You are on page 1of 2

UNCONTROLLED IF PRINTED TERHAD

PU 2103 ANNEX A TO SECTION 1 LEAFLET 4

CLASSIFICATION OF DESIGNS

FURTHER DEFINITION OF DESIGN DESCRIPTORS
1. All designs can be classified in terms of the equipment effected by the design and the implications of that design. For the purposes of this publication all designs will be classified as being either: a. On-Aircraft Items. This class of items consists of those forming part of the aircraft itself, ie structures, engines, radars, avionics etc and those items carried on the aircraft but not necessarily part of the aircraft. Thus this includes role equipment such as medivac equipment, stores, cargo and cargo handling equipment, additional fuel bladders, as well as items consumed during flight (fuels and lubricants, oxygen etc). b. Off-Aircraft - With Interface. This class of items consists of all items that have any (physical or functional) interface with an aircraft. c. Physical Interfaces. Tools, test equipment, ground power units, fuel tankers etc all have obvious physical interfaces with the aircraft and thus it is important that none of these things include design flaws which might endanger the aircraft. d. Functional Interfaces. On the other hand a number of systems have functional interfaces which may represent as great (or greater) threat to the safety of the aircraft and personnel. These include such systems as simulators, Instrument Landing Systems, Air Traffic Control radars, some mission planning systems, and even some ground-based IT systems such as CAMM. Similarly, there are some offaircraft systems that have a functional interface with aircraft and provide significant capabilities to the Services (SAO). These include systems such as air defence radars, some data communications networks etc. e. Off-Aircraft – No Interface. DGTA is responsible for the oversight and regulation of a small number of systems that have no interface with aircraft at all. These systems are generally ground-based IT systems used for logistics management and command and control, some calibration equipment, and most facilities. 2. In addition, all designs will be classified as having the following implications: a. Airworthiness. This class consists of any design that impacts upon the safety of flight of an aircraft. b. Safety. Any design that impact upon personnel safety in any way. For example, if one considers the issue of flight safety, this class would include designs affecting some of the operations of ILS and ATC equipment. Similarly, the design of a

www.dgta.gov.my

1.4A - 1 of 2
TERHAD

Rev 1
July 2013

UNCONTROLLED IF PRINTED TERHAD

PU 2103

moveable gantry for painting aircraft could equally have safety implications and require the inclusion of safety rails and speed control etc. c. Capability and Efficiency. This class consists of all designs intended to provide, or change, an operational capability. Software changes to an Electronic Warfare suite to improve its effectiveness, and the redesign of an antenna to improve an air defence radar’s performance, are both examples of this class of design. This class of design also consists of those designs intended to increase the logistics efficiency of the item, but which have no impact upon its airworthiness, safety or capability. Examples of these kinds of change include the repackaging of maintenance tasks within item individual lives to arrive at a more convenient servicing arrangement. Combination of Design Descriptors to Classify Designs 3. Combining both of these classifications the design agency can arrive at the classification of their design and hence determine how the regulations are to be applied to that design. For example, a radar fitted to an aircraft is obviously an aircraft component. However, the nature of the radar and its role in the aircraft will determine the level of tailoring permitted to the regulations. A surveillance radar used for the detection and tracking of surface targets is a vital component of the capability of a maritime patrol aircraft but not essential to its airworthiness, thus any change to that would be fall into the Aircraft component/Capability class and a design agency working on this equipment could employ some tailoring of the regulations as permitted by Annex C. Conversely, a weather radar may have no impact upon an aircraft’s mission performance but may be essential if the aircraft is to fly at night and to fly all-weather missions safely, hence it would normally be classed as Aircraft Component/Airworthiness and subject to the full rigour of the regulations. 4. Using a ground-based system as an example, most IT systems used for logistics management have no direct interface with an aircraft (some such as spares assessing and life cycle costing tools may have an indirect interface with the fleet but not to individual aircraft). Usually, the operation of these tools is to help the SAO to put aircraft online at the lowest possible cost in logistic support. Thus these tools would generally be classified as Off-aircraft – no interface/Capability and Efficiency and could be managed in accordance with a system where the regulations were used simply as a management guide. On the other hand, some ground-based systems (such as CAMM) have a direct interface with individual aircraft and aircraft components, and collect and manipulate data which may influence the ability of those aircraft to fly safely. In such an example, that IT system would normally be classified as Off-aircraft – with interface/Airworthiness and would be required to be managed in accordance with the regulations with only some tailoring.

www.dgta.gov.my

1.4A - 2 of 2
TERHAD

Rev 1
July 2013