DO-178C

DO-178C
Title	DO-178C
Othernames	RTCA DO-178C, EUROCAE ED-12C
Status	Active
First published	2011
Predecessor	DO-178B
Successors	DO-178C/ED-12C supplements
Subject	Airborne software certification guidance
Organizations	RTCA, EUROCAE, FAA, EASA

DO-178C DO-178C is a consensus-based guidance document produced for avionics software certification that builds on previous work to address airborne software development, verification, and configuration management. It is jointly referenced by RTCA, Inc. and EUROCAE and used by regulators such as the Federal Aviation Administration and the European Union Aviation Safety Agency. The document interacts with industry actors including Boeing, Airbus, Honeywell Aerospace, Thales Group, and Safran and informs certification activities for platforms from Lockheed Martin fighters to Embraer regional jets.

Overview

DO-178C originated as a revised successor to earlier guidance and was published to harmonize practices among standards like RTCA DO-178B and regulatory expectations from agencies such as the FAA and EASA. Stakeholders including Collins Aerospace, Leonardo S.p.A., GE Aviation, Raytheon Technologies, UTC Aerospace Systems, and certification authorities contributed to its consensus development. The standard addresses software considerations across avionics programs by aligning with systems engineering approaches practiced by firms like Northrop Grumman and Saab AB and by referencing model-based methods used in organizations such as IBM Rational and MathWorks.

Scope and Objectives

The scope covers airborne software throughout the aircraft life cycle for civil aviation platforms produced by manufacturers such as Airbus Helicopters, Bombardier Aerospace, Mitsubishi Aircraft Corporation, and COMAC. Objectives include establishing objectives for planning, development, verification, configuration management, quality assurance, and certification liaison involving regulators like the National Transportation Safety Board in accident investigations and industry groups like ARINC. DO-178C sets integrity levels comparable to safety concepts from ICAO and aligns with certification artifacts expected by authorities such as Transport Canada Civil Aviation.

Structure and Guidance Content

The document is organized into sections that define planning documents, software requirements, design, coding, verification, and data certification artifacts similar to documentation used by NASA and European Space Agency. It includes pedigree expectations familiar to engineers at Thales Alenia Space and verification strategies comparable to those in Siemens model-based workflows. The guidance references techniques applicable to activities performed by contractors like Kongsberg Gruppen and MTU Aero Engines and aligns with configuration and change control practices employed at Boeing Defense and Airbus Defence and Space.

Certification Process and Life Cycle Activities

Certification processes guided by the standard involve coordination between civil regulators such as the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and manufacturers like Pilatus Aircraft or Dassault Aviation. Life cycle activities include planning, requirements capture, architectural design, implementation, verification (including structural coverage), and certification liaison, following practices seen in programs by General Dynamics and BAE Systems. Evidence produced under the guidance is used during Type Certification and Supplemental Type Certificate processes overseen by authorities like the UK Civil Aviation Authority and interfaces with operational approvals from organizations like IATA.

Tool Qualification and Software Considerations

DO-178C introduces explicit approaches for tool qualification and for integrating software tools into the certification baseline, paralleling quality assurance regimes used by Siemens Energy and Schneider Electric in safety-critical domains. It includes considerations for model-based development tools from MathWorks and for automatic code generators provided by vendors such as Green Hills Software and Wind River Systems. The guidance influenced toolchain practices at integrators like RTX Corporation and affected verification tooling employed by laboratories such as TÜV SÜD and DNV.

Updates, Supplements, and Related Standards

DO-178C is maintained with supplements and companion documents that address modern techniques, including model-based development, formal methods, and object-oriented technology—areas explored by institutions like Carnegie Mellon University and MIT. Related standards and documents include interoperability with ISO 26262 considerations in automotive contexts and with IEC 61508 for functional safety; cross-sector influences are observed between companies such as Tesla, Inc. and aerospace suppliers. Supplements published by RTCA and EUROCAE provide linkage to documents on software tool qualification and formal methods advocated by research centers such as Fraunhofer Society.

Criticisms and Industry Impact

Critics from industry and academia including voices associated with Cornell University and Stanford University have argued that the guidance can be heavyweight for smaller suppliers such as boutique avionics firms and regional OEMs like Harbin Aircraft Industry Group. Others at organizations like MITRE Corporation and RAND Corporation have debated the standard’s adaptability to agile and DevOps practices used by Microsoft and GitHub-centric teams. Nevertheless, DO-178C has materially influenced product development at prime contractors including Boeing, Airbus, and Lockheed Martin and has shaped curricula at universities such as Purdue University and University of Cambridge where aerospace software engineering is taught.

Category:Aviation safety