See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/255993754

Systems Engineering for Commercial Aircraft

Conference Paper · August 1997

DOI: 10.1002/j.2334-5837.1997.tb02151.x

CITATIONS READS

39 4,036

1 author:

Scott Jackson
Burnham Systems Consulting
83 PUBLICATIONS 589 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Systems Engineering View project

Systems Engineering and Thinking View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Scott Jackson on 17 October 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 SYSTEMS ENGINEERING FOR
COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT
Scott Jackson
Douglas Aircraft Company
3855 Lakewood Blvd.
Long Beach, California 90846
ABSTRACT
The application of systems engineering (SE) to
commercial aircraft presents a set of requirements
and processes unique to the commercial aircraft
industry. SE can be applied to new, derivative,
and change-based aircraft design. The concept of
an aircraft system extends beyond the aircraft
itself. The hierarchy of the aircraft architecture is
embedded in present-day processes. Aircraft
life-cycle functions follow the classical life-cycle
functions. The aircraft-level functions can be
flowed to aircraft and subsystem level functions
and requirements. Requirements which receive
more attention than others include performance,
safety, cost, reliability, and weight, not
necessarily in that order. Economic
requirements include both market-driven and
particular customer requirements. Certification
guidelines for the aircraft, including its software,
incorporate SE principles. Strong SE
management is required for the successful
development of commercial aircraft. This paper
is based on the author's book Systems
Engineering for Commercial Aircraft (1997).
INTRODUCTION
SE is increasingly being applied in commercial
practice. (Petersen and Sutcliffe, 1992), for
example, discuss the principles of SE as applied
to aircraft development. The purpose of this
paper is to show how the unique aspects of
commercial aircraft development would be
applied within the SE process.
COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT
Although the term "commercial aircraft"
generally refers to jet-powered aircraft carrying
large numbers of passengers or more for long
distances, SE principles also apply to freight-
carrying aircraft, "commuter," aircraft, and to
"general aviation."
There are three types of aircraft developed in
the commercial aircraft industry: new aircraft,
derivative aircraft and change-based aircraft. All
aircraft should meet the top-level requirements,
and a thorough verification process is required to
show that these requirements have been met.
A new aircraft is developed from a "blank
slate" using the SE process. The requirements
for new aircraft are market driven and reflect the
desires of a broad spectrum of potential
customers. The top-level synthesis of an aircraft
is discussed later in this paper.
Derivative aircraft are based on previous
designs. Like new aircraft, derivative aircraft
requirements are based on market-driven needs.
The advantage of derivative designs is that
significant development costs can be avoided.
Change-based aircraft are those new or
derivative aircraft which have been ordered by
specific customers and require specific options
and custom designs. Often these options can
affect aircraft performance and therefore must be
evaluated at the aircraft level.
Architecture of the aircraft system
Figure 1 shows a typical hierarchy for a
commercial aircraft system, which includes
more than the aircraft itself. The aircraft is just
one of five second-level elements. Secondly, a
hierarchical numbering system known as the
ATA index and is published in the ATA
Specification 100 (1989) already exists in the
aircraft industry. The correlation between the
ATA index and the sample hierarchy is shown in
Figure 1. This hierarchy is one of many possible
valid hierarchies. The development of this
hierarchy is one of the first steps in the aircraft
SE synthesis process.
New technologies and concepts
To meet design requirements for reduced weight,
noise, and emissions, robust systems, and safe
and economic operation, many advanced
technologies are routinely incorporated into
commercial aircraft, e.g., heads-up displays
(HUD), voice recognition, global positioning
system (GPS) receivers, point-to-point inertial
navigators, reconfigurable instrument displays
 Aircraft system

