OSO 2 – UAS manufactured by competent and/or proven entity
AMC1 Article 11 Annex E. Operational Safety Objective 2
CAA ORS9 Decision No. 46
OSO 2 – UAS manufactured by competent and/or proven entity
Level of integrity
| Criterion | Low (SAIL 3) | Medium (SAIL 4) | High (SAIL 5, 6) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Technical issue with the UAS | OSO2.L.I |
OSO2.L.I OSO2.M.I |
OSO2.L.I OSO2.M.I OSO2.H.I |
Level of assurance
| Criterion | Low (SAIL 3) | Medium (SAIL 4) | High (SAIL 5, 6) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Technical issue with the UAS | OSO2.L.A |
OSO2.L.A OSO2.M.A |
OSO2.L.A OSO2.M.A OSO2.H.A |
Low level of robustness (SAIL 3)
OSO2.L.I
The manufacturing procedures must cover:
(a) The specifications of materials used.
(b) The processes necessary to allow for manufacturing repeatability and conformity within acceptable tolerances.
(c) Configuration control.
OSO2.L.A
(a) The manufacturing procedures must be developed to a standard or means of compliance acceptable to the CAA.
(b) The Applicant must declare and provide evidence of compliance with the Integrity requirements. The detailed evidence of compliance may be assessed by the CAA.
AMC.OSO2.L.A
Annex E – AMC 1 Integrity and assurance levels for the Operational Safety Objectives (OSO) paragraph 1.5 provides further information about proposing a standard as an AMC.
Medium level of robustness (SAIL 4)
Lower robustness level requirements to be complied with:
• OSO2.L.I
• OSO2.L.A
Additional requirements to be complied with:
OSO2.M.I
The manufacturing procedures must cover:
(a) The verification of incoming products, parts, materials, and equipment.
(b) Identification and traceability.
(c) In-process and final inspections, and testing.
(d) Control and calibration of tools.
(e) Handling and storage of all products.
(f) Handling of non-conforming items.
OSO2.M.A
The Applicant must provide evidence that each UAS is verified to have been manufactured in conformance to its design.
The Applicant must provide evidence of compliance with the Integrity requirements, which will be assessed by the CAA.
AMC.OSO2.M.I
Annex E – AMC 1 Integrity and assurance levels for the Operational Safety Objectives (OSO) paragraph 1.5 provides further information about proposing a standard as an AMC.
AMC.OSO2.M.A
The Applicant may use a combination of methods such as (but not limited to) physical inspections and flight testing to demonstrate that each requirement listed in the design specification is satisfied by the finished UAS product.
High level of robustness (SAIL 5 and 6)
Lower robustness level requirements to be complied with:
• OSO2.L.I
• OSO2.L.A
• OSO2.M.I
• OSO2.M.A
Additional requirements to be complied with:
OSO2.H.I
The manufacturing procedures must cover:
(a) Personnel competence and qualifications.
(b) Supplier control.
OSO2.H.A
The manufacturing procedures and conformity of the UAS to its design must be recurrently verified through process or product audit.
The Applicant must provide evidence of compliance with the Integrity requirements, which will be assessed by the CAA. The CAA will validate continuing compliance through oversight.
AMC.OSO2.H.I
Annex E – AMC 1 Integrity and assurance levels for the Operational Safety Objectives (OSO) paragraph 1.5 provides further information about proposing a standard as an AMC.
AMC.OSO2.H.A
An audit programme may be established and agreed between the Applicant and the CAA that will allow the CAA to obtain and assess the evidence of conformity during an audit. The frequency of audits may be agreed with the CAA as part of the audit programme.