Richard DAMM : We moved away from the objective 1; to make true universal CRS. We are now almost rewriting R44. We do see the improvements like Q dummies and new limits, but not the full potential that we had.
Question to the group; are we going to live with belt and ISOFIX systems, or can we focus more on ISOFIX systems. Richard clearly favours ISOFIX systems, and he would like to ideally see as many ISOFIX seats as technically possible.

Chairman answer : For phase I , we push ISOFIX mandatory for rearward facing up to 15 month, for integral in forward facing up to 105 cm at least. For booster seat, there is some issue with R16 about the number of ISOFIX in car, the safety belt interaction with ISOFIX anchors. We have to work on the current R16.
We also improved the lateral protection up to 135 cm for universal (plug and play) ECRS.

Richard DAMM: why new regulation and not modify R44 ?
Participants to IWG CRS bring some answers :
Pierre CASTAING (Chairman) : It’s not simple to change mass definition to size definition in the same regulation.
François RENAUDIN (DOREL) ; internal size dimension are also checked in addition to R44.
There are some tools for checking the compatibility of the child into the ECRS, and a tool for checking the compatibility of the ECRS into the car.
Philippe LESIRE (LAB); ease of use and reduction of misuse also for a booster seat
A gabarit up to 135 cm with backrest is added too.
There is new dummy with new sensors also the abdomen area.