Aircraft Training Support Facilities Personnel

Environmental Avionics Electrical Interiors Mechanical Propulsion Auxiliary Airframe

segment segment segment segment segment segment segment segment

21 Air 22 25-10 27 Flight 28 (2) 53 (7)

24 49 (6)
conditioning Auto flight Crew controls Fuel Fuse-
Electrical Auxiliary
power accommoda- lage
29 power
21 (1) Cabin 23 tions
Hydraulic 54 through system 55
pressure Communica- Empen-
33-30, -40, power 54-80 (3)
tions 25-20 nage
-50 Pylon
30 Ice & rain Passenger 32 (6) Part of 54
protection Shipside
accommoda- Landing Nacelles/ 57
31 Indicating lighting tions gears pylons Wing
35 Oxygen & recording 71(1) (4)
Power
36 Pneumatic plant
25-30 & -40, 38 (7) Includes
34 Water, waste, lavs, galleys, 52 Doors and
Navigation & plumbing
(1) Part of 21 Air 76 (5) 56 Windows
conditioning Power
(2) Includes control
25-60(2)(3)
applicable parts of
Emergency (4) Includes 72 Engine, 73 Engine fuel and control,
26 Fire protection
provisions 75 Air, 54-10 Nacelle, 74 Ignition, 78 Exhaust, 79
(3) Includes 33-50 Emergency Oil, & 80 Starting
lighting
33-10, -20 (5) Includes
Signs & lights 77 Engine display

Figure 1. Typical Aircraft System Architecture (and ATA Chapter Correlation)

based entirely on digital video displays, Doppler Aircraft functions
radar, fly-by-wire (FBW) or fly-by-light (FBL),
and real-time computer fault detection and One way to identify aircraft functions is to view
isolation. Composite material technology is key them as nodes of a matrix. These nodes include
to weight reduction. the operational phases, mission functions, and
Radical changes in aircraft design are being situational functions, as shown in Figure 2.
studied. For example, the drive towards a high
speed civil transport (HSCT) has focused on
advances in propulsion and materials. The three- Perform
surface aircraft described by (Martínez-Val, Pre-flight
Operations Perform Perform
1994) and (Birch, 1995) has been shown to Passenger & Cargo Normal
improve aerodynamic performance. Another Perform operations Operations
concept to improve aerodynamic performance is Take-off
the blended wing-body (BWB). This concept Operations Perform Perform
x Abnornal
would resemble a large manta ray. x Freighter
SE has the capability of evaluating the Perform Operations Operations
introduction of advanced technology for both Flight
subsonic and supersonic aircraft, as described by Operations Perform Perform
Non-revenue Emergency
(Mackey, 1996). Each technology must be
Perform Operations Operations
evaluated as part of the trade-off and risk
analyses which are part of the SE synthesis Post-landing Node 2
Node 3
process, discussed later in this paper. Operations Mission
Situational
functions
Node 1 functions
FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS Operational
phase
Life-cycle functions functions
Figure 2. Matrix of Aircraft Operational
The demands of the aircraft industry gives the Functions
life-cycle flow its own unique characteristics.
Table 1 compares aircraft life-cycle functions Figure 3 shows how the Perform Flight
with the traditional SE life-cycle functions from Operations functions can be expanded. These
the draft EIA 632 (1994). functions and their subordinate functions will
drive the subsystem performance requirements.
Table 1. Comparison of Traditional and
Aircraft Life-cycle Functions REQUIREMENTS
Traditional SE life- Aircraft life-cycle functions
cycle functions Economic requirements
Development Market analysis
Perform initial marketing
Perform initial design Economic requirements are either market-driven
Market aircraft or specific customer requirements. Top-level
Perform design and requirements, such as the range, number of
development passengers, cargo capacity, and operating costs,
Manufacturing Perform manufacturing, will be driven by overall market factors. Specific
procurement, and assembly customers will require special capabilities, for
Verification Perform design and
development
example, relating to interior or avionics design.
Perform certification Requirements can also be initiated internally,
Deployment Operate aircraft such as for a design for manufacturing and
Operations Operate aircraft assembly (DFMA) initiative.
Support Perform sustainment
Training Perform sustainment Regulatory requirements
Disposal Remove aircraft from service
Regulatory requirements are those imposed by
regulatory agencies, such as the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) and the Joint Aviation
Agencies (JAA). The FAA and JAA set the (sound levels), external noise, electrical loads, air
requirements for the certification of the aircraft distribution, fuel consumption, emissions,
(discussed later). Many requirements are also maintenance cost, and loads, shock, and
set by industry standards and other agencies. vibration.

