# Germany Driving Quiz....



## peejay (May 10, 2005)

So you think you know how to drive in Germany? Try this quiz just for fun.....

http://gettingaroundgermany.home.att.net/quiz.htm

Lots of other handy German stuff on the rest of the website as well.

Gute fahrt!

pete


----------



## 88742 (May 9, 2005)

Enteresting post PJ, got most of those I tried, but I am embarraed to say that at this time of night, I failed a few, maybe the influenze of incohol :roll: which I am happy say doesn't get mixed with driving - Thanks

Ian


----------



## Wupert (Aug 6, 2007)

peejay said:


> So you think you know how to drive in Germany? Try this quiz just for fun.....
> 
> http://gettingaroundgermany.home.att.net/quiz.htm
> 
> ...


Looks like the British Forces Germany theory test.

This test has to be done by every BFG driver and 100% is the only pass figure


----------



## 88742 (May 9, 2005)

Your right Wupert, but in 8? I wasn't allowed a bottle of red in the classroom :wink:


----------



## peejay (May 10, 2005)

As I recall (1979) the BFG test wasn't nearly as hard as this one, mind you they sometimes left the answer sheet out if you were struggling :roll: 

pete


----------



## 88742 (May 9, 2005)

mmmmm PJ, as I remember you had to be a bit 'blind not to pass :wink:


----------



## Autoquest (May 16, 2007)

After all these years I still feel uncomfortable not giving way to the right.


----------



## sallytrafic (Jan 17, 2006)

Got a few wrong had forgotten the 'if everything else is equal vehicle turning' right has priority

also got the 7kph sign wrong never encountered it. 

Also I know when i broke down on the autobahn i didn't go 200 m away to put my sign out did a risk assessment and there was no way I was walking 200m down the hard shoulder of a 2 lane autobahn in the evening rush hour hi vis jacket or not!


----------



## Boff (May 10, 2005)

Hi,

some comments from Motorhomefacts's "official German". :wink:

*Section 1:*

Question 1: 
This is heavily discussed in Germany. Obviously 2 has priority over 1, however 3 has no priority over 1. So 3 can only ride first, because 1 is blocked by 2. So the answer 3-2-1 is not really false, but as 2 does not interfere with 3, the solution 2-1-3 would also be legally possible. Communication is required here.

Question 24:
While at first glance this might look like a mirror image of question 1, it is not: Fact is that 1 has priority over 2, and 2 has priority over 3. But 1 has no priority over 3. So the given answer 1-2-3 is not incorrect, but requires negotiation between 1 and 3. 1 cannot insist on 3 waiting.

*Section 2:*

Question 7:
The given answer is right for the left sign, but wrong for the right sign! Fact is that both signs prohibit stopping and parking. The German traffic code knows no "Parking prohibited" sign. But while the left indicates that stopping is forbidden under all circumstances, the right allows stopping for letting people step in and out, or loading/unloading, and that as long as it takes. 
Both signs do BTW not affect vehicles which have to wait, e.g. because of a traffic jam. But, strictly speaking, if you were waiting in a traffic jam at the left sign, you would not be allowed to let anybody step in or out. However, even in Germany rules are not taken that literally. :wink:

Question 13:
Same as for question 7 applies.

Question 19:
It is strictly speaking not "7 kph", but "pedestrian speed". Which is considered as being about 7 kph. Other important rules in such a zone are:
- Pedestrians have right of way all over the road, all vehicles (also cyclists) must yield 
- Children are allowed to play on the road
- Parking is only permitted in marked areas.

Question 20:
This sign cancels all previously signed speed or overtaking limits, so the default limits apply from here.

Question 29:
Not entirely correct. You may overtake here, if you can do so without crossing the solid line. So, provided that the road is wide enough, you might be allowed to overtake a bicycle or motorcycle.

Question 30:
Again, like in question 7, this is rather a no-stopping zone than a no-parking zone. Again, limited stopping for stepping in/out or loading/unloading is legal, provided that no bus is coming.

Rest is correct.

Best Regards,
Gerhard


----------



## peejay (May 10, 2005)

Hi Gerhard;

Thanks for your input, you can't beat a bit of 'local' knowledge! 

Q1 - To be honest, when I first looked at it my first response was 2,1,3 but as you point out 3,2,1 is possibly ok as well, in that situation if I was the cyclist then I would definately be double checking what that truck was doing first :? 

