DO-178C

Abstract: For about two decades, compliance with Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification (DO-178B) has been the primary means for receiving regulatory approval for using software on commercial airplanes. A new edition of the standard, DO-178C, was published in December 2011, and regulatory bodies have started the process towards recognizing this edition. The stated purpose of DO-178C remains unchanged from its predecessor: providing guidance “for the production of software for airborne systems and equipment that performs its intended function with a level of confidence in safety that complies with airworthiness requirements.” Within the text of the guidance, little or no rationale is given for how a particular objective or collection of objectives contributes to achieving this purpose. Thus the assurance case for the document is implicit. This paper discusses a current effort to make the implicit explicit. In particular, the paper describes the current status of the research seeking to identify the specific arguments contained in, or implied by, the DO-178C guidance that implicitly justify the assumption that the document meets its stated purpose.

Abstract: The RTCA has recently released DO-178C and DO-278A as new certification guidance for the production of airborne and ground-based air traffic management software, respectively. Additionally, RTCA special committee SC-205 has also produced, at the same time, five other companion documents. These documents are RTCA DO-248C, DO-330, DO-331, DO- 332, and DO-333. These supplements address frequently asked questions about software certification, provide guidance on tool qualification requirements, and illustrate the modifications recommended to DO-178C when using model-based software design, object oriented programming, and formal methods. The objective of this paper is to first explain the relationship of DO-178C to the former DO-178B in order to give those familiar with DO- 178B an indication of what has been changed and what has not been changed. With this background, the relationship of DO-178C and DO-278 to the new DO-278A document for ground-based software development is shown. Last, an overview of the new guidance contained in the tool qualification document and the three new supplements to DO-178C and DO-278A is presented. For those unfamiliar with DO-178B, this paper serves to provide an entry point to this new certification guidance for airborne and ground-based CNS/ATM software certification.

Abstract: For about two decades, compliance with Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification (DO-178B/ED-12B) has been the primary means for receiving regulatory approval for using software on commercial airplanes. A new edition of the standard, DO-178C/ED-12C, was published in December 2011, and recognized by regulatory bodies in 2013. The purpose remains unchanged: to provide guidance 'for the production of software for airborne systems and equipment that performs its intended function with a level of confidence in safety that complies with airworthiness requirements.' The text of the guidance does not directly explain how its collection of objectives contributes to achieving this purpose; thus, the assurance case for the document is implicit. This paper presents an explicit assurance case developed as part of research jointly sponsored by the Federal Aviation Administration and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

Abstract: According to the FAA Order 8110.49, there are two distinct types of databases used in airborne systems and equipment: Aeronautical Databases (AD) and Parameter Data Items (PDI). Although the database development processes in the RTCA DO-178C and the RTCA DO-200B have many similarities, the use of the DO-200B is limited to navigation, terrain, obstacle, and airport map databases. This paper provides some scenarios for database verification using the RTCA DO-178C and the RTCA DO-200B standards, including the usage of Tool Qualification, when processes are eliminated, reduced, or automated by the use of software tools without reviewing the output produced by such tools.