CONSTRAINTS AND SPECIALTY

Provide
Aerodynamic
REQUIREMENTS
Performance
Weight
Provide Thrust
Weight is one of the most closely watched
Provide aircraft requirements. The primary weight for
Passenger & Crew design and allocation to subsystems is the
Accommodations manufacturer's empty weight (MEW). The
Provide
primary weight for sizing is the maximum take-
Cargo Capability off weight (MTOW). Weight can either be
established as a derived sizing parameter or as a
Provide constraint from airport weight limits. Either
Environmental way, weight will be allocated to the subsystems
Control using the classical SE allocation process.

Provide
Communications
Provide
Guidance &
Navigation
Maintain
Structural
Integrity
Provide
Power
Provide Situational
Awareness
Figure 3. The Perform Flight Operations
Function
Derived and allocated requirements
As the aircraft is developed from the top-level
performance requirements and constraints,
derived requirements at the top and subsystems
levels will be developed. The number of engines
and weight are examples. In addition, software
requirements, all of which are derived, will be
developed.
Many requirements can be allocated to
aircraft subsystems. These include, but are not
limited to, weight, non-recurring (development)
cost, recurring (unit) cost, direct operating cost
(DOC), dispatch reliability, maximum allowable
probability (MAP) of failure, internal noise
Reliability
Several types of reliability can be applied to
aircraft design, but the one with the most
visibility is dispatch reliability. Dispatch
reliability is the probability that the aircraft will
leave the gate within 15 minutes of the scheduled
time. Like weight, dispatch reliability can be
allocated to all the aircraft subsystems. Safety
related reliability is treated within the certification
process, discussed later.
Human Factors
Although human factors requirements apply to
many aspects of aircraft design, such as
passenger comfort and maintenance, the area
receiving the most attention is flight deck
(cockpit) design. The challenge of human
factors is the development and allocation of
verifiable requirements both to humans and to
the equipment, as described by (Chapanis,
1996). That is, the human is considered part of
the system in accordance with the aircraft system
hierarchy of Figure 1.
The human factors requirements for cockpit
design require the resolution of conflicting
requirements: On one hand the cockpit must be
designed to avoid excessive pilot workload
during periods of high stress, such as during
landing and during emergency situations. On the
other hand, the cockpit must be designed to
maintain pilot vigilance during periods of low
activity. Another goal of human factors is to
minimize the effects of periferalization, that is, take-off. However, iterations may size the
the complex psychological state which results engines at other conditions. Take-off weight can
from a shift in the pilot role from direct contact be estimated from standard sizing relationships
and control of the aircraft to one of system involving structure, engines, fuel, payload, and
monitor, as described by (Satchell, 1993). fixed equipment (electrical, hydraulic,
environmental control, avionics, etc.). All of the
TOP-LEVEL SYNTHESIS above information gives us enough information
to determine the climb and cruise ranges.
The aircraft system
Table 3. Wing Sizing Requirements
The aircraft system is much larger than the Performance
aircraft itself and consists of the five elements Requirements Constraints
previously discussed. There are many Number of passengers Field length
requirements which may affect or be affected by Weight of cargo Initial cruise altitude
one or more of these elements. Table 2 presents Range Atmospheric conditions
a partial list of these requirements. Cruise Mach number Approach speed
Table 2. Requirements Affecting the Aircraft
Economic constraints. As described by
System
(Jackson, 1995), direct operating cost (DOC) is a
Cargo characteristics Costs
Airport characteristics Exterior noise
primary design constraint. The components of
Utilization rate Operational requirements DOC are navigation fees, insurance, landing
Turnaround time Growth capability fees, ground handling, crew (cabin, cockpit),
People-related Aircraft autonomy ownership (depreciation and interest),
requirements maintenance (engine, airframe), and fuel and oil.
Passenger service Consumables Figure 4 shows how DOC is allocated to the
requirements
Regulatory environmental Reliabilities, both dispatch various aspects of the design. In most cases the
requirements and operational DOC allocation requires a change in parameter to
Configuration change-over Particular customer perform the requirements allocations.
times requirements Figure 5 shows how DOC is used to select a
Actual origins and design point for a new aircraft. Two types of DOC
destinations
are important: DOC per seat mile and DOC per
trip. Design points in the lower left-hand corner
Aircraft top-level synthesis are deemed to be economically viable while
those in the upper right-hand corner are not.
The creation and building of complex systems is
often called systems architecting (Rechtin, 1991). SUBSYSTEM SYNTHESIS
Systems architecting goes beyond technical
requirements to focus on such concepts as Virtually all subsystem requirements are derived
customer satisfaction. We will frame the aircraft requirements. The flow-down of requirements
synthesis process in terms of performance from the top level is dependent on the
requirements, constraints, and requirements allo- architecture selected at that level, such as the one
cation. The top-level aircraft synthesis process shown in Figure 1. The subsystem performance
began with the top-level functions (Figure 2) and requirements are also driven by the subsystem
the aircraft system architecture (Figure 1). functions identified in Figure 3. While each of
the individual segments shown in Figure 1 may
Aircraft sizing. As described by (Corning, derive its requirements from individual
1977) aircraft sizing begins with wing sizing and functions, many functions apply to several
balances three conditions: take-off, cruise, and segments. Hence, SE trade studies should be
landing. For the purpose of initial sizing, the conducted both between and within aircraft
performance requirements and constraints of segments and subsystems. For example, the
Table 3 apply. weight savings of advanced material would be
This process continues with many trade-offs traded against the increased costs. In addition,
and iterations involving, for example, wing the trade-off is key to the introduction of
sweepback angle, thickness ratio, etc. The advanced technologies, previously discussed.
engines are normally sized by the conditions at
 Recurring
Design-to-cost
Recurring cost cost
allocations
allocations

