Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The flexible nature of DO-178C's processes and entry/exit criteria make it difficult to implement the first time, because these aspects are abstract and there is no "base set" of activities from which to work. The intention of DO-178C was not to be prescriptive. There are many possible and acceptable ways for a real project to define these aspects.
The Advisory Circular AC 20-115( ), Airborne Software Development Assurance Using EUROCAE ED-12( ) and RTCA DO-178( ) (previously Airborne Software Assurance), recognizes [1] the RTCA published standard DO-178 as defining a suitable means for demonstrating compliance for the use of software within aircraft systems.
Software was still considered to be assessed and controlled by other means; that is, by RTCA/DO-178A or later revision, via Advisory Circular AC 20-115A. [ 19 ] In 2002, work was done on Revision B, but it was not formally released; the result is the Rulemaking Advisory Committee-recommended revision B- Arsenal Draft (2002).
With application of DO-178B, it was discovered that many projects were not complying with DO-178B, but there was also wide variations in how various certification authorities conducted project assessments. In response, the CAST developed a standard software compliance assessment approach.
DO-178C and DO-254 define the design assurance objectives that must be accomplished for given DAL. Unlike SIL, it is the case that both ASIL and DAL are statements measuring degree of hazard. DAL E is the ARP4754 equivalent of QM; in both classifications hazards are negligible and safety management is not required.
Many of RTCA documents begin with the letters DO which stands for DOcument. RTCA develops Minimum Operating Performance Standards for aviation-based technology (typically avionics) but has developed standards for such far-ranging topics as Airport Security, Counter UAS Detection standards, and Aircraft Cockpit and Cabin Cleaning standards.
CAST-15, Merging High-Level and Low-Level Requirements is a Certification Authorities Software Team (CAST) Position Paper. It is an FAA publication that "does not constitute official policy or guidance from any of the authorities", but is provided to applicants for software and hardware certification for educational and informational purposes only.
It is a misunderstanding that by purely syntactic rearrangements of decisions (breaking them into several independently evaluated conditions using temporary variables, the values of which are then used in the decision) which do not change the semantics of a program can lower the difficulty of obtaining complete MC/DC coverage.