Dr. Konosu introduced document GTR9-7-09. He explained that Japan did not participate in the master legform round robin testing but that the information presented refers to an impactor that has the same build level according to the information shared at the last meeting. Dr. Konosu concluded that from Japanese side there are no concerns to use the FlexPLI as it is under normal conditions of use.

Mr. Zander explained that BASt summarized the information from the logbooks of the three master legs, legforms SN-01, SN-03 and the so-called E-Leg. He explained that there may not be a need to review this in detail during this meeting. It was finally agreed that all attendees may double check and comment the documents GTR9-7-10, GTR9-7-11, GTR9-7-12 by the 8th meeting the latest (action item A-7-06).

Also, Mr. Zander presented documents GTR9-7-16 and GTR9-7-17. He explained that the presentations cover the information made available to BASt following the request during the last meeting (action items A-6-06 and A-6-07). The information includes legforms that are currently in use, master legforms as well as other legforms on master leg build level owned by test labs. So, the test results combine information from different labs with different legforms and therefore provide a good overview. However, he again noted that it was pointed out during the last meeting to deliver only the information for legforms that represent the build level of the master legs.

At the end of the presentation, Mr. Hardy wondered how many legs passed all corridors of the certification tests. Mr. Zander promised to double check this and to provide this information during the next meeting at the latest (action item A-7-07). On request of Mr. Knotz it was agreed to also add the information then that legforms 1, 2 and 3 in the presentation are the master legs. (Note of the secretary: Revised documents GTR9-7-16r1 and GTR9-7-17r1 were kindly provided immediately after the meeting; see also footnote under section B).)

On request of Dr. Otubushin, Mr. Zander stated that no conclusions were drawn and no clear tendency was noted. Mr. Stammen added that a tendency could be seen for mean values in the pendulum tests to be higher compared to the mean value of the new corridors while they seem to be lower in inverse tests. Mr. Zander stated that he cannot generally confirm this for the time being but that his main point was that signals were in the majority of cases in the corridors.

It was finally noted that with the discussion above, action items A-6-06, A-6-07 and A-6-08 can be closed as the actions are covered.