Since 2018, the system of tariff setting in the electric power industry will undergo profound changes. The methodology of forming a standard sales markup to electricity tariffs begins to operate. Thus, in fact, the Federal Antimonopoly Service, for the first time since the transfer of powers of the tariff regulator to it three years ago, has achieved a significant change in the tariff setting system, and is not going to stop there.

The idea of \u200b\u200bswitching to the unified cost method when calculating the markup of power supply companies began to be seriously discussed seven years ago. In 2013, the Prime Minister Russian Federation Dmitry Medvedev even approved an action plan to limit the final cost of goods and services of infrastructure companies while maintaining their financial stability and investment attractiveness. The main idea of \u200b\u200bthe document was the adjustment of the sales markups of the so-called guaranteeing suppliers using approaches to the formation of benchmark costs for energy sales.

According to this roadmap, the draft resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation had to be submitted by March 2014. The Federal Tariff Service was supposed to develop this document. However, it was never prepared, and the FTS ended its existence. In 2015, tariff regulation functions were transferred to the Federal Antimonopoly Service. Actually, this is where “ recent historyThis long-overdue reform.

“We made a 180-degree turn in approaches to tariff regulation. Now the tariff policy is focused on the consumer, and not on the observance of the interests of natural monopolies. We also set a course for deregulation of some competitive sectors of the economy ... The Antimonopoly Service updated the existing developments and promptly developed a draft government decree on the introduction of reference costs of guaranteeing suppliers, held a public discussion with the expert community and federal executive authorities, "said Vitaly Korolev, Deputy Head of FAS Russia ... His words are listed on the official website of the FAS.

MORE ON THE TOPIC

The result of this work was the decree of the Russian government No. 863, adopted on July 21, 2017, which became the starting point of the reform. According to this document, amendments were made to a number of regulatory legal acts of the Government in terms of improving the mechanism for establishing sales surcharges for guaranteeing electricity suppliers and new concepts were introduced: the standard of costs of the supplier of last resort, the reference revenue of the supplier of last resort, and the estimated business profit of the supplier of last resort. It was established that the required gross revenue of the supplier of last resort and sales markups will be calculated in accordance with the methodological guidelines for calculating the sales markups of guaranteeing suppliers using the comparison method approved by the FAS Russia.

FAS had to develop a methodology for calculating standards, and its head FAS Igor Artemyev presented at a meeting on electricity issues, which was chaired by President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin on November 14, 2017.

“This is a real breakthrough - the work that was carried out in relation to the preparation of benchmarks ... These benchmarks today allow us to very accurately assess the level of actual costs that sales companies need to function properly. About two-thirds of the regions today live above the standards, in this sense we have a tremendous opportunity: it is not necessary to reduce these tariffs, but it is possible, for example, to demand that the difference from the reference costs to the actually already assigned tariff be directed exclusively to investments, to the very modernization ", - noted Artemiev.

What is the meaning of the changes? Until now, when establishing sales margins for a supplier of last resort (let us clarify that a supplier of last resort is a participant in the wholesale and retail electricity markets, which is obliged to conclude an agreement with any consumer who turns to him, who is located within the boundaries of the zone of its activity), the regulation of sales margins has been carried out through approval of economically justified costs. The Regional Energy Commissions (REC) are engaged in this, moreover, somewhere they agree with the proposed tariffs, but somewhere they do not. As a result, the allowances in different parts of the country may differ by an order of magnitude, the head of the FAS said.

The transition to the method of measurement standards will greatly simplify the procedure for establishing the amount of sales markups. They will be differentiated by consumer groups for each region and will be calculated using a special methodology that takes into account the standards of fixed and variable costs. FAS has set benchmarks for three years.

As Sergey Dudkin, Deputy Head of the Electricity Regulation Department of the Federal Antimonopoly Service, explained, allowances will be taken into account as fixed costs (for the maintenance and rent of premises, wages, printing and delivery of payment documents, organizing the work of call centers and interaction via the Internet), and variables, associated with servicing borrowed funds and creating reserves for doubtful debts.

New mechanisms for tariff setting should stimulate energy sales companies to increase their own efficiency, and when making infrastructure decisions and calculating the cost of services, be guided primarily by economic efficiency and make every effort to reduce the financial burden on consumers. This is relevant even if we take into account that the share of sales costs in the final price of electricity is not very significant - on average 3.7% in the country.

