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.
For example, assignment of the number of days in a month (excluding leap years) could be achieved by using either a switch statement or by using a table with an enumeration value as an index. The number of tests required based on the source code could be considerably different depending upon the coverage required, although semantically we would ...
Some advisory circulars are only a few pages long and do little more than reference a recommended standard; for example, AC 20-152 referencing DO-254. [8] Others, like AC 20-115 C/D, are considerably longer; in this case including guidance on how to transition from DO-178 revision B to C [ 9 ] while AC 20-152A adds several new objectives to an ...
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.
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.
Businesses that meet the reporting criteria must submit a Beneficial Ownership Information Report to the U.S. Department of Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), according to ...
Corresponding with the releases of DO-178C and DO-278A, the present revision, DO-248C, is an update to the previous revision DO-248B, Report for Clarification of DO-178B "Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification". While new FAQs and discussion papers have been added, most of the FAQs and discussion papers of DO ...
One of the first steps when creating safety-related software is to classify software according to its safety-criticality. Various standards suggest different levels, e.g. Software Levels A-E in DO-178C, [4] SIL (Safety Integrity Level) 1-4 in IEC 61508, [1] ASIL (Automotive Safety Integrity Level) A-D in ISO 26262. [2]