Weather radar qualification
Weather radar qualification evidence review and support
A weather radar qualification evidence review checks that the environmental and software qualification behind a radar actually covers the environment and configuration it will be authorized into. A certification engineer runs it for the supplier before qualification evidence is relied on in a TSO or STC package, or when a prior qualification is being reused for a new application. It examines DO-160G test category selection, the coverage of the qualification test plan, software life-cycle qualification data, and whether the tested configuration matches the article being certified. You receive a qualification coverage assessment, a list of categories or configurations that fall short, and the retest or delta-qualification items needed to close them.
When this review is needed
- Qualification evidence for a radar is about to be relied on in a certification package and no one has confirmed its coverage.
- A qualification run under an earlier program is being reused for a new application with a different environment.
- A design change touched hardware or software and the existing qualification may no longer bound the article.
- The DO-160G test plan was written years before the current installation and its category selection has never been rechecked.
The problem
Qualification evidence ages quietly. A radar carries a DO-160G test report and a software qualification record that were valid for the environment they were written against, but the article gets reused, re-hosted, or re-installed into conditions the original plan never contemplated. The engineer relying on that evidence has to know whether the tested categories and the tested configuration still bound the new use, and the reports rarely make that easy to see.
What gets reviewed
- DO-160G test category selection checked against the intended installation environment
- Qualification test plan coverage compared with the required condition set
- Software life-cycle qualification data at the assigned assurance level
- The tested hardware and software configuration reconciled to the article being certified
- Reused or legacy qualification assessed for whether it still bounds the new application
- Delta-qualification or retest items scoped where coverage falls short
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
- Every DO-160G section required by the intended environment appears in the qualification with a passing result
- The tested severity levels bound the environment the radar will actually see
- The configuration under test matches the article's current hardware and software definition
- Software qualification data is present at the DO-178C level the failure analysis assigns
- Any qualification reused from an earlier program is shown to still cover the new application
Evidence normally required
- The DO-160G qualification test plan and its results
- The intended installation environment and required condition set
- The article's current hardware and software configuration definition
- Software life-cycle qualification data and the assigned assurance level
- Any earlier qualification records proposed for reuse
Common discrepancies
- A required DO-160G section absent from the qualification because the environment changed after the plan was written
- A tested severity level that no longer bounds the intended installation
- Qualification tied to a hardware or software configuration the article has since superseded
- Reused legacy evidence whose original application differs from the new one in a way that matters
What is at stake
Relying on qualification that does not cover the actual environment puts a hidden hole in the certification basis that an authority or a downstream installer eventually finds. Discovering a category shortfall late can force a retest on the critical path, and reusing a qualification tied to a superseded configuration can invalidate the very evidence a program was counting on.
How the work runs
Define the required coverage
Derive the DO-160G sections, severities, and software qualification the intended environment and configuration demand.
Read the existing evidence
Inventory what the current and any reused qualification actually tested, at what level, in what configuration.
Compare and find the shortfall
Overlay required coverage on existing coverage and mark every category or configuration gap.
Scope the retest
Define the delta-qualification or retest needed to close the gaps, in priority order.
What the buyer receives
- A qualification coverage assessment against the intended environment and configuration
- A list of categories, severities, or configurations where the evidence falls short
- A scoped set of retest or delta-qualification items to close the coverage gaps
Who uses the output
- Certification engineers relying on qualification evidence in a TSO or STC package
- Test and engineering leads planning any retest the coverage gaps require
- Program managers deciding whether legacy qualification can be reused or must be redone
How the work fits into the transaction or program
The review sits upstream of both the TSO evidence work and the STC installation work, because both lean on qualification evidence holding. Confirming coverage here prevents a category or configuration shortfall from surfacing inside a submission, where it is far more disruptive to fix.
Start with a single asset
Confirm requirements map to substantiating evidence.
Jurisdiction-specific considerations
FAA and EASA both recognize DO-160G as the environmental qualification standard, so the categories translate, but each authority differs in how it expects reuse of prior qualification to be justified. The coverage assessment notes where a reuse argument acceptable to one authority will need strengthening for the other.
Regulatory limits
The review assesses the coverage of existing qualification evidence. It does not perform qualification testing, certify the tested configuration, or determine that the radar meets any airworthiness requirement. It identifies where evidence is missing, not that the article passes.
What this review does not cover
- Conducting DO-160G environmental or software qualification testing
- Modifying the article to match a prior qualification
- Approving the qualification evidence on an authority's behalf
Specific to this review
- Qualification most often falls short not because a test failed but because the environment changed after the test plan was fixed, leaving a required section untested.
- A qualification tied to a superseded configuration can be technically valid and still useless, because it no longer describes the article being certified.
- Reusing a legacy qualification is cheaper than retesting only when the original application genuinely bounds the new one, which is the exact thing this review confirms.
Sources
U.S. Government (eCFR). Type certificates, STCs (Subpart E), TSO authorizations (Subpart O), PMA (Subpart K), and export airworthiness approvals (Subpart L).
European Union / EASA. EASA design and production certification, STCs, ETSO authorizations, and EASA Form 1 release.
RTCA. Environmental qualification test categories and procedures referenced by TSO and equipment qualification.
RTCA. Objectives and lifecycle data for airborne software assurance, by design assurance level (DAL A-E).
Frequently asked questions
Can we reuse qualification from an earlier radar program?
Sometimes. Reuse holds only where the earlier application's tested environment and configuration bound the new one. The review checks that overlap explicitly and identifies the delta qualification needed where the earlier evidence does not fully cover the new use.
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.