To avoid drastic changes, a transition period is introduced for producers and consumers. In regions where tariffs are higher than the reference ones, they will be gradually reduced over two years, where tariffs will have to be increased, this process will take place gradually over three years.

As a result, within the same region, supply companies - guaranteeing suppliers will have equal conditions, which will lead to increased competition, and the consumer will be able to choose the company that will offer him best conditions service.

It is noteworthy that the FAS does not intend to stop and is going to continue the reform of the tariff setting system in the electric power industry. After it shows its effectiveness new system the establishment of a sales markup, the next step, according to the deputy head of the service Vitaly Korolev, will change the rules for the formation of the network component in tariffs. In this area, as many experts in the electric power industry have repeatedly emphasized, it is also long overdue to establish transparency in tariff setting, and, as a consequence, in investment activities. This can be achieved by a similar scheme - setting cost standards for network companies. According to Korolev, the FAS plans to complete the relevant work in 2018 and implement it in 2019. And the most important thing now is to create a methodology that will focus on fair, that is, in the interests of all market participants, the calculation of reference costs.

A police U-turn is a maneuver that allows you to quickly turn a car that was previously traveling in reverse by 180 degrees. Moreover, the car will continue to move along the same trajectory, but in the "facing forward" position. Let's figure out how to learn the police turn.

Table of contents:

Which cars can make a police U-turn

An important criterion for the successful implementation of the "police" maneuver is the technical data of the car. The car must meet the following conditions:

Note that cars with a high center of gravity - for example, minibuses (buses) - will not turn around like a policeman. High risk of rollover vehicle.

The consequences of a police turn for a car

With external "steepness" quick change position of the vehicle, this maneuver harms its nodes:

• high tire wear;
• increased load on wheels and axles, possible damage;
• possible malfunctions of elements of the steering system and suspension;
• critical damage to the automatic transmission may occur.

You should not try to make a police U-turn on a car, the technical condition of which is obviously not ideal.

Due to drivers who do not know enough the technique of turning 180 degrees, the following emergency situations occur:

• the car loses control, its trajectory changes. Lucky if there are no obstacles;
• the machine is turned on its side or upside down with its wheels. This is due to bumps slippy road or too much high speed movement.

Since an emergency situation that develops when trying to make a police turn is dangerous not only for the driver, but also for third-party traffic participants, the maneuver should be trained on an empty section of the road and in the presence of an experienced mentor.

Car gearbox for maneuvering

Mechanical or automatic gearbox - it doesn't matter. The only difference is in the small details of driving the car when performing the maneuver.

If the gearbox is mechanical:

If the gearbox is automatic:

How to do a police turn

Performing a quick 180-degree turn of the vehicle takes place in five consecutive steps, discussed below:

Note that on the first attempts to train the turn, it may not work to turn the car exactly 180 degrees. Those. at the fifth step, the car will not move along the calculated trajectory. Therefore, before making a U-turn of the machine, make sure that there is enough free space for going “in the wrong direction”. The easiest way is to unscrew the car on an icy area, while it is important not to accelerate faster than 25-30 km / h.

May 9, 2016 became for the family of Yana K. from the city of Shatura near Moscow a truly holiday with tears in her eyes. Seventeen-year-old Yana K. was taken by an ambulance to the Roshal hospital with multiple fractures - the girl fell from a motorcycle that crashed into a Kia crossover. From Roshal, Yana was transported to the intensive care unit of the Moscow Children's Hospital No. 9.

“The girl was in a very serious condition, and we could hardly put her on the stretcher. It was evident that all the bones were broken, "recalls the ambulance driver Sergei S.

Yana K. (the last name is omitted by the editors) was diagnosed with a brain contusion, closed head injury, fractures of the lower jaw, forearm and hip, rupture of the liver and kidney, chest, abdominal and pancreas injuries. To leave her daughter, Yana's mother quit her job. Two years later, the girl still cannot lead a full life, and soon she will lie down on the operating table again - her arm has grown together incorrectly.

