5. In the initial discussion of the document AMEVSC-05-06e it was suggested that the “character of a vehicle” definition should be in R.E.3, in addition to ECE R.13. The AMEVSC secretary undertook to discuss this with the chairman of the group currently working on amendments to R.E.3.

The KBA expressed the view that a simulation tool manufacturer who is not a vehicle manufacturer is not acceptable. This, as a concept, was challenged by CLEPA as it was considered to go against the basic objective behind the introduction of simulation in the vehicle stability function type-approval procedure by the EVSC informal working group.

CLEPA understood that the objective of simulation was to simplify the type-approval process, via an alternative method, to reduce costs. To restrict this to vehicle manufacturers would in reality mean that simulation would only be available to the larger companies as only they had the substantial resources required to develop a simulation tool.

As a result, the draft proposal shown in document AMEVSC-05-07 was developed.

The development of both documents – AMEVSC-05-06e and AMEVSC-05-07e – will continue at the next meeting.