AFOP-7900.3-023.pdf

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

Center.

Armstrong Flight Research Center AFOP-7900.3-023, Revision G-2 Edwards, California 93523 Expires December 1, 2024

Compliance is mandatory.

SUBJECT:

Airworthiness & Flight Safety Review Process

RESPONSIBLE OFFICE:

Office of the Chief Engineer

Airworthiness and Flight Safety Review Process AFOP-7900.3-023, Revision G-2 Expires December 1, 2024

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

AFOP-7900.3-023, Airworthiness & Flight Safety Review Process

Concurrence Signatures By signing this concurrence, I accept the requirements that apply to my organization.

David McBride, Center Director Date Armstrong Flight Research Center

Bradford A. Neal Date Center Chief Engineer

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

CONTENTS

1.0 PURPOSE OF DOCUMENT

2.0 SCOPE, APPLICABILITY, & WAIVER

Scope

2.1.1 Scope Exceptions

Applicability Waiver

3.0 OBJECTIVES & METRICS

4.0 ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES

5.0 AIRWORTHINESS & FLIGHT SAFETY REVIEWs

Airworthiness and Flight Safety Review Flight Readiness Review

5.2.1 An FRR Board is charged with:

5.2.2 FRR Outline

6.0 AIRWORTHINESS REVIEW FLOWCHART

7.0 AFSR FLOWCHART REMARKS

8.0 TECHNICAL BRIEFS & MINI-TECH BRIEFS

Tech Brief (T/B) Board Tech Brief Mini-Tech

9.0 T/B or MINI-T/B FLOWCHART

10.0 T/B OR MINI-T/B FLOWCHART REMARKS

11.0 MANAGEMENT RECORDS & RECORDS RETENTION

12.0 RELEVANT DOCUMENTS

12.1 Authority Documents

12.2 Referenced Documents

12.3 Forms

12.4 Templates

APPENDIX A, Definitions

APPENDIX B, Acronyms

APPENDIX C, Review Board Checklist

APPENDIX D, Sample Questions For Review Board Members

APPENDIX E, Requirement Verification Matrix

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

1.0 PURPOSE OF DOCUMENT

This document establishes the requirements for the Airworthiness and Flight Safety Review (AFSR) process used at the Armstrong Flight Research Center (AFRC, henceforth referred to as the Center). The information provided is intended to maximize the effectiveness of the various parts of the AFSR process as practiced at the Center. This document will:

• Explain the functions of the AFSR, Airworthiness and Flight Safety Review Board (AFSRB), the AFSRB Chairperson, and the Flight Readiness Review Board (FRRB) when one is formed.

• Provide a sample Flight Readiness Review (FRR) outline for the FRRB Chairperson’s consideration during the review process.

• Delineate items that will be covered in the FRRB report to the AFSRB.

• Provide Technical Brief (T/B) and Mini-T/B process and guidelines.

2.0 SCOPE, APPLICABILITY, & WAIVER

Scope

This process applies to all flight activities, whether resident or deployed, hazardous ground tests involving manned aircraft, Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS), critical flight systems, high value assets and/or experimental facilities for which the Center has any airworthiness, ground, flight or range safety responsibility, or that involve Center personnel utilizing non-National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) assets.

2.1.1 Scope Exceptions

Projects conducted jointly with organizations having a Center recognized safety review process (e.g., other NASA Centers, the Air Force Test Center, United States Navy test organizations, etc.)

or where the safety review process is covered in a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA).

Applicability

This procedure applies to all FRRB, AFSRB, and T/B Board members, project managers/team members and Center organizations involved in the conduct of flight or high-risk ground test projects.

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

Waiver

The time requirements between FRRB report, chart delivery, and the AFSRB meeting or between the AFSRB meeting and T/B may be waived upon consultation with the AFSRB Chair (Section 7.0, Remark G).

The time requirements between chart delivery and T/B or between T/B and flight may be waived upon consultation with the T/B Board Chair (Section 10.0, Remark A).

This document’s requirements may be waived per AFPR-7123.2-001, Waivers and Deviations to Technical Requirements and Standards.

3.0 OBJECTIVES & METRICS

There are no metrics for this procedure.

4.0 ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES

Role: Chief Engineer Responsibility: Leads the Center’s AFSR process.

Role: Project Team Responsibility: In coordination with the Chief Engineer, present to the FRRB the project’s objectives, plans, hazard stance and approach to accomplish the project’s goals and objectives.

Role: Airworthiness and Flight Safety Review Board Members Responsibility: Review and assess the project team’s plans, approach, and hazard stance to accomplish their objectives safely as presented by the FRRB.

Role: FRRB/Independent Review Team (IRT) Members Responsibility: Review and assess the project team’s plans, approach, and hazard stance to accomplish their objectives safely.

Role: Center Director Responsibility: Establishes the Center’s AFSR process and evaluates and accepts or rejects residual hazards that fall into the Center accepted risk category, as appropriate (i.e., Some Center accepted risks will be reviewed by the Center Director and approved by NASA Headquarters (HQ)).

Role: Tech Brief Board Members

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

Responsibility: Review and assess the project team’s plans, approach and hazard stance to accomplish their objectives safely.

5.0 AIRWORTHINESS & FLIGHT SAFETY REVIEWS

Airworthiness and Flight Safety Review

The AFSRB performs reviews to ensure the flight safety of all Center projects. The AFSRB members or their designated representative are:

• Center Chief Engineer, Chairperson

• Director, Flight Operations

• Director, Research and Engineering

• Director, Safety and Mission Assurance

• Director, Mission Operations

• Director, Programs and Projects

• Chief Pilot

• Aviation Safety Officer (ASO)

• Range Safety Officer (RSO) (UAS reviews only)

• Ex-officio and other U.S. Government personnel may be appointed to the AFSRB as necessary to provide a thorough and streamlined review.

