GRRF 1999

Accueil ] Remonter ] projet initial de 1999 ] GRRF sept 2000 ] [ GRRF 1999 ] GRRF janv 2000 ] projet le 11 sept. 2000 ] projet le 26 juin 2001 ] projet290100 ] WP29 (24 mars) ] wp29 123ème session ] norme définitive ] conseil d'orientation ]

COMPTE RENDU DE LA REUNION DE TRAVAIL DU GROUPE SPECIALISE DU WP29 (GRRF) qui s'est tenue à Genève du 13 au 15 septembre 1999. (Seule la partie du compte rendu concernant l'amendement précédent est reproduite).

(d) Regulation No. 89 (Speed limitation devices)

Documentation: TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/1999/15; informal document No. 6 to annex 1 to this report.

86. Presenting the proposal to extend the scope of the Regulation to vehicles of category M1, (TRANS/WP.29/GRRF/1999/15), the expert from France explained that he did not expect to discuss it in detail but intended to ask for contributions, in order to improve the proposal. He also explained that prescriptions for the recording device (paragraph should be eliminated from the proposal.

87. The expert from Germany reminded GRRF that, in his country, the speed limits did not apply for M1 vehicles on the motorway and announced that such a proposal would be difficult to support in his country. The expert from France explained that the proposed device should maintain the speed selected by the driver and did not have the aim of introducing a general speed limitation.

88. GRRF noticed that the driver would be allowed to set freely a preselected speed limit and agreed to continue consideration of the proposal at the February 2000 session.

89. The expert from Japan presented informal document No. 6, which contained guidelines on safety and the environment for new auto technology. He explained that such guidelines had existed in the past, although, they were not yet included in the Japanese legislation.

90. The expert from Hungary asked for details concerning the actuation of the brakes by the cruise system controlling the distance and from the preceding vehicle and maintaining the brake aided speed limit. The expert from Japan promised to make available some explanatory information for consideration during the February 2000 meeting.

91. GRRF agreed to resume consideration of informal document No. 6 at the February session, and the experts were kindly requested to keep informal document No. 6 for this purpose.