Why Our Roads Take Lives

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

The design, construction and modernization of the road network does not take into account the human factor, its behavior in a given situation. As a result, our designers and transport workers stumble upon the mistakes that were made by the capitalist countries back in the 50s.

In incomplete 2015, more than 16,000 people died in the Russian Federation, more than 168,000 were injured - these are the worst indicators in Europe and one of the worst in the world. News bulletins are constantly full of reports of accidents, pedestrians are most often affected.

According to traffic police wrong choice of speedis one of the most common causes of road traffic accidents. Despite this, in Russia, the non-fine speed limit in cities has been increased to 80 km / h, that is, 60 km / h is the permissible speed and 20 km / h is the non-fine speeding. While in Germany the permissible speed in the city is 50 km / h, and the non-punitive speeding is 3 km / h.

Why is this happening? Indeed, in Russia there are many officials, leaders, experts and even scientists involved in the organization of traffic. Many are at the peak of their careers, general ranks, they have a sufficient amount of resources and powers. There is even a whole department whose main function is to ensure road safety (traffic police). But the death toll is not decreasing! I will even say more, it looks like the traffic police does not fulfill these functions, and sometimes in every possible way interferes with the work of other departments. Here is an example based on Omsk, the Department of Transport installed cones to separate traffic flows on the street. Maslennikov, but the traffic police banned them. Even the deputies of the City Council noticed that it became safer and more convenient with the cones … Why?

This is not to say that nothing is being done. There is an entire federal targeted road safety program. From 2013 to 2020, 32 billion rubles were allocated for it in order to reduce deaths in road accidents by 28.2% by 2020. Two years have already passed … How can you achieve such remarkable results? Believe it or not, they will do it with the help of: Studying the existing provisions and building scientifically grounded models for the delineation of powers (areas of responsibility) of executive authorities of various levels, local government bodies.

Many hundreds of millions of rubles have already been spent on these remarkable goals, but to no avail … Where will these billions be spent?

• Creation (modernization) of automated systems for collection, accounting, analysis of indicators of the state of road safety (179 million rubles)
• Conducting comprehensive scientific research aimed at creating analytical methods for decision support and management in the field of road safety, as well as developing mechanisms for a comprehensive assessment and analysis of the effectiveness and efficiency of current and programmatic activities (59.6 million rubles)
• Development of effective mechanisms to attract extra-budgetary funds to priority projects to ensure road safety (27.9 million rubles).
• Implementation of complex scientific research using methods of mathematical analysis in the field of systematization and evaluation of the effectiveness of means of increasing, including the development of standard solutions and layouts for practical implementation (39 million rubles).

Propaganda

• Organization of thematic headings in print media to cover road safety issues - (25 million rubles)
• Creation of propaganda TV programs for federal channels (72 million rubles), (and another 36.7 million rubles).
• Creation of teaching aids, films and games for road users of different age categories (70 million rubles)
• Conducting awareness-raising campaigns using the most effective communication channels (38 million rubles)

If you ask how security is improved specifically, here's the answer:

• Systems for automatic detection of traffic violations in the Central Federal District. (56.6 million rubles)
• Construction of pedestrian barriers in 2014 (34.5 million rubles)

But there are also practical solutions that you can touch with your hands. For example, 809 kilometers of pedestrian barriers were built last year. After all, our main and universal means of security is a fence (a kind of prohibitive measures).

Here is another example from Omsk. Instead of organizing a safe pedestrian crossing, they built a fence!

The same thing happens with pedestrian crossings (BCPs). Instead of making them comfortable and safe, they are either eliminated or underpasses are built, which, as practice shows, are very "convenient" for people with limited mobility.

This also happened at the Mayakovsky / Marx intersection: where there used to be a pedestrian crossing, signs of the prohibition of crossing are now flaunting, and soon they promise to install a road fence. But people, as they crossed, will continue to do so, because it is so convenient for them!

Unfortunately, this is a characteristic feature not only of Omsk, but also of any other city in Russia.

Have you seen fences in Japan, and in Germany, and in Switzerland? I haven't seen either. This is because they know how to build crossings and set up traffic light phases, GIDD not only does not interfere with the city administration, but helps them in every possible way. We do not know how - that is why they use different technical methods around to drive pedestrians into uncomfortable conditions. Imagine that it is a hundred meters to go to the nearest pedestrian crossing, but it is itself unregulated and no one even thinks to let pedestrians pass on it, pedestrians naturally cross the road wherever they have to. And our traffic police and the developers of the organization of road traffic put fences against them. And motorists are very happy with these measures (because they cannot think big).

