Re: [SystemSafety] FMEA draft international standard

From: John Knight < >
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 12:20:44 -0400

Hi Ross,

I did not mean to imply that not-for-profit organizations should be deprived of essential revenue. What I am looking for is for the cost of standards to be born by those who receive financial value from the standards.

All of the standards-development organizations are essential assets in the community. I am anxious for them to remain financially healthy and to have a predictable economic model.

I have written up a few ideas about standards that go beyond but include the financial element. At the risk of stirring up a lot of controversy, I note that a paper defining the ideas is available from the Safety Critical Systems Club:

The SCSC has graciously agreed to allow this particular paper to be available at no cost to the community in part because of my stand on the cost of standards.

I am extremely grateful to the SCSC both for publishing the paper and for allowing it to be downloaded at no cost.

On 7/18/14, 12:02 PM, Ross Hannan - Sigma wrote:
> John -- Whilst I have sympathy with your position, I wanted to make
> clear to readers that both RTCA and EUROCAE are not for profit
> organizations that obtain their primary income from membership fees
> and from the sale of the documents.
> Historically all RTCA and EUROCAE member organizations were given hard
> copies of all publications as they were released (this is before
> electronic copies were available) whether they had been involved in
> the development of the documents or not. It was soon realised that
> there was a certain futility in this as printing costs were high and
> subsequent sales were low -- as most interested parties had already
> been provided a copy of all of the documents.
> Next up, as Tom noted, active committee members were presented with a
> set of the hard copy guidance/standards they had worked on by RTCA. A
> few years ago this also changed, driven again by the cost of printing.
> There was then a period where the chairs and secretaries of the
> committee were asked to nominate a "few" people who had made
> significant contributions and they were provided with a hard copy.
> Nowadays there are no complimentary copies and EUROCAE has ceased
> publication of hard copy documents completely. The ED-12C (DO-178C)
> set of documents are only available electronically.
> Whether a model could be developed that satisfied RTCA and EUROCAE,
> and I guess in many cases SAE, I don't know. There are a growing
> number of users of the documents around the world and many other
> Certification Authorities involved, and the model would need to
> account for that.
> Ross Hannan
> *From:*systemsafety-bounces_at_xxxxxx > [mailto:systemsafety-bounces_at_xxxxxx > Behalf Of *John Knight
> *Sent:* 18 July 2014 16:30
> *To:* systemsafety_at_xxxxxx > *Subject:* Re: [SystemSafety] FMEA draft international standard
> On 7/16/14, 3:53 AM, Peter Bernard Ladkin wrote:
> For example, John Knight has complained publicly that he cannot obtain copies of standards to which
> he has himself contributed as a committee member without paying out large sums of money to which he
> does not have access in his academic role. And his students thereby cannot study them. He is right.
> Almost all academia is hindered from using actual - even past - standards in their teaching, at
> least in the area in which I work. That seems to be absurd if the standards' claim to codify current
> state of the art is true.
> Just to follow up on what Peter said here, I have proposed a model in
> which:
> * All standards from all sources are placed in the public domain.
> * Authorities that use standards as part of certification require
> that applicants pay a fee to the standards development
> organization for using the standard.
> As an example, in my model RTCA DO-178C would be in the public
> domain. But any organization seeking certification from the FAA for
> an avionics software system would pay a fee to RTCA. The FAA would
> require a copy of the receipt.
> This model provides the community with full access to the standards
> and charges those who benefit commercially from standards rather than
> the community at large.
> -- John

The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety_at_xxxxxx Received on Fri Jul 18 2014 - 18:20:57 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Jun 04 2019 - 21:17:06 CEST