Applying System Safety thinking to new Aviation technologies

When incorporating new and novel technologies into the aviation sector – such as Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning, Development Assurance is crucial to ensure safety and compliance, as Beca’s Robert McGivern explores.

This article is the third part in our series exploring how cutting-edge technology can make everyday better for the Aerospace sector. Here's Part 1 and 2.

The promise of new and novel Aviation technology 

New and novel Aviation technologies such as neural networks, next-generation sensors and AI-driven aircraft controls hold immense potential for the sector; with the promise of optimising flight operations, reacting to changes in weather conditions, air traffic control management to aircraft aerodynamics and beyond. However, for this promise to be realised, these technologies must first gain regulatory approval by proving they can be safely integrated into existing aircraft.

The dominant aviation safety standards (SAE ARP4754 and ARP4761) were written 29 years ago – when there was no Wikipedia, phones didn’t have cameras and PCs ran Windows 95. These global safety standards have stood the test of time and have required very few revisions. We should be thankful for the foresight of the engineers who wrote them in a technology-agnostic manner.

In our experience, the successful application of new and novel technologies within the Aviation sector requires early engagement with regulators, having the right expertise within your team, and the strategic application of existing standards in a pragmatic, robust and effective manner.

Key insight: Proven processes are adaptable to new challenges

Aviation’s foundational safety processes are robust enough to support new and emerging technologies. Elements like the Functional Hazard Assessment (FHA) and Preliminary Systems Safety Assessment focus on aircraft functions, not their specific implementation. This means that during the early stages of implementation, the technology itself does not challenge the process, as only the function it performs is analysed.

Like-for-like technology replacements are often presented as not requiring significant changes to the Safety Analysis – which is the systematic process of evaluating and ensuring the safety of aircraft functions and systems; especially when new or emerging technologies are introduced. However, be wary as new and novel technologies may require changes to fault trees (the graphical, top-down representations used to analyse the potential causes of system failures), or introduce new hazards.

At the Aircraft/System Safety Assessment stage, deeper technical expertise is required to evaluate and justify the safety of the given implementation. These evaluations need to involve collaboration between safety specialists and experts in the specific novel technology to support pragmatic and effective analysis.

Does innovation fit within established standards?

Emerging technologies can sometimes outgrow traditional compliance frameworks. For example, neural networks—a dynamic and powerful advancement—create challenges under standards like DO-178C. Testing requirements like Decision Coverage, designed for conventional software logic, don’t effectively address the nature of floating-point calculations used in neural networks. This gap, while technically compliant with the letter of the standard, may fail to provide the confidence necessary to identify anomalous behaviours and therefore address the safety requirements.

To mitigate such issues, designing systems so that the "new and novel" components are limited to lower IDALs (Item Development Assurance Levels) can help reduce risk. Collaboration with regulators to adapt AMOCs (Alternative Means of Compliance) or develop new ones with equivalent levels of safety assurance is highly beneficial to all parties in both understanding the challenges and how the AMOC is derived.

Engaging regulators: Transparency and early involvement are key

Introducing new technologies naturally draws regulatory attention, and rightly so. Engaging regulatory authorities early in the process is essential to give them the necessary time, understanding and resources to properly assess innovations, their impact and subsequent mitigations. Regulators must have technical expertise to evaluate how new designs fit within established AMOCs; or to define new pathways if necessary – this can be through industry collaboration and being directly involved and engaged as part of the development and technology integration.

Proposed designs should include multiple stages of regulator involvement, such as the FAA's precedent of 4 Stages of Involvement (SOI): Planning, Development, Verification and Final. Though the FAA has since updated its approach, this staged process remains widely respected and effective across the industry, providing clear points for all parties to meet, discuss, analyse and agree on the best way forward.

Design teams should remember that while they’ve been immersed in their technology for months and sometimes years; it may still seem very unfamiliar to a regulator. Allowing regulators to engage early gives them the opportunity to grow familiar with the novel elements, understand the processes and approaches being taken, and identify possible issues early. This makes for a significantly smoother approval process.

Building the right team

Developing a safety case for new technologies is at its core a systems engineering challenge that benefits from diverse expertise. Having the right team is critical as you evolve the technology ahead of working with the regulator, and providing confidence in how the system is being designed to meet the certification needs. Ideally team roles should include:

• Aircraft Safety Specialists: To ensure compliance with established safety processes and regulatory standards.
• System Engineers: Generalists who organise and oversee the safety case.
• Fault Tree Specialists: For detailed analysis of system risks and failure scenarios.
• New and Novel Technology Experts: Specialists who understand the unique technical details of the emerging technology.
• General Technical Specialists: As required, depending on the specific domains (e.g. power systems, RF, hydraulics).

Much of this work can often be carried out by generalist systems engineers, but it’s critical for an experienced Aircraft Safety Specialist to review and sign off all outputs, providing the final assurance that standards are met.

Final thoughts: Embrace innovation, safely

Adapting new technologies into aviation systems doesn’t mean reinventing the wheel. By leveraging established safety processes, limiting the impact of high-risk components, and maintaining clear communication with regulators, the path to innovation can be navigated confidently and safely.

Novel systems such as neural networks, next-generation sensors, or AI-driven controls hold immense potential; but only if managed carefully within the existing robust framework of aviation safety. With the right team, processes and mindset, innovators can ensure these cutting-edge technologies take flight safely and effectively; shaping the evolution of Aerospace now and into the future!

Learn more about Beca’s Defence & National Security capability, including our work in the Aerospace domain here.