Even worse with off-street crossings. Many officials from the traffic police and city administration believe that an underground or elevated crossing is safer than an overground one. And many motorists are sure that off-street crossings save roads from traffic jams. In fact, this is also a big delusion, although, at first glance, everything is logical: pedestrians crossing the road are an obstacle to transport, and the more interference, the more traffic jam, and vice versa, removing people from the road, we increase its throughput. This statement is true only for traffic light highways that do not have single-level intersections. But on city streets (especially in the center), this approach does not work. We will, of course, achieve an increase in traffic capacity in this particular section, but all our achievements will be completely leveled by the increased traffic jam literally a few hundred meters away, and the total traffic capacity of the street will not change at best! On the contrary, the number of pedestrian crossings should be increased and their number should be higher in the city center and slightly less in the outskirts. It is necessary to build pedestrian crossings correctly, so that they are comfortable and safe for pedestrians, and drivers feel uncomfortable on them (narrowing of the carriageway, raised crossings, safety islands, lighting, etc.)

In developed countries, the density of traffic lights and PPs is five (!) Times higher than ours. At the same time, even according to our disgusting anti-human norms, the provision of pedestrian crossings is only 40% of the norm. A normally placed and adjusted traffic light is not an obstacle to the flow, it is a means that makes the flow more stretched, even, and dosed. The uniformity of the flow is the most important property that increases the traffic capacity on the streets and roads - this is an axiom for the transport worker! Otherwise, the stream, flying over a free area, immediately bumps into a traffic jam or narrowing of the road. M. Ya. Blinkin: " Multilevel interchange is the most expensive way to move traffic congestion 500 meters in space."Likewise, we will not get rid of the traffic jam by eliminating the PP. It's just that the cars that are on it will quickly get into the traffic jam at the nearest intersection or traffic light. And the grandmothers begin to walk around 600 meters, a kilometer - as long as you like …

Why, then, does everyone demand traffic light highways, interchanges and underpasses? Because people, as a rule, do not know how to think systematically. They have the ability to think at a specific intersection and officials are no exception (not all of them, of course). They are driving in a car and they see a traffic light or a pedestrian crossing that stopped them, and therefore they think that it is he who slows down the flow. They cannot be at the next intersection at the same time and see for themselves that the traffic light / PP simply delayed them before the next traffic jam. I recommend watching an intelligible video on off-street PP, which was prepared by the guys from the "Beautiful Petersburg" society.

So what to do? It is necessary to change the concept and approaches to road traffic. Convenience is the beginning of security. This should be guided by first of all, it should be put at the forefront. If the movement becomes convenient and comfortable, it will automatically become safe. You just won't have to violate traffic rules. Why, if it is convenient to cross the road according to the rules! The motorist must be placed in such a framework, from which he simply cannot physically leave, but at the same time he must also be comfortable. In Russia, the MADI website has a road safety guide prepared by the Norwegian Ministry of Transport. I will not waste time on a detailed retelling of the content. Anyone can read it for themselves (and I really hope so). I will only note the main points in my opinion:

- for example, chapter 3.14. "Regulation of the movement of pedestrians and cyclists", "marking of pedestrian crossings leads to an increase in the number of accidents involving both pedestrians and vehicles."

- 3.11. Limiting the speed of movement. This paragraph contains a list of parameters by which the socio-economic effect of speed limit measures is assessed: "The analysis of the effect of the implementation of the measure included: losses from road accidents, losses associated with travel time, fuel costs and CO2 and SO2 emissions, costs of local air cleaning and road wear due to studded tires, etc. " The article also says that with a decrease in traffic speed, the throughput of intersections increases due to the stretching of the traffic flow, and not its accumulation at the intersections of the flows.

- 3.12. Forced regulation of traffic speeds, it is said that the installation of road speed limit signs does not always have the desired effect on the speed level. To reduce the speed to the desired level, it becomes necessary to apply coercive measures that would make it impossible or inconvenient to follow at high speed. In general, a very curious book, which I advise everyone without exception to read, and especially to specialized departments!

Well, as a cherry on the cake, I propose to look at the largest traffic jam in the world, which formed on a 50-lane highway in China!

At the moment, there is a significant bias in the design and construction of roads and streets, they try to give all free space to the car, while they destroy other infrastructure (pedestrian, public transport infrastructure): they make it inconvenient or cut out completely (as was the case with tram traffic, which is simply vital needed in cities). The result is a dangerous, uncomfortable and hostile urban environment.

And this is facilitated by a different lobby: tire, automobile, fuel, etc.