Search Results

Certifying an aircraft, part or appliance can be a challenge.  The FAA/EASA procedures can be frustrating and a maze of rules, policy and guidance. Understanding the process and procedures can provide you with a competitive edge and reduce your time obtaining a Certification approval. This course provides an overview of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) policies, guidelines and requirements leading to Type and Supplemental Type airworthiness approvals. This course has a focus on 29.801 Ditching and EASA 29.802 Emergency Flotation.

Certifying an aircraft, part or appliance can be challenge. The FAA/EASA procedures can be frustrating and a maze of rules, policy and guidance. Understanding the process and procedures can provide you with a competitive edge and reduce your time obtaining a Certification approval. This course provides an overview of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) policies, guidelines and requirements leading to Type and Supplemental Type airworthiness approvals. This course has a focus on 29.865 External loads to include hoists, belly-mounted external structure and cargo hook loads.

This course describes the basic elements of the process for achieving a successful aircraft certification globally once certification by the State of Design has been accomplished. The regulatory framework established under ICAO is presented with discussion of how major countries around the world comply with the ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs). The uncertainty of how each country performs validation is a challenge. This course identifies common validation practices and key bilateral agreements which facilitate acceptance of aviation products from one country to another.

This course is verified by Probitas Authentication as meeting the AS9104/3A requirements for continuing Professional Development. Why is a design for manufacturing, assembly and automation so important? This introductory course on airframe engineering will cover the importance of design for manufacturing, assembly and automation in aerospace. It will review what the key drivers are for a “good” design and some of the key points for manufacturing and assembly of aircraft components. It will look at how an engineer can combine traditional technologies with new, cutting-edge technologies, to determine the best scenario for success.

This course will introduce participants to industry best practices for real-world aviation cyber-security risk-assessment, development & assurance. Participants will learn the information necessary to help minimize DO-326/ED-202-set compliance risks and costs, while also optimizing cyber-security levels for the development, deployment and in-service phases Topics such as aircraft security aspects of safety, systems-approach to security, security planning, the airworthiness security process, and security effectiveness assurance will be covered.

This course is verified by Probitas as meeting the AS9104/3A requirements for Continuing Professional Development. Production and continual improvement of safe and reliable products is key in the aviation, space, and defense industries. Customer and regulatory requirements must not only be met, but they are typically expected to exceeded requirements. Due to globalization, the supply chain of this industry has been expanded to countries which were not part of it in the past and has complicated the achievement of requirements compliance and customer satisfaction.

This course is verified by Probitas Authentication as meeting the AS9104/3A requirements for continuing Professional Development. In the Aerospace Industry there is a focus on Defect Prevention to ensure that quality goals are met. Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (PFMEA) and Control Plan activities are recognized as being one of the most effective, on the journey to Zero Defects. This two-day course is designed to explain the core tools of Design Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (DFMEA), Process Flow Diagrams, Process Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (PFMEA) and Control Plans as described in AS13100 and RM13004.

This document has been declared "CANCELLED" as of July 2008 and has been superseded by PRI AC7102/1. By this action, this document will remain listed in the Numerical Section of the Aerospace Standards Index noting that it is superseded by PRI AC7102/1. Cancelled specifications are available from SAE.

This Aerospace Standard (AS) establishes the requirements for suppliers of Nonconventional Machining Services to be accredited by the National Aerospace and Defense Contractors Accreditation Program (NADCAP). NADCAP accreditation is granted in accordance with SAE AS7003 after demonstration of compliance with the requirements herein. The requirements may be supplemented by additional requirements specified by the NADCAP Nonconventional Machining and Surface Enhancement (NMSE) Task Group. Using the corresponding Audit Criteria (PRI AC7116) will ensure that accredited Nonconventional Machining suppliers meet all of the requirements in this standard and all applicable supplementary standards. The purpose of this audit program is to assess a supplier's ability to consistently provide a product or service that conforms to the technical specifications and customer requirements.

