all these questions will not coincide with the answers proposed by the ticket issuers. This, of course, is a disgrace, and something tells me that the General Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation will soon finally deal with the issues of examination tickets.

3. Incorrect placement of road signs. Very often on the road you can see the following arrangement of road signs:

Considering that the signs "Straight ahead or left" and "Straight ahead or right" act on the first intersection of carriageways, which, as we found out, is one at the intersection, then with this arrangement of signs, turning left into the second passage is prohibited by the sign "Straight ahead or to the right. " Of course, this is not at all what the road services wanted to do, and the placement of signs for the correct implementation of traffic should be slightly different. But more on that in the next post.

Be careful on the roads.