cb1111
Member
Actually, the problem there is quite similar to automotive safety, in that the industry self certifies that they meet the regulatory requirements. It is only during periodic compliance inspections or complaints that some of these issues come to light.
Newer technology, like MCAS, are no exception - the regulators must rely on the manufacturers to explain why it meets the regs and certify it as such.
Bringing it back to the car world - this is why it annoys me no end when some of these lighting manufacturers (it is almost always lighting manufacturers) tout that their lights are "DOT approved". DOT approves squat and it is the manufacturers that need to certify that their parts meet the regs.
And before you say "this is a US problem", you need to realize that this is the same exact way that regulatory enforcement works worldwide.
The US has some of the most dedicated people working at DOT/NHTSA/FAA, but the real subject matter experts must remain with the manufacturers and designers.
I know more about lighting and how the brain processes light than most (everyone?) here because I've been doing it far longer than I care to admit, but my knowledge pales when you look at the people who are doing the actual lighting designs for the major car companies.
The aftermarket lighting manufacturers have zero understanding of how lighting works and don't understand (or care) about the regs or the meaning behind the regs.