The culprit of the accident, according to the investigation, was a motorcyclist - a friend of Yana K., a 21-year-old cadet of the Moscow University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs Alexei Klyuchnikov. An administrative case was opened against him, but on June 29, 2016 it was stopped due to signs of a criminal offense - causing grievous bodily harm as a result of an accident (part 1 of Art.264 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The examination showed that the motorcycle was traveling at a speed of about 180 km / h and collided with the car at a zero angle. In addition, the Shatursky City Court established that the future policeman had a stolen CTP policy with him. (Cm.Administrative decision ).

But in the end, motorcyclist Klyuchnikov got off with only a fine of 500 rubles for driving without a policy. And the investigation, suddenly, indicted the driver of the Kia crossover - the inspector of the Control and Accounts Chamber (KSP) of the city district of Roshal Irina Gavrilova. It so happened that shortly before that, Alexey Klyuchnikov successfully completed his studies and entered the service in the police of Shatura.

Missing photos of the accident

The criminal case about an accident near Roshal was received by the investigative department of the inter-municipal department (SO MO) of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, where it passed from one investigator to another. They wrote refusals to initiate a criminal case, for which they received refusals from the leadership. First, it was required to interrogate Yana K. and conduct her medical examination, which was difficult while the victim was in the hospital and on outpatient treatment. And the police do not like "hang-ups".

The investigator Soglasnov held out the longest. The harm caused to Yana K. was classified as serious, and the girl herself was recognized as a victim only on February 28, 2017 - almost a year after the accident. On November 13 of the same year, Klyuchnikov was interrogated as a suspect and gave a written undertaking not to leave the place. The guilt of Alexei Klyuchnikov was seemingly obvious. But by that time he had already become a precinct. In this regard, for further investigation, the case was transferred to the Shatura SB of the Main Investigative Directorate of the Investigative Committee of the Ministry of Defense.

If the investigator of the Ministry of Internal Affairs Soglasnov scrupulously indicated his every step in the case, then the investigator for especially important cases of the TFR Lieutenant Colonel of Justice Maksimov did not bother himself with clerical work. Investigator Maksimov, having expertise in the case, which has already established that the collision of Klyuchnikov's motorcycle with Irina Gavrilova's car occurred at an angle of 0 degrees, appoints an additional examination, as a result of which the expert again established that the collision occurred at an angle of 0 degrees.

On November 13, 2017, the investigator of the Shatursky Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia S.I. Soglasnov establishes that Klyuchnikov A.AND. violated points 1.3., 1.5., 10.1, 10.2, moved at a speed that did not provide him with the opportunity for constant control, created a danger to the movement of the car under the control of Gavrilova, did not take possible measures to reduce the speed and made a collision with a Kia car as a result which Jana K. suffered serious health harm. As a result, the investigator Soglasnov transferred the criminal case to investigative committee... It would seem that everything is clear. But…

On January 26, 2018, the investigator of the Investigative Committee Maksimov, who accepted this criminal case, suddenly decides that there are no grounds for bringing charges against the motorcyclist Klyuchnikov, although no additional evidence has appeared to refute his guilt. But on February 5, he finds them for Irina Gavrilova. Why the course of the investigation turned 180 degrees is not explained in the case file. Gavrilova gives a written undertaking not to leave the place, but the prosecutor's office returns the case for further investigation.

What they managed to follow up is unknown. The materials of the criminal case not only were not supplemented, but, oddly enough, decreased. Traffic inspectors, as expected, photographed the scene of the accident. To conduct the first auto-technical examination (there are only four of them in the case), the expert receives photographs on an electronic carrier. However, these photographs are absent in the case file. If they were, they would not argue in court about the key point: where and in what position was "Kia" at the moment and after the collision. It is in the photographs that the "heroes" of the case and vehicles are captured.

On April 12, the driver Irina Gavrilova was re-charged, and the case was transferred to the judge of the Shatursky City Court, Yuri Zhukov.

Already in court, the victim Yana K. filed a civil claim against Irina Gavrilova with a demand to pay her 1 million rubles as compensation for the material and moral damage caused. Although Gavrilova's guilt has not yet been established, the judge accepted the claim.

90 km / h multiply by two

The car accident happened at about eight in the evening, but dusk had not yet come. A cadet of the Ministry of Internal Affairs Klyuchnikov and his friend Yana K. were driving a silver Suzuki Bandit along the Krivandino-Roshal highway of the Moscow Region (MO) from the Yubileinoye summer cottage village towards Roshal. At the 18th kilometer from the secondary road - Zelenyaya street - a black one drove to the main road. Kia Sorento"40-year-old Irina Gavrilova. Collision - Yana K. flies to the side of the road - a motorcycle with a driver rolls into a ditch.