Maintenance Maintenance Maintenance

cost cost requirements
allocations

Aerodynamic Aerodynamics
Direct requirements allocations
operating
Performance
cost Must-weigh Must-weigh
cost
requirements allocations

Engine
requirements

Crew
Crew cost requirements

Figure 4. Allocation of Direct Operating Cost

classes of interfaces. This framework promises

to standardize interfaces and make interface
Number of development easier.
seats Traditional aircraft development fixtures
Region of (DFs), that is, aircraft mock-ups to coordinate
DOC per seat-mile

economic physical interfaces, are being replaced by

non-viability electronic development fixtures (EDFs), that is,
three dimensional electronic models. This trend
promises to reduce the cost of aircraft
development, speed the development cycle, and
Region of improve the quality of interfaces.
economic
viability CERTIFICATION

Certification is the process that substantiates that

DOC per trip the aircraft and its subsystems comply with
airworthiness requirements. The FAA and the
Figure 5. DOC Design Regimes SAE have taken a major step towards
incorporating the SE process into the certification
INTERFACES process with the publication of ARP 4754
(1996).
Because aircraft components are developed in Certification encompasses the entire
various parts of the world and brought to a single development of the aircraft. Required
location for assembly, adherence to the SE documentation includes descriptions of aircraft
interface principles is even more important. development, requirements and their validation
Aircraft functional interfaces include and verification, system integration,
electrical power, hydraulic power, pneumatic configuration management, and process
power, mechanical forces and torques, assurance. All of these activities are completely
conditioned air, heat, vibration, shock, loads, and in line with the SE process.
signal interfaces. The SAE Generic Open
Architecture Framework (1996) establishes nine
Safety analysis
Safety is the primary focus of certification.
Specific analyses to assure the safety of the
aircraft are treated in accordance with SE
principles as shown in Figure 6. The principal
safety analyses are the functional hazard analysis
(FHA), the preliminary system safety analysis
(PSSA), the system safety analysis (SSA), and
the common cause analysis (CCA). This figure
shows how the safety assessment and SE
processes are linked.
Software development
Another area requiring adherence to certification
requirements is software development. The
process, described by RTCA/DO-178B (1992),
for the development of the software itself is
essentially the same as the SE process.
Secondly, the certification process does not
consider the software to be a separate entity, but
rather a part of a larger system to be certified.
SE MANAGEMENT
The important aspects of SE management for
commercial aircraft include, first, the conduct of
rigorous design reviews, particularly at the
aircraft level. Secondly, the use of integrated
product teams (IPTs) is essential to develop,
implement, and verify requirements for each of
the major aircraft segment shown in Figure 1. A
supplier management process which includes the
suppliers as part of the IPTs is important. IPTs
also assure that normally down-stream
processes, such as maintainability, get included
at the beginning. Thorough configuration
management is essential for aircraft integration.
