AOPA Pilot Magazine - December 2017 - 71

PATH TO THE COCKPIT
What manufacturers must overcome
Each time a manufacturer wants to bring a unit
to market, the company must overcome multiple
major steps along the way.
Design. The unit must meet standards, including its software and environmental performance.
Previously DO-178 made that process cumbersome for software. Today a new ASTM standard is
bringing about a less expensive pathway for certain
applications.
Production. With limited exception, FAA
officials must sign off on the production process
to ensure each unit is manufactured to the level of
certification. AOPA argues this process should be
risk-based.
Installation. Finally, an approval must be
granted for each airplane where the equipment
is to be installed, assuming it rises to the level of a
major change in type design. This process remains
largely unchanged.
-IJT

Certifying a piece of modern avionics
is a complex endeavor. When all the systems were mechanical, the process was
relatively straightforward. The FAA put
out a technical standard order (TSO) for
each type of equipment that listed specific
performance standards, and a manufacturer simply developed the equipment,
made sure it met the specifications of the
order, and applied for TSO approval. That
all changed when software found its way
to the cockpit. Instead of verifying final

performance, the FAA required each line
of software code to be validated. That
validation is called DO-178 compliance
testing, and for manufacturers it can mean
millions of dollars of additional investment in bringing a product to market.
Bill Stone, Garmin's senior business
development manager, said the additional
burden can significantly increase certification costs. "If a product through ASTM
standards is a couple million to develop, it
might be $8 or $10 million to TSO for aircraft under 6,000 pounds, it could be $20
million to cover the entire Part 23 market." Stone said despite the additional
cost, the unit would have no perceptible
difference in performance.
The industry has known for years
that DO-178 was a hindrance to certifying many products, and has been pushing
for an alternative means of compliance.
In 2004, with FAA support, the industry
gathered with representatives from ASTM
International to create a new standard for
software; ASTM sets standards for products and materials around the globe. This
alternative method is more modern, and
has enabled makers of electronic flight
information displays, autopilots, and more
to enter a certification pathway at far less
cost than previous projects.
Typically described as non-TSO units,
these newer avionics have gone through
a variety of certification pathways, and
the process continues to evolve as the

THE GARMIN G5 (left) and Dynon D10A

(right) and bring reliable solid-state
electronics to primary cockpit displays
for only a little more than a standard
analog instrument. Both were approved
without a technical standard order.

manufacturers try to push to see safer
alternatives hit the market. Stone said
the FAA has begun allowing a return to
a more goal-oriented certification, where
only the device's performance is verified.
"If you look at the G5, yes, it has software in it, but yes, it's a simple device as
well," he said. "What we've come to agreement with the agency with, collectively, is
we've come full circle. With the G5 we're
using ASTM as a box-level standard. We
design to the specifications, and we test
and verify at the box level that we're
meeting those specifications. With a simple system it's not really necessary to get
under the hood and test what's inside,"
Stone said.
Once the design has been certified, a company must receive the FAA's
www.aopa.org/pilot AOPA PILOT | 71

http://www.aopa.org/pilot

AOPA Pilot Magazine - December 2017

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of AOPA Pilot Magazine - December 2017