LTA ERP2.0 OBU fail standards? Automotive Electronics Council: AEC-Q100

[jumpthepig]

CBF.. cheaper, better, faster

Everyone always has a choice…So they had chosen “Cheaper, better, faster.….” … make sure jobs are safe…No?

Public service leaders must have courage to advise ministers even when they disagree: SM Teo​

https://www.straitstimes.com/singap...vise-ministers-even-when-they-disagree-sm-teo

 

[helinoob]

Actually not surprising la. Normally civil service send their engineers for writing courses, public speaking courses. Never send for technical courses. Not surprised if lta engineers didn't even know about the existence of these standards

 

[Flexamoria]

Eye power standard

 

[PoloBoiBoi]

 

[The_Davis]

http://www.aecouncil.com/Documents/AEC_Q100-008A.pdf

Even the lowest Grade 4 also cannot meet. I dont know what to say about the quality of our civil service.

You got share with must share news? Or the independent?

or even worse gutzy ?

 

[The_Davis]

woah, now that you mentioned about ISO 26262, last time cybersecurity risk is under this. then it became a big topic, and cybersecurity is now ISO 21434

then you brought up another important subject, this ERP2.0 has some sort of connectivity, is it ISO 21434 certified?

we all know the answer

So John Conner can hack this IU?

 

[jumpthepig]

Actually not surprising la. Normally civil service send their engineers for writing courses, public speaking courses. Never send for technical courses. Not surprised if lta engineers didn't even know about the existence of these standards

Ownself check ownself…. Maybe Ownself can train ownself…

BTW…“LTA Academy leverages in-house expertise”…. So ownself can claim ownself expert liao?

https://www.lta.gov.sg/content/ltag...transformation_map/academies/lta_academy.html

 

[SuperGreenHorn]

Dun tell me @coern is MOS Koh?!

Tot he busy poking pigu, where got time come here

 

[iceblendedchoc]

Better not be another scandal

no more isawaran should be safe now

 

[Mecisteus]

Thank you for your vouch! Actually, the TS is the one that is more learned than I am in the industry, so he can find stuff that I may not think of....

TS anyhow google and pok lah. He thought he can score slam dunk in EDMW.

This specs has nothing to do with OBU.

This specs governs the working of electronics that can have an impact on the safety and reliability of the car.

Even if the OBU fails, the car is still safe to ride.

 

[alph4tang0]

http://www.aecouncil.com/Documents/AEC_Q100-008A.pdf

Even the lowest Grade 4 also cannot meet. I dont know what to say about the quality of our civil service.

Good point, can opposition party bring this up and challenge the chicken wind?

 

[fandango]

Really need to slap this Chee Hong tat

 

[GreatPumpkin]

Actually what's to stop LTA from issuing their own standards to say ERP 2.0 is everything compliant?

Remember that time we got bad haze then somebody say if PSI is higher than a certain number then something something something? End up we don't use PSI anymore.

 

[Armadeus]

ST bid 1.2b this ncs only 500+m lei


Which make people wonder how can ncs work with less than half of what ST propose

And TADAAAAAAAAAA

Here you go. A 3 piece device that cannot handle Singapore weather


#cheapnogoodgoodnocheap

As someone who dont own car I thank NCS for saving me 700m of taxpayers monies

 

[Chalkycliffs]

They should peg minister salary to monitor levels instead

 

[fandango]

Chee Hong tat. Senior Minister of State for Transport.

2020 to 2024.

 

[gundogan]

ivory tower will argue 1m vehicle population we spend only 500m so is $500 per vehicle cheap lo!

 

[tatsit]

you know their pattern very well.. or they will say sg has different requirements so the standards doesn't apply to us.

ahhh...

let me tell you this interesting story in sg's automotive industry, specifically regarding this safety device called centre high mounted stop lamp (CHMSL). if you google around, there are many research on this stating how successful it is in reducing road accidents.

the reason why it is successful in reducing road accidents, is due to the fact that the stop lamp is mounted high so that vehicles behind the immediate vehicle behind, can see and anticipate. imagine the first car brakes, 3rd car and beyond is able to see the first car's brake lamp.

if you are observant, it is on every vehicle because it is pretty much a safety standard under UNECE (mandatory), and all the vehicles we have are homologated to UNECE as they have to sell internationally. however, it is not mandatory under SG's Road Traffic Act (RTA). why not mandatory, I dont know, maybe because LTA finds it as a stupid device or maybe they are just lazy, do not want to adopt UNECE, just want to cling on to old colonial British law.

but what's more infuriating, is the word high.

under RTA, all stop lamps:

(8) The Registrar may, subject to such terms and conditions as he may impose, approve a height of more than 1.5 metres but below 2.0 metres.

there's no differentiation between the normal pair of stop lamp and CHMSL.

however, under UNECE r48, stop lamp is categorized as S1/S2 (the normal pair) and S3/S4 (the CHMSL), and here's what it says:

The horizontal plane tangential to the lower edge of the apparent surface shall: either not be more than 150 mm below the horizontal plane tangential to the lower edge of the exposed surface of the glass or glazing of the rear window, or not be less than 850 mm above the ground. However, the horizontal plane tangential to the lower edge of the apparent surface of a S3 or S4 category device shall be above the horizontal plane tangential to the upper edge of the apparent surface of S1 or S2 categories devices.

basically it is saying not too low, not lower than the normal pair of stop lamps. but they are not limiting how high as they expect the manufacturers use some brains.

so what you get... in UK (photo not mine):

in SG (photo not mine):

do you see how pointless the CHMSL has become in SG?

I digress, but it really shows how non conformity SG is to tested and proven international standards, especially when the international standards are safety related.

 

[jumpthepig]

Actually what's to stop LTA from issuing their own standards to say ERP 2.0 is everything compliant?

Remember that time we got bad haze then somebody say if PSI is higher than a certain number then something something something? End up we don't use PSI anymore.

They need solid genuine experts… else there is a risk of becoming a laughing stock…

 

[GreatPumpkin]

They need real solid genuine experts… else there is a risk of becoming a laughing stock…

There's always Pogba for those who question their sexperts.