Product certification
GNSS/SBAS receiver evidence review for DO-160G, DO-178C
This review is for avionics suppliers, equipment suppliers, OEMs responsible for GNSS/SBAS receiver. It is triggered by navigation TSO authorization planning. EE checks DO-229D MOPS test results, integrity-monitoring, fault-detection data, plus the governing plan or application, against DO-160G, DO-178C. Discrepancies include missing source records, mismatched configuration, unsupported assumptions, or MOPS run to an earlier DO-229 revision than the operational approval assumes. Output includes GNSS/SBAS receiver gap register, Means of compliance map, Test and analysis request list.
When this review is needed
- A new article, software load, or installation is moving into certification review.
- Quality control needs a repeatable list of ready and open records.
- Internal teams need a supplier request list tied to evidence gaps.
- The buyer wants a defensible package before committing the claim.
The problem
Certification risk sits in the gap between the claimed basis and the records in the folder. With GNSS/SBAS receiver, MOPS run to an earlier DO-229 revision than the operational approval assumes can stay hidden until the exact source record is requested.
What gets reviewed
- Review dO-229D MOPS test results against the configuration, installation, or claim under review.
- Compare integrity-monitoring against the configuration, installation, or claim under review.
- Trace fault-detection data against the configuration, installation, or claim under review.
- Challenge sBAS message-processing verification against the configuration, installation, or claim under review.
- Reconcile dO-178C data at the assigned level against the configuration, installation, or claim under review.
- Confirm dO-160G environmental categories. against the configuration, installation, or claim under review.
Scope this review
Tell us the asset, the event, and the evidence in scope, and we will outline a focused first engagement.
Identify what is missing against the means of compliance.
What gets validated
- Pass check: dO-229D MOPS test results must match the released configuration and the claimed means of compliance.
- Configuration check: integrity-monitoring must match the released configuration and the claimed means of compliance.
- Trace check: fault-detection data must match the released configuration and the claimed means of compliance.
- Rationale check: sBAS message-processing verification must match the released configuration and the claimed means of compliance.
- Closure check: dO-178C data at the assigned level must match the released configuration and the claimed means of compliance.
Evidence normally required
- Controlled dO-229D MOPS test results
- Released integrity-monitoring
- Signed fault-detection data
- Current sBAS message-processing verification
- Archived dO-178C data at the assigned level
- Supplier dO-160G environmental categories.
Common discrepancies
- Gap: mOPS run to an earlier DO-229 revision than the operational approval assumes.
- Mismatch: integrity performance not demonstrated for the claimed approach class.
- Unsupported claim: antenna/installation assumptions unqualified.
What is at stake
A weak package can convert a planned review into a long question log. If integrity performance not demonstrated for the claimed approach class, the program may need new evidence before the claim can proceed.
How the work runs
Frame Gnss Sbas
Confirm the exact event, affected file set, buyer role, and decision standard before any do-229d mops test results is treated as sufficient.
Trace TSO C145
Walk the named evidence from index entry to source artifact and mark where the trail supports, conflicts with, or fails to answer the page-specific question.
Sort Evidence Review
Group exceptions by closure route: document retrieval, data correction, engineering disposition, authority response, or contractual decision.
Package 178c Product
Deliver the exception list, evidence map, and owner sequence in a form that can move directly into remediation, submittal cleanup, or transaction negotiation.
What the buyer receives
- GNSS/SBAS receiver gap register
- Means of compliance map
- Test and analysis request list
- Interface closure plan
Who uses the output
- Certification engineer assign closure actions from the exception register.
- navigation engineer use the map to locate source evidence.
- Product manager decide what can proceed and what must wait.
How the work fits into the transaction or program
What a GPS/SBAS navigation receiver must substantiate for TSO-C145 (sensor) or TSO-C146 (standalone), distinct from the navigation-equipment category page because the decisive evidence is DO-229D minimum operational performance, integrity/RAIM and SBAS augmentation behaviour, and the software assurance level set by the intended LPV/approach use. The evidence set centers on DO-229D MOPS test results, integrity-monitoring and fault-detection data, SBAS message-processing verification, DO-178C data at the assigned. The likely weak points are MOPS run to an earlier DO-229 revision than the operational approval assumes, integrity performance not demonstrated for the claimed approach class, and antenna/installation assumptions unqualified. The output gives the certification engineer a cleanup register for GNSS/SBAS receiver before navigation TSO authorization planning.
Start with a single asset
Reduce finding cycles by checking the package first.
Regulatory limits
The output supports applicant decision making and authority discussions. It does not replace required approvals, designee findings, conformity activity, or airworthiness determinations.
What this review does not cover
- Final certification decision
- Airworthiness determination
- Hardware or software redesign
- Production quality release
Specific to this review
- Configuration identity matters because evidence from another baseline may prove a different article, load, or installation.
- A useful trail names the source record, revision, owner, and closure decision for each claim.
- The exception list separates document-control cleanup from gaps that need engineering substantiation.
- The finding pattern for this page is specific: MOPS run to an earlier DO-229 revision than the operational approval assumes changes the strength of the certification argument.
- The scope uses the Gnss Sbas Receiver TSO question as the control point, so the review stays tied to Navigation TSO authorization planning and the buyer decision behind it.
- The evidence starts with DO-229D MOPS test results and follows C145 C146 Evidence Review references until every exception has a source location and a reason code.
- The finding logic separates missing paperwork, conflicting status, stale revision data, and unsupported disposition because each class closes through a different owner.
- The timing matters for Certification engineer: the output is useful only if the unresolved items are visible before acceptance, submittal, handback, or negotiation pressure fixes the sequence.
- The boundary control keeps 160g 178c Product Certification questions in the records or certification lane and sends technical acceptance issues to the authorized people who own them.
- The handoff value comes from GNSS/SBAS receiver gap register; it gives the next reviewer a precise map instead of another broad request for a better file.
Sources
U.S. Government (eCFR). Type certificates, STCs (Subpart E), TSO authorizations (Subpart O), PMA (Subpart K), and export airworthiness approvals (Subpart L).
RTCA. Objectives and lifecycle data for airborne software assurance, by design assurance level (DAL A-E).
RTCA. Environmental qualification test categories and procedures referenced by TSO and equipment qualification.
Frequently asked questions
What makes this product-types review different from a general file audit?
The scope is tied to gnss sbas receiver tso and to the decision named in the request. A general audit can list weak records; this pass ranks the gaps by whether they block navigation tso authorization planning or can be closed later without changing the decision.
What evidence has to be available before this work starts?
The starting point is do-229d mops test results, the current status source, and any index or matrix that tells reviewers where the supporting artifact should live. Missing inputs are logged as findings rather than filled with assumptions.
Who decides whether an open item is acceptable?
The review explains what the evidence supports and gives certification engineer a closure path. Acceptance remains with the buyer, operator, authority, delegated engineer, or authorized person responsible for the underlying airworthiness or certification decision.
Relevant glossary terms
Related pages
Where this fits
Talk to an engineer who has done this work
We will walk through your current state, the records or evidence involved, and a scoped first engagement.
Talk through the aircraft, records, evidence, deadline, and next useful step.