This Aerospace Standard (AS) is to be used as a supplement to SAE AS7109. In addition to the requirements contained in AS7109, the requirements contained herein shall apply to suppliers seeking NADCAP Coatings accreditation who are engaged in thermal spray.

Abstract Letter from the Guest Editors

Abstract Threat identification and security analysis have become mandatory steps in the engineering design process of high-assurance systems, where successful cyberattacks can lead to hazardous property damage or loss of lives. This article describes a novel approach to perform security analysis on embedded systems modeled at the architectural level. The tool, called Security Threat Evaluation and Mitigation (STEM), associates threats from the Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC) library with components and connections and suggests potential defense patterns from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 800-53 security standard. This article also provides an illustrative example based on a drone package delivery system modeled in AADL.

This Aerospace Standard (AS) is to be used as a supplement to SAE AS7109. In addition to the requirements contained in AS7109, the requirements contained herein shall apply to suppliers seeking NADCAP Coatings accreditation who are engaged in stripping of coated material.

The potential for small scale local production of Bio fuel derivatives and their partial blending with aviation turbine fuel in non-civilian bases has been investigated. A feasibility study on technical readiness levels for process viability is presented in the paper. Demand side analysis for various blend mixes and corresponding requirement for production facilities and land area requirements are performed. Sustainable production and blending operations are the basis for selection of key performance indicators for the air base. Guiding framework and readiness evaluation processes are delineated for the base. Qualitative inference is combined with quantitative scoring system within the framework.

Project Oculus is an in-flight deployable mechanical arm/pod system that will accommodate 500 pounds of sensor payload, developed for a C-130 military aircraft. The system is designed for use in counter narco-terrorism and surveillance applications by the Department of Defense and the National Guard [1]. A prototype of the system has been built and is in the testing/analysis phase. The purpose of this study was to analyze the actual stresses and strains in the critical areas found using previous Finite Element (FE) simulations and to ensure that acceptable safety requirements have been met. The system components tested will be redesigned, tested, and reconstructed in the case of unacceptable safety factors or if more reliable methods can be implemented. The system was built to be deployed and retracted in flight, to avoid causing any problems in take off and landing.

This document has been declared "CANCELLED" as of June 2017. By this action, this document will remain listed in the Numerical Section of the Aerospace Standards Index. Cancelled specifications are available from SAE.

This SAE Aerospace Information Report (AIR) is prepared for stakeholders seeking information about the evolution, integration, and approval of SHM technologies for military aircraft systems. The report provides this information in the form of (a) two military organizations’ perspectives on requirements, and (b) general SHM challenges and industry perspectives. The report only provides information to generate awarness of prespectives for military aircraft and, hence, assists those who are involved in developing SHM systems understanding the broad range of regulations, requirements, and standards published by military organizations that are available in the public domain from the military organizations.

Abstract Fighter pilots must study models of aircraft dynamics before learning complex maneuvers and tactics. Similarly, autonomous fighter aircraft applications may benefit from a model-based learning approach. Instead of using a preexisting physics model of a given aircraft, a machine learning system can learn a predictive model of the aircraft physics from training data. Furthermore, it can model interactions between multiple friendly aircraft, enemy aircraft, and the environment. Such a system can also learn to represent state variables that are not directly observable, as well as dynamics that are not hard coded. Existing model-based methods use a deep neural network that takes observable state information and agent actions as input and provides predictions of future observations as output. The proposed method builds upon this approach by adding a residual feedforward skip connection from some of the inputs to all of the outputs of the deep neural network.

The modeling and simulation pyramid in defense states it clearly: Multi-Level modeling and simulation are required. Models and simulations are often classified by the US Department of Defense into four levels—campaign, mission, engagement, and engineering. Campaign simulation models are applied for evaluation; mission-level simulations to experiment with the integration of several macro agents; engagement simulations in engineered systems development; and engineering-level simulation models with a solid foundation in structural physics and components. Models operating at one level must be able to interact with models at another level. Therefore, the cure (“silver bullet”) is very clear: a comprehensive framework for Multiple Resolution Modeling (MRM) is needed. In this paper, we discuss our research about how to construct MRM environments.