Risk management is essential especially for the
introduction of new technologies. Finally, it is
important for SE management to assure that
safety is not compromised by organizational
factors, as described by (Paté-Cornell, 1990).
CONCLUSIONS
Many changes in aircraft and subsystem
concepts are being studied by the aircraft
industry. Cockpits are being studied with the
goal of improvements in safety. All of these
developments will be enhanced by the
application of SE during the development cycle.
REFERENCES
ARP 4754, Guidelines for the Certification of
Highly-Integrated and Complex Aircraft
Systems, Society of Automotive Engineers
(SAE), November 1996
Birch, Stuart, Technology Update, Aerospace
Engineering, December 1995, pp. 9-10.
Chapanis, Alphonse, Human Factors in
Systems Engineering, New York, Wiley,
1996.
Corning, Gerald, Supersonic and Subsonic,
CTOL and VTOL, Airplane Design, College
Park, Maryland, published by author, 1977.
Jackson, Scott, "Systems Engineering and the
Bottom Line," Proceedings of NCOSE,
November 1995.
Jackson, Scott, Systems Engineering for
Commercial Aircraft, Aldershot, Avebury
Aviation, 1977.
Mackey, Dr. William F., "Conducting a
Technology Management Assessment,"
INCOSE Proceedings, 1996.
Martínez-Val, Rodrigo, et al, "Design
Constraints in the Payload-Range
Diagram of Ultrahigh Capability
Transport Airplanes," Journal of Aircraft,
Vol. 31, No. 6, November-December
1994.
Petersen, T. J. and Sutcliffe, P. L., "Systems
Engineering as Applied to the Boeing 777,"
AIAA 1992 Aerospace Design Conference,
Irvine, California, 1992.
Paté-Cornell, M. Elisabeth, "Organizational
Aspects of Engineering System Safety: The
Case of Offshore Platforms," Science, Vol.
250, November 30, 1990.
Rechtin, Eberhardt, Systems Architecting:
Creating and Building Complex Systems,
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey; Prentice-
Hall, 1991.
 Safety Systems
assessment engineering
process process
Aircraft-level Aircraft-level Aircraft-level
FHA functions functions &
requirements
Functional
interactions
Top-level
architecture
Failure conditions, (synthesis)
effects, class,
Subsystem- safety objectives
Allocation of
Failure Level FHAs functions &
Functions
conditions requirements
& effects Failure conditions, effects, to subsystems
class, safety objectives
Common cause
analysis (CCA) Architectural Subsystem-
requirements level
PSSAs
architecture
Architecture
(synthesis)

Item requiremts, safety

Item requirements
objectives, Allocation of
analyses requiremets
required to subsystem
elements

Implementation Design &

SSAs
build
(synthesis)

Separation & Physical system

verification
Verfification &
certification

Figure 6. Interrelation Between Safety Assessment and SE Processes

(adapted from ARP 4754)

Satchell, Paul, Cockpit Monitoring and Alerting

Systems, Aldershot, Ashgate Publishing AUTHOR
Limited, 1993.
Scott Jackson, MS, MA is a Principal Specialist
Software Considerations in Airborne Systems in Systems Engineering at Douglas Aircraft
and Equipment Certification, RTCA/DO- Company (DAC), Long Beach, California. Mr.
178B, RTCA, Inc., 1 December 1992. Jackson's book Systems Engineering for
Commercial Aircraft was published by Avebury
Specification for Manufacturers' Technical Data, Aviation in 1997.
Air Transport Association (ATA),
Specification 100, Revision 28, 15 March
1989.

Systems Engineering, EIA IS (Interim

Standard) 632, 1994. (draft)

View publication stats