Functional Safety Certification for Planetary Rovers: ARP4754A Explained

Date
2026-09-28
Location
Online
Host
Zach L

About this event

A Practical Workshop for Compliance Managers pursuing functional safety certification. A live 30-minute practical workshop on ARP4754A (Civil Aircraft Development) for planetary rovers, built for compliance managers pursuing functional safety certification. What We'll Cover: What ARP4754A (Civil Aircraft Development) requires and how its scope applies to planetary rovers Mapping ARP4754A clauses to the certification evidence assessors expect System-specific hazards and safety functions typical of planetary rovers Common findings that delay certification, and how to avoid them A practical readiness roadmap for compliance managers preparing for assessment Related topics: ARP4754A · Planetary Rovers · functional safety certification · functional safety assessment · Practical Workshop · Compliance Managers · safety lifecycle · compliance evidence · SIL · PL · risk assessment · safety case Critical Systems Analysis provides embedded functional safety consulting for ARP4754A. Learn more: https://criticalsystemsanalysis.com Partner with us: https://meetings.hubspot.com/benjamin-twombly/strategic-partnerships

Topics

Registration

View event page

About ARP4754A (Civil Aircraft Development)

This hands-on workshop builds applied knowledge and team exercises around the certification requirements of ARP4754A.

ARP4754A (ED-79A) governs development of civil aircraft and systems: requirements capture, allocation, and validation/verification at aircraft and system level, orchestrating where DO-178C/DO-254 items get their DALs and requirements.

What it regulates

Development assurance planning, requirements validation, FDAL/IDAL assignment from safety analyses, integration verification, and configuration/change management across the aircraft hierarchy.

Who must comply

Aircraft OEMs and system integrators (flight controls, avionics suites, propulsion control).

Key requirements of ARP4754A

  • Aircraft/system/item hierarchy with requirement flow-down
  • FDAL/IDAL assignment logic with independence credit
  • Requirements validation (right requirements) vs implementation verification
  • Coupling to ARP4761 safety assessment throughout

Key concepts: ARP4754A

Development vs safety process
4754A (development) and 4761 (safety assessment) run as interlocked twins.
FDAL/IDAL
Function and item development assurance levels allocated from failure-condition severity, with architecture-based reduction rules.
Requirements validation
Structured demonstration that stated requirements are correct and complete before proving compliance to them.

Frequently asked questions: ARP4754A

Why is DAL assigned at system level and not chosen by suppliers?

Assurance levels derive from aircraft-level failure condition severity through the 4754A/4761 process; suppliers inherit FDAL/IDAL with the architecture rationale, not commercial preference.

Standard information based on the published text of ARP4754A (Civil Aircraft Development). Event content is provided by the host. For authoritative guidance, consult the official standard body.