According to Aleksey Klyuchnikov, who became the Shatursky district police officer of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, he was driving in a stream of no more than 90 km / h, he did not overtake anyone, there was no one behind him, three more cars followed him at a distance of 60-70 meters , which Gavrilova missed in contrast to the motorcycle.

During the investigation, during the interrogation, Klyuchnikov did not speak about any cars that were driving in the same direction. On the contrary, he spoke in the affirmative: there were no cars. But in court I remembered: there were three cars in front of them.

“She just drove out in front of me about 30 meters, jumped out, there was no way to avoid the collision,” says Klyuchnikov.

According to the district police officer, Gavrilova's car cut off the corner, leaving quickly at an acute angle onto the highway, so at the time of the accident it was at an angle with respect to the median strip. “She didn't even have time to complete the maneuver,” Klyuchnikov proves.

And the passenger of the motorcyclist Yana K. stated in court: Gavrilova's car drove onto the main road slowly. At an acute angle.

Witness Fedotov (a classmate of Aleksey Klyuchnikov) stated in court that Irina Gavrilova was driving on the main road according to the rules (without cutting off the corner) at a speed of 5-10 km / h and no one was driving in front of him, Fedotov, in the same direction.

Witness Shapovalov stated in court that Gavrilova's car was making a maneuver without cutting off the corner.

However, in court, the district police officer Aleksey Klyuchnikov, began to argue that after the accident, Irina Gavrilova's car was moved further from the intersection to the side of the road, therefore, in the accident diagram, the position of "Kia" is marked differently, the district police officer claims. He allegedly did not sign the scheme, but saw only three days later, told the Klyuchnikov court (while he told the investigation that he had signed the scheme, but a different one).

In addition, Klyuchnikov "remembered" that a right-hand drive Toyota was driving in the opposite lane towards him, which prevented him from avoiding an accident. Which, by the way, Fedotov did not see on his way to meet Klyuchnikov.

Presiding Officer:"How can you explain that witness Fedotov does not speak of any car that was moving in front of him?"
Klyuchnikov A.I .:"Hard to answer."

Contrary to all logic, the driver of the "Japanese", as Klyuchnikov explains, when he saw Gavrilova's Kia, began to cuddle not to the side of the road (to the side from which Gavrilova was driving), but to the dividing strip. That is, he wanted to avoid a collision with Gavrilova's Kia and for this he sent his car into Gavrilova's car! The motorcyclist allegedly slipped between the two cars, but touched the Kia tangentially. Klyuchnikov came to his senses in a ditch and saw a classmate Nikita Fedotov above him, who was on the spot on time, because he was moving in his car towards Klyuchnikov. On the side of the road, Yana K. was screaming in pain. The district police officer, at that time still a cadet, called his two friends. This is exactly what Alexey Klyuchnikov says.

Excerpt from the minutes of the court session:

Question from Vitaly Belochistov (lawyer of Irina Gavrilova):"Immediately after the accident, did you call anyone from your friends?"
Alexey Klyuchnikov:"To report to the chief about the incident, to the chief whose internship."

About his friends, whom Klyuchnikov called and who later became understood when drawing up an accident scheme, he had already kept silent in court. It was two fellow motorcyclists Klyuchnikov, who arrived at the scene of the accident and became understood when drawing up the road accident scheme, and three days later announced that they had not signed the road accident scheme. And with them, no one did any measurements. Amazing coordinated forgetfulness.

Strange forgetfulness

“I didn’t see the fact that Gavrilova’s car was moved,” Klyuchnikov said in court. "When I was at the scene of an accident motor vehicles they did not move from their place, ”Nikita Fedotov testified, who is considered an eyewitness to the accident. He was at the scene before the arrival of the traffic police. And road inspectors Valery Belov and Artyom Zinin said that Kia did not change its location either. Traffic police officers spotted Irina Gavrilova's Kia - at the edge of the roadway! Not at the dividing line, as Klyuchnikov and his classmate Fedotov claim, but at the roadside. Whether the Kia car moved after the collision is an important question, because it can destroy the version of the investigation.