Q24 - In my opinion there is a subtle difference between this and Q1 as it is a crossroads as opposed to a T junction in the first question and the veh on the left (veh 2) is going straight ahead as opposed to turning right in Q1 so I would say 1,2,3 is the only option as 3 is wating for 2 to go and should not block the junction for 1 (?).

section 2

Q29 - I agree but do you know if there is a law allowing you to overtake 'slow' vehicles, ie tractors and cyclists in this situation and also when in a 'no overtaking' zone? I thought I could remember reading something about this but might be wrong?

pete


----------



## Boff (May 10, 2005)

peejay said:


> Q24 - In my opinion there is a subtle difference between this and Q1 as it is a crossroads as opposed to a T junction in the first question and the veh on the left (veh 2) is going straight ahead as opposed to turning right in Q1 so I would say 1,2,3 is the only option as 3 is wating for 2 to go and should not block the junction for 1 (?).


1-2-3 is indeed the most reasonable option. But this is a situation in which - like in question 1 - pure strict application of rules does not lead to a unique solution. So, and this might be a challenge for some of the more stereotypical German drivers, you have to apply some common sense. :wink:



peejay said:


> section 2
> 
> Q29 - I agree but do you know if there is a law allowing you to overtake 'slow' vehicles, ie tractors and cyclists in this situation and also when in a 'no overtaking' zone? I thought I could remember reading something about this but might be wrong?


The solid line does not say anything about overtaking, you just must not cross it. If you can overtake without crossing the line, you may do so.

Even in a no overtaking zone, marked by this sign:








you may still overtake "single-track vehicles" (like bicycles, don't know whether "single-track" is the right translation). But not tractors, they are dual-track vehicles.

An extra sign under the no-overtaking sign might however allow overtaking tractors.

So no-overtaking signs and solid lines exist independent of each other.

And there is just one situation in which you really may cross the solid line: If there is a non-moving obstacle on your lane, like e.g. a broken-down vehicle, then you may, while watching out and yielding for any oncoming traffic, carefully pass by.

Best Regards,
Gerhard


----------



## EJB (Aug 25, 2007)

Having passed my test in Germany and residing there for 20 years I am pleased to say I passed....although as Gerhard points out there is room for debate. It's 27 years since I left so even my memory isn't too bad....except on mundane things like day to day living!


----------



## 108600 (Dec 4, 2007)

Hello all,
I'm the author of the website quoted at the start of this thread. I wanted to respond to Gerhard's comments. :wink:

*Question 1: 
This is heavily discussed in Germany. Obviously 2 has priority over 1, however 3 has no priority over 1. So 3 can only ride first, because 1 is blocked by 2. So the answer 3-2-1 is not really false, but as 2 does not interfere with 3, the solution 2-1-3 would also be legally possible. Communication is required here.*

Hmmm, after looking at this one again, I see your point. In fact, #3 should probably yield to #1. I went back and checked the source where I got it from and indeed they have it at 3-2-1, but that's certainly not a "clean" example. I'll figure-out how to edit that accordingly.

*Question 24:
While at first glance this might look like a mirror image of question 1, it is not: Fact is that 1 has priority over 2, and 2 has priority over 3. But 1 has no priority over 3. So the given answer 1-2-3 is not incorrect, but requires negotiation between 1 and 3. 1 cannot insist on 3 waiting.*

Not so fast on this one. Since #3 must wait for #2, and #2 must wait for #1, #3 must then inherently wait for #1. There's no question in this case.

*Question 7:
The given answer is right for the left sign, but wrong for the right sign! Fact is that both signs prohibit stopping and parking. The German traffic code knows no "Parking prohibited" sign. But while the left indicates that stopping is forbidden under all circumstances, the right allows stopping for letting people step in and out, or loading/unloading, and that as long as it takes.*

While it is true that there is no literal "no parking" sign in the German traffic code, I chose to use the term "no parking" for this sign for a couple of reasons:

- The German traffic code (§12(2)) says that if you stop for longer than 3 minutes and/or leave your vehicle, you are considered "parked". The sign on the right (286), which is officially entitled "restricted stopping prohibition", means that stopping for longer than 3 minutes, except to load or unload, is prohibited. Since stopping longer than 3 minutes is considered "parking", this is essentially a "no parking" sign.
- Saying "no parking" is clearer and more meaningful to English-speakers than saying "restricted stopping prohibition".

The full meaning of the sign is on the signs page on my site.

*Question 19:
It is strictly speaking not "7 kph", but "pedestrian speed". Which is considered as being about 7 kph. Other important rules in such a zone are:
- Pedestrians have right of way all over the road, all vehicles (also cyclists) must yield 
- Children are allowed to play on the road
- Parking is only permitted in marked areas.*

Indeed, there are even more restrictions, which are mentioned on one of the other pages in my site:

- Traffic must maintain the lowest possible speed-- no more than 7 km/h. 
- Pedestrians may use the entire street; children are permitted to play in the street. 
- Motorists may not endanger or hinder pedestrians; when necessary, motorists must wait. 
- Pedestrians may not unnecessarily hinder traffic. 
- Parking is not permitted outside of marked spaces except for boarding/discharging and loading/unloading. 
- When leaving the zone, you must yield to all other traffic.

