[SystemSafety] FMEA draft international standard

[Ross Hannan - Sigma]

John - Whilst I have sympathy with your position, I wanted to make clear to
readers that both RTCA and EUROCAE are not for profit organizations that
obtain their primary income from membership fees and from the sale of the
documents. 

 

Historically all RTCA and EUROCAE member organizations were given hard
copies of all publications as they were released (this is before electronic
copies were available) whether they had been involved in the development of
the documents or not. It was soon realised that there was a certain futility
in this as printing costs were high and subsequent sales were low - as most
interested parties had already been provided a copy of all of the documents.


 

Next up, as Tom noted, active committee members were presented with a set of
the hard copy guidance/standards they had worked on by RTCA. A few years ago
this also changed, driven again by the cost of printing. There was then a
period where the chairs and secretaries of the committee were asked to
nominate a "few" people who had made significant contributions and they were
provided with a hard copy. Nowadays there are no complimentary copies and
EUROCAE has ceased publication of hard copy documents completely. The ED-12C
(DO-178C) set of documents are only available electronically. 

 

Whether a model could be developed that satisfied RTCA and EUROCAE, and I
guess in many cases SAE, I don't know. There are a growing number of users
of the documents around the world and many other Certification Authorities
involved, and the model would need to account for that. 

 

Ross Hannan

 

 

From: systemsafety-bounces at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
[mailto:systemsafety-bounces at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de] On Behalf Of
John Knight
Sent: 18 July 2014 16:30
To: systemsafety at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
Subject: Re: [SystemSafety] FMEA draft international standard

 

 

On 7/16/14, 3:53 AM, Peter Bernard Ladkin wrote:

For example, John Knight has complained publicly that he cannot obtain
copies of standards to which
he has himself contributed as a committee member without paying out large
sums of money to which he
does not have access in his academic role. And his students thereby cannot
study them. He is right.
Almost all academia is hindered from using actual - even past - standards in
their teaching, at
least in the area in which I work. That seems to be absurd if the standards'
claim to codify current
state of the art is true.


Just to follow up on what Peter said here, I have proposed a model in which:

*	All standards from all sources are placed in the public domain.
*	Authorities that use standards as part of certification require that
applicants pay a fee to the standards development organization for using the
standard.

As an example, in my model RTCA DO-178C would be in the public domain.  But
any organization seeking certification from the FAA for an avionics software
system would pay a fee to RTCA.  The FAA would require a copy of the
receipt.

This model provides the community with full access to the standards and
charges those who benefit commercially from standards rather than the
community at large.

-- John

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/private/systemsafety/attachments/20140718/a43fccc5/attachment.html>