At the same time, we recall that Klyuchnikov's friend Nikita Fedotov, who arrived at the scene of the accident before the traffic police officers, stated in court that the Kia car was not moved with him. And the traffic police officers showed in court that Gavarilova's car was not rearranged and was shown on the diagram by the side of the road!

Excerpt from the minutes of the court session:

Presiding Officer:"How can you confirm that the Kia car moved before the arrival of the traffic police?"
Klyuchnikov:"Testimony of witness Fedotov."
Presiding Officer:"Fedotov does not say anything about this, he says that he did not see it."
Klyuchnikov:"Police officers distorted the road accident scheme."
Presiding Officer: "What is the reason why the traffic police should have committed a malfeasance?"
Klyuchnikov: "Friendly relations with Gavrilova's husband."
Presiding Officer:"Why would the traffic police take on such responsibility to commit an official crime?"
Klyuchnikov:"I can't explain it."

If the car stood obliquely in relation to the median strip and did not even have time to completely cross it, as Klyuchnikov and his classmate Fedotov say, then how did the right side of the motorcycle hit the left rear - "Kia"?

"Left rear wheel Gavrilova was behind the dividing strip, you say you did not drive into the oncoming lane. Then why did you not drive into the trunk of Gavrilova's car? " - the defender of Belochistov is surprised.

Klyuchnikov claims that not only did he not cross the solid, but even drove at a distance of 30-40 cm from it. Paradox.

If the car was standing at an angle to the flow of traffic, as the district representative Klyuchnikov insists on, then it is not clear how a motorcycle could crash into Gavrilova's car at a zero angle, as it sets independent expert Of the 10th department of the forensic center of the Main Directorate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for the Ministry of Defense Andrey Khavansky. He also set the average speed of the motorcycle - 180 km / h

“The motorcycle buzzed past me at over 120 km / h. I was driving at a speed of 120 km / h and when a motorcyclist flew past me, I automatically looked at my speedometer. The girl has her hair on end. It hummed like a jet plane, ”witness Alexander Larionov told the court. According to him, both the motorcyclist and the passenger were without helmets. Witness Larionov was driving at a speed of 120 km / h and was catching up with the Volkswagen Polo and some other foreign car going ahead, when a motorcyclist swept past all three cars in the oncoming lane. A colleague of Gavrilova's husband, firefighter Alexei Frolov, who was driving at that time at a speed of 100-110 km / h, also points to the speeding. He was also overtaken by a motorcyclist.

On the oncoming lane witness Larionov saw no one either before or after the accident. Irina Gavrilova did not see the Toyota mentioned by Klyuchnikov, which prevented from overtaking the Kia. A classmate of the district police officer Fedotov, gives incomprehensible explanations in court.

Excerpt from the minutes of the court session:

Presiding Officer:"How can you explain that witness Fedotov does not speak of any car that was moving in front of him?"
Alexey Klyuchnikov:"Hard to answer."

District police officer Klyuchnikov says that "Kia" jumped onto the track. Fedotov defined the speed of "Kia" differently: "usually, as people leave the turn." "The Kia drove out slowly," says the victim, Yana K.

Testimonies also differ about the traces of braking, which are not left on the road. Klyuchnikov explained that he did not press the pedal sharply, otherwise he would have been thrown out of the saddle. The victim K. added that Klyuchnikov tried to smoothly reduce the speed by several pressing the brake. This is despite the fact that "Kia", as the district police officer Klyuchnikov explains, allegedly jumped out onto the road just 30 meters from the motorcycle.

Second cousin witness

The documents signed at the scene of the accident cause many questions. The scheme of the accident was drawn by inspector Artyom Zinin, his colleague Valery Belov drew up a protocol for inspecting the scene. Traffic police officers assure that the documents were filled in with attesting witnesses Eldar Mukhametzhanov and a certain Bochkarev. Those assure that they signed only the documents on the medical examination of the participants in the accident, which was carried out without them, they did not see the rest of the papers. Who is telling a lie?

As the investigation found out, Bochkarev is the second cousin of Alexei Klyuchnikov on his father's side, together with Mukhametzhanov Klyuchnikov was engaged in the sports section. After the accident, a classmate of the district police officer Nikita Fedotov called Bochkarev and asked him to come to the scene. Bochkarev at that time was next to Mukhametzhanov. So they ended up in the right place at the right time.