However, the point of that question was to ensure that people knew there was a speed restriction attached to that particular sign. If they know that, they are almost sure to know the other restrictions.

*Question 20:
This sign cancels all previously signed speed or overtaking limits, so the default limits apply from here.*

True, and I probably should mention "default limits" in the answer. In most cases, though, this sign is used either on the Autobahn or on rural highways, which is why I phrased the answer the way I did.

*Question 29:
Not entirely correct. You may overtake here, if you can do so without crossing the solid line. So, provided that the road is wide enough, you might be allowed to overtake a bicycle or motorcycle.*

Which is why the answer reads "The solid line on your side of the road indicates that you may not cross to overtake." Again, it could probably be a phrased a little clearer, but it's essentially correct.

Cheers!
--Brian


----------



## peejay (May 10, 2005)

Hello Brian, thanks for responding to this thread and welcome to MHFacts.

I'd just like to compliment you on your excellent website, I found it full of useful information and a handy reference for anyone visiting Germany.

pete.

ps; it just goes to show, you never know who's watching MHF!


----------



## Boff (May 10, 2005)

Hi Brian,

welcome here, and I am looking forward to some interesting discussions.

Regarding Section 1, questions 1 and 24:

Even for German drivers these two are a bit difficult. Not without reasons Germany is notorious for having very specific and complex rules, and yet there are many people trying to push these rules to their limit. Which often leads, in a kind of vicious circle, to even more specific and complex rules...

But still there are situations in which a strict application of rules does not lead to a unique answer. However, Germany would not be Germany if they hadn't invented a rule that covers all situations not covered by other rules, at least in road traffic. :wink:

And this rule is: 
_"StVO §11 (3) Auch wer sonst nach den Verkehrsregeln weiterfahren darf oder anderweitig Vorrang hat, muß darauf verzichten, wenn die Verkehrslage es erfordert; auf einen Verzicht darf der andere nur vertrauen, wenn er sich mit dem Verzichtenden verständigt hat."_ Means: _"Even drivers who have the right of way according to the traffic code, or priority due to other reasons, have to renounce it if traffic conditions require so; others may only rely on this renunciation if they have negotiated with the renunciative."_

In case of question 1 this means that both solutions, 3-2-1 and 2-1-3 are possible. And while 3-2-1 is certainly the preferrable one, both require negotiation, like hand-signs etc.

And about question 24: Of course 1-2-3 is the only really viable solution, that is true. But if 3 for whatever reason does not wait for 1, and they subsequently crash, then 1 will have to take part of the blame.

Section 2, question 7:



TexHwyMan said:


> While it is true that there is no literal "no parking" sign in the German traffic code, I chose to use the term "no parking" for this sign for a couple of reasons:
> 
> - The German traffic code (§12(2)) says that if you stop for longer than 3 minutes and/or leave your vehicle, you are considered "parked". The sign on the right (286), which is officially entitled "restricted stopping prohibition", means that stopping for longer than 3 minutes, except to load or unload, is prohibited. Since stopping longer than 3 minutes is considered "parking", this is essentially a "no parking" sign.
> - Saying "no parking" is clearer and more meaningful to English-speakers than saying "restricted stopping prohibition".


Totally agree. We Germans have a tendency to make things more complex than they would have to be. However, drivers have been fined, and tried to challenge the fines at court, because they claimed they had their vehicle always in sight, were stopping for only 2 minutes 50 seconds, etc. 
In a more famous case one district court ruled that a vehicle may not be towed from a no-stopping zone if a note with the driver's mobile phone number was placed under the windscreen. This decision was later cancelled by the appellate court, but still quite a few drivers count on it.

Question 20:



TexHwyMan said:


> *This sign cancels all previously signed speed or overtaking limits, so the default limits apply from here.*
> 
> True, and I probably should mention "default limits" in the answer. In most cases, though, this sign is used either on the Autobahn or on rural highways, which is why I phrased the answer the way I did.


You do find this sign also in towns. And the default limits (for normal passenger cars) are: 50 kph in town, 100 kph on rural highways, and no limit on the Autobahn.

Question 29:



TexHwyMan said:


> Which is why the answer reads "The solid line on your side of the road indicates that you may not cross to overtake." Again, it could probably be a phrased a little clearer, but it's essentially correct.


Correct yes, but not quite complete: You may not cross the solid line at all. Under no circumstances, except to bypass a non-moving obstacle. So not even e.g. to turn into a driveway on the left side.

Best Regards,
Gerhard


----------

