[SystemSafety] UAV / UAS / RPAS System Safety, or not!

[Matthew Squair]

Well, actually no luck required. Apparently the lack of formal (funded)
safety programs is no impediment to improving safety.

In fact I'd go so far as to say that the USAF should continue with business
as usual. :)

Safety: USN naval aviation vs USAF drones | Critical Uncertainties
http://criticaluncertainties.com/2015/03/09/safety-usn-naval-aviation-vs-usaf-drones/

Matthew Squair

MIEAust, CPEng
Mob: +61 488770655
Email; Mattsquair at gmail.com
Web: http://criticaluncertainties.com

On 9 Mar 2015, at 7:26 am, S Whiteley <simon at whiteley-safety.co.uk> wrote:

Hi everyone, this article popped up on google this afternoon regarding UAS
in the US.

If your not in UAS/UAV/RPAS circles, it'll open your eyes. If you're in
those circles, good luck!

http://m.insurancenewsnet.com/oarticle/2015/03/05/unmanned-aerial-systems-risks-opportunities-in-the-workplace-a-603450.html

This bit is interesting:
"Although many military UAS have not undergone a system safety analysis in
accordance with the military's Standard Practice for System Safety
(MIL-STD-882), acceptance by the military is currently an FAA criteria for
considering a UAS safe for operation under restricted operating rules."!!!
(Emphasis added!)

And this bit:
"The lack of airworthiness certification and system safety assessments of
military UAS has not gone unnoticed by NATO allies purchasing
U.S.-manufactured UAS (DCDC, 2011). The U.K. Ministry of Defense (MOD)
began to independently evaluate UAS coming from the U.S. in 2007 following
hundreds of UAS mishap reports. MOD noted that these UAS lacked a safety
analysis required by defense standards and voiced its criticism during a
meeting of the Technical Cooperation Program. Considerable differences
between safety programs can only be partially explained by the amount of
money spent in each country. According to Steve Mattem of the International
System Safety Society, MOD budgets a greater percentage of its acquisition
funds toward system safety programs than does the DOD."
Well done MOD.

Rather concerning, given the high significance of Software:
"Another concern is that even those UAS that have had a system safety
analysis conducted in accordance with DOD acquisition regulations would not
likely meet the more rigorous FAA requirements. DOD did not formally adopt
functional hazard analysis techniques that are the norm for commercial
aircraft programs following the Society of Automotive Engineer's Aerospace
Recommended Practices into MIL-STD-882E until 2012. The military also has
never fully adopted a software certification standard meeting the criteria
of Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics (RTCA) Document DO-178C."
Without FHA, then, well, that's just bonkers.

Thoughts?

-Simon

Sent from my iPad

_______________________________________________
The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety at TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/private/systemsafety/attachments/20150309/bebb84cd/attachment.html>