As the traffic police officers who executed the accident scheme show, Klyuchnikov signed all the documents with his own hand. I did not make any statements. Klyuchnikov agreed with the drawn up road accident diagram where the place of the collision was indicated. (But according to this road accident scheme, Klyuchnikov, who was moving in the same direction with Gavrilova, had a carriageway along his own lane of 2 meters! But Klyuchnikov hits Gavrilova's car). And only on May 26, 2016, Klyuchnikov wrote a statement that the accident scheme was not drawn up correctly.

At the scene of the accident, the motorcyclist Klyuchnikov agreed with the protocol that was drawn up against him for driving without a CTP policy. I wrote with my own hand that I agree. And a few days later he goes to court and asks to admit that he had an OSAGO policy.

On a call from Klyuchnikov, the head of the Roshal police, Alexander Durmanov, arrived, accompanied by his subordinates Maxim Davydov and Yevgeny Smorodin. According to the driver of "Kia" Irina Gavrilova, Durmanov tried to issue an OSAGO policy to Klyuchnikov retroactively and through intermediaries to make changes to the accident scheme, but he failed.

An interesting fact is that the head of the Roshal police department, Alexander Durmanov, does not know whether the head is responsible for his subordinates.

Excerpt from the minutes of the court session :

Defender Vitaly Belochistov: "Is it determined by any internal documents or documents of the Ministry of Internal Affairs the responsibility of the management staff for offenses committed by trainees during their internship?"
Alexander Durmanov: "I find it difficult to answer".

Witness Durmanov, a police lieutenant colonel, was also unable to answer why his testimony contradicted the testimony of the traffic police inspectors who drew up the scheme of the accident.

Excerpt from the minutes of the court session:

Vitaly Belochistov: "What did the traffic police officers who arrived at the scene of the accident?"
Alexander Durmanov: “I can't say what they did. They drove up literally in front of me. "

The defender's question to the witness, the traffic police inspector Belov:“When you arrived at the place Car accident "Kia" was located as indicated on the road accident diagram - at the side of the road "?
Valery Belov: "Yes."

And here is the answer of the witness, the entire head of the Roshal police Alexander Durmanov, to the question of the state prosecutor regarding the location of the Kia car: “When I arrived, the Kia car was located at the median strip, while the left rear wheel of the car was behind the dividing strip”.

At the same time, it is surprising, but the question of the lawyer Vitaly Belochistov - "Why does your testimony contradict the testimony of the traffic police inspector?" - was removed by the court.

Motorcyclist Klyuchnikov explains that he himself could not write due to a fractured hand, so he dictated the text to his colleague Maxim Davydov. He put the signature himself, but only under the explanatory note, where he wrote that "it was written with his own hand."

The district policeman allegedly saw the scheme of the accident only three days later. On it, the "Kia" was right at the right shoulder, and not at the median strip. However, Klyuchnikov did not seek correction, allegedly relying on the testimony of witnesses. Klyuchnikov did not look for the seller of the stolen policy, for which he paid about five thousand - a third of his salary.

Questions from Vitaly Belochistov, representing the interests of the driver of "Kia" Irina Gavrilova, following the results of several court sessions:

How could it have happened that after the interrogation of A.I. Klyuchnikov as a suspect and after the transfer of the case to the Investigative Committee, was the charge brought against I. Gavrilova? However, the investigator of the Investigative Committee did not carry out any additional investigative actions.

Why did none of the investigators question the experts who conducted forensic auto-technical examinations, who claimed in their examinations that the results of the investigative experiments were contradictory? Why did no one find out what the contradictions are?

Why did none of the investigators ask Klyuchnikov and the victim why their testimonies (in particular, the angle of contact of two vehicles upon impact; the place of collision; the speed of the motorcycle) contradict the conclusions?

Where are the photographs on electronic media provided to the expert? It is in these photographs that the witness, police lieutenant colonel Durmanov, is captured at the Kia car parked by the side of the road.

Why should a defense lawyer not ask a witness in court questions about the contradictions between his testimony and the testimony of other witnesses?

To date, all witnesses of the accident have been questioned. The study of the materials of the criminal case began. Judge Yury Zhukov suggested to the state prosecutor that it was necessary to interrogate investigators. It would be worth not forgetting about the need to interrogate in court the experts who carried out the auto-technical expertise. Here is such a simple road accident, which has become difficult due to the local administrative and police specifics of the Shaturskaya.

