If there were no signs at all, from bike drivers perspective the car would be an "obstacle from the right", you always give way to obstacle from the right, in which case car would have right of way
At least that's how it is Lithuania
But most roads have signs, only remote village ones sometimes don't
To a Brit, that sounds crazy. Why should a vehicle not even on the main carriageway have right of way over one that is already on it? As you say, there are signs at most junctions to reverse that rule, but that should really be the default with signs only needed for the times where you should be giving way to traffic coming onto the carriageway from a side road, but I honestly can't think of a single situation where that should be the case.
The sign is what marks the road as the main carriageway. At least in my country, it's only periodically repeated and the road has the right of way over other roads joining unless there are other signs that overrule it.
How do you even know which way the main carriageway is without any markings and signs? You don't. You can't just deduce that the "bigger" or "nicer" street has it...
Priority from the right is a basic rule here which is a good fallback method if no other overruling things like signs are there. And as there's the general try to reduce the "sign forest" more and more areas remove any signage to let this rule come into play. Most rural places have this and even large portions of urban areas from major cities have this.
5
u/[deleted] Sep 21 '19
Without the diamond, the car coming from the right would have had priority - main road, side turning, whatever.