| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Document Title | Stationary Sound for Audible Vehicle Alerting Systems (AVAS) | ||||||||
| Reference Number | REG58-QRTV-01-06 | ||||||||
| Date |
17 Dec 2014
|
||||||||
| Summary | Presentation discussing pros and cons of requiring (or not) a minimum sound level for quiet vehicles when stationary. | ||||||||
| Source(s) | JASIC | ||||||||
| Rulemaking Area(s) | UN R138 Quiet Road Transport Vehicles | ||||||||
| Meeting(s) | |||||||||
| Downloads | |||||||||
| UNECE server | .pdf format | ||||||||
| Excerpts from session reports related to this document | |||||||||
| REG58-QRTV | Session 1 | 10-11 Dec 2014 |
11. Japan : Presentation of document REG58-QRTV-01-006 – QRTV JASIC 20141210: The main conclusions form the presentation are:
12. In Japan there are various local requirements in place that prohibit the unnecessary emission of noise and exhaust gases, prohibiting the engine to remain turned if not necessary. 13. WBU expressed its disagreement with those findings as stationary sound would increase the safety. France replied that the findings from Japan and Germany are based on scientific researches, while the request for stationary sound is based on subjective opinions. Germany supports France and proposes to make a final decision on the requirement for stationary sound at a later stage; once more reliable data is available. 14. A clear decision for the handling of stationary sound must be made in GRB. If there is no such standpoint, the document risks being rejected completely. |
||||||||