FLB will continue to monitor this lawsuit.

Russian experience: "You are being persecuted !?"

Emergency 180 degree turn

In Western literature, this U-turn is called "bootlegger" (smuggling) because of its frequent use by adventurers of all ranks, when they, escaping police pursuit, leave on a section of road blocked by "cops". But, of course, it can be used by other categories of persons, including law-abiding citizens in emergency situations.

This maneuver allows you to change the direction of travel by 180 degrees practically without stopping the vehicle within the two-lane width. It is easiest to carry out it on a machine that has automatic transmission transmission and emergency braking, although this is not a prerequisite, since the success of the maneuver depends to a large extent on your practical driving skills.

This turn is done in four steps as shown in Figure N6.

Figure: 6. Stages of the emergency 180-degree turn

1. The speed is reduced to 40-50 kilometers per hour;

2. The throttle is released and the steering wheel is turned to the left by a quarter-half of its full turn. At the same moment (without a pause) the emergency braking system is activated. In cars with a manual transmission, the brake is pressed sharply and the clutch is disengaged;

3. When the machine is at an angle of approximately 90 degrees to the original direction of travel, the brake is released, the accelerator pedal is depressed, and the steering wheel is straightened (set to the original position). If your car has a manual transmission, the clutch is engaged and the accelerator pedal is depressed;

4. Quick departure from the U-turn.

It should be emphasized, however, that such turns should be worked out with increased tire pressure (no less than 2.3-2.5 atmospheres for a Zhiguli-type car). Failure to do so may result in the tire sidewall bursting or dismantling. In addition, it is advisable to remove the wheel caps from the wheels to avoid losing them.

If you are the owner of a Ford, Volkswagen, Chrysler or other car with an automatic transmission, you should keep in mind that if there is a sudden change in the driving mode of these cars, increased consumption transmission oil. Consequently, during operation, it is necessary to check its level more often in order to exclude the failure of the gearbox, the most crucial and inappropriate moment.

“Police U-turn” is a car maneuver in which the vehicle makes a 180-degree U-turn, and then, having traveled a certain distance in reverse, performs the opposite action, and then moves forward.
The technique of its execution is simple, but requires some skill of the driver technical condition car.

Technical condition of the car.
It is a delusion to believe that good brakes and a parking brake are sufficient to perform this trick. Making a "police turn" the car carries colossal loads on the axle and wheels. So damage is not excluded not only of the parking brake and brake padsbut also tires as well as car suspension.

Execution technique.
The car is moving in a straight line. Vehicle speed depends on the condition of the road surface (dry or wet asphalt, snow) and the vehicle itself. For example, on a snow cover, 20 km / h is enough to start performing a maneuver. On dry asphalt, this speed will not be enough. The speed limit is selected empirically. The driver relies on his experience and knowledge. technical features car.
Having gained the required speed, it is necessary to engage in neutral gear and turn sharply with the steering wheel. Simultaneously with the turn of the steering wheel, the handbrake is pulled. The heading direction is set and the vehicle is moving along the set path. Before completing the U-turn, be prepared to reverse. To do this, it is necessary to remove the car from the parking brake in time. Ideally, such a withdrawal later flows into the car's rollback in reverse. Here then the reverse gear should be switched on and the accelerator pedal pressed. The machine is moving in reverse.
In order to return the car to its original position, the driver picks up the required speed. The neutral position of the checkpoint. Turning the steering wheel with a handbrake. Turning on the first and sharp "gas".

Possible breakdowns.
Since the car is intended, basically, for driving forward and at certain moments in reverse, moving sideways for it is fraught with certain consequences. The consequences can be varied. Saleinte blocks, ball joints, steering bearings, hub bearings - can fail at any time. The option of a gearbox breakdown is not excluded. The stock gearbox is not designed for harsh actions. The tires of a car are literally "gobbled up" under friction. So, the technical preparation of the car must be at the proper level.

Safety.
Performing such tricks is always associated with a high degree of risk. Moreover, such a risk depends not only on the degree of skill of the drivers and the preparation of the car, but also on the state of the weather, the roadway, the presence of random factors (the unexpected appearance of other cars or pedestrians). It is best to learn this driving technique in specialized ones. And goals itself, and the car too.