TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0
Sender:
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Ada Marketing <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 21 Dec 2000 10:22:56 -0500
Content-Type:
multipart/mixed; boundary="------------7747C84765A9B220D95DEB73"
Reply-To:
Ada Marketing <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (2011 bytes) , adamark.vcf (171 bytes)
Mike,

Thanks for the reply.  I guess I wasn't very clear in my initial message.  I
do know DO-178B very well.  I misspoke by saying it was a commercial avionics
standard in that it is used by commercial avionics, but is a government
standard.

What I was wondering though, is if there is any military standard that would
imply military avionics projects have to conform to DO-178B, and/or such a
requirement?


Mike Brenner wrote:

> Ada Marketing wrote:
> > Some military programs are now requiring the conformance to commercial
> > standards, such as the FAA's DO-178B.
> > Is there a defined government mandate that encourages or requires this?
>
> The FAA is the agency that usually mandates DO-178B. That standard is
> quite close to saying something like it requires both CMM Level 4 and an
> INSPECE (independent software performance evaluation and coding
> examination as used on nuclear weapons programs).
>
> DO-178B compliance is tailorable on a per-contract basis and includes
> such stuff as:
>
>         process model of the software maintenance
>         strict configuration management
>         metrics on hanging pointers, memory leakages, overflows
>         quality assurance to analyze the trends in metrics
>         both product and process audits
>         testing standards
>         independent proof that no extraneous outputs are generated
>         testing that trace every input and output
>         automated testing
>         automated integration testing
>         built-in-tests
>         battle shorts
>         tools and methods of analyzing the impact of change
>         enterprise logging
>         data integrity
>         carrying out the testing when the HW, SW, OS, or net changes
>         software peer reviews
>
> It is true that DO-178B was written by a "commercial" aviation
> organization, but I think of it more as a government standard.
>
> ADVICE: First, define the requirements for how well the software has to
> work, get everyone's agreement on those requirements, and then tailor
> the DO-178B requirements on your contract to those requirements.
>
> Mike Brenner


ATOM RSS1 RSS2