A quorum consists of the Chair and the Directors for Research and Engineering, Flight Operations, Safety and RSO (UAS only). The Chief Pilot and/or ASO may be represented by a qualified director.

The AFSRB Chairperson, in consultation with the AFSRB members and the Project under consideration, determine the appropriate level of review to be performed. There are four levels of review that vary depending upon the complexity and the criticality of the project:

• The first and least extensive level of review is one conducted solely by the AFSRB Chairperson. The Chairperson will determine whether a specific project needs to be reviewed in any further depth or by any committee. If project plans and preparations are adequate to conduct their proposed operation with an appropriate level of safety, the Chairperson has the authority to cease reviews at that point. Flight release may be via a crew brief, T/B, Operational Readiness Review (ORR) or appropriate Flight Request (AFRC Form 70129, Flight

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

Request, AFRC Form 70129g, Ground Test Request, or AFRC 70129u, UAS Flight Request).

• The second level of review occurs if the Chairperson decides that a specific project needs further review but does not require full FRRB activity. The chairperson will convene a small IRT of Center subject matter experts (SME) to assist determining whether the proposed project is cleared for flight. If the Chairperson and the small team agree that the project will be cleared for flight, a flight release will be via a T/B or ORR.

• The third level of review is to have the plans and proposed conduct of the project presented to the entire AFSRB for review. In this case, the entire board will make the judgment as to whether a particular project has adequately considered and integrated flight safety into its proposed plans. This determination is based on a presentation to the AFSRB by the project. The recommendation of the board to the Center Director is based upon the general agreement of the members with each major objection addressed and resolved or a minority report included with the recommendation. Flight release will be via T/B.

• The fourth level of review is to have the plans and proposed conduct of the project presented to the AFSRB by an ad hoc team of SMEs, independent of the project, to assess whether the proposed project may proceed to flight. This team is called an FRRB. The entire committee renders an assessment as to whether a particular project has appropriate designs, integration, plans, and procedures to conduct the proposed mission and adequately considered and integrated flight safety into these plans. The findings and recommendations of the FRRB are typically presented to the AFSRB by the FRRB chairperson and board members. The recommendation of the AFSRB to the Center Director are based on the general agreement of the members with each major objection addressed and resolved or a minority report included with the recommendation.

In any of the four review types, the AFSRB chairperson has the authority to obtain assistance from any part of the Center or any outside help that may be necessary to ensure that the project is conducted in the safest manner possible. This assistance can take many forms, such as the hiring of a consultant, using the aircraft manufacturer’s expertise, using experts in various fields, or forming ad hoc committees to assess any or all parts of the proposed program.

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

Flight Readiness Review

The AFSRB chairperson may establish a formal FRRB to assist in evaluating whether a specific project is adequately prepared to proceed with its proposed program. Typically, an FRRB will be convened if any of the following criteria are present:

A. Any new program or operation that can reasonably be assumed to contain significant risk to personnel or property.

B. A phased program that is ready to enter a second or succeeding phase beyond that already approved by the AFSRB.

C. A program that is preparing to exceed some limit previously approved by the AFSRB.

D. A program that will require a major modification to an aircraft.

The FRRB is established at a time when credible review and assessment can be made without delaying the operational schedule of the project. A good estimate for the start of an FRR is two-thirds to three-quarters of the way through a project’s integrated Verification & Validation (V&V) effort.

In all cases, this takes place before the first flight or major ground test operation of the project. FRRs are normally limited in scope to addressing safety as the main subject of review but may also include a review of the project’s potential for mission success when included in its charter.

5.2.1 An FRR Board is charged with:

A. Conducting an independent review and assessment of the entire program or operation and ensure that proper planning and preparation have been accomplished resulting in the project being conducted in a safe manner. This review will include, where applicable, the design, fabrication, performance, and documentation of all software and hardware associated with the project as well as ground and flight operational procedures. It will also include any substantiating wind tunnel, computational fluid dynamics, ground, and/or simulation testing performed.

B. Verifying that the approved system safety plan has been followed and that all analyses and results have been properly integrated into the project’s planning and tracking documentation.

C. Ensuring that all identifiable risks have been identified, assessed, and either adequately controlled or presented to Center management as risks to be accepted in order to conduct the program.

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

D. Providing engineering and technical recommendations to program personnel throughout the life of the FRR while recognizing that it is not a function of the FRRB to direct actual work effort.

E. Maintaining ongoing communication among FRRB members, program personnel, Center management, and the AFSRB chairperson.

F. Submitting a final report on Board activity, findings, and recommendations to the AFSRB chairperson.

The AFSRB chairperson in consultation with the AFSRB members and project management will select the FRRB members to represent specific disciplines and functions necessary for an objective review and assessment of a project and its proposed plans. The FRRB chairperson shall be a Center civil servant and senior engineer with extensive experience and expertise in the project’s primary discipline. Broad experience and expertise are desirable among board members in order to ensure recognition of potential problems in a wide range of areas. Other members may be drawn from NASA field centers, other government agencies, academia, and/or the private sector as long as they are independent from the project under review. The board will take advantage of other advisors and consultants to assist them in fully reviewing the project. If an outside consultant needs to be hired, the project will provide funding. Findings and recommendations are the sole responsibility of the board and its chairperson.

The FRRB members may go to their respective director and/or the AFSRB chairperson for help or advice to interpret the board’s charter. Line management will ensure that individuals working under them are given the time and priority necessary to do a thorough job as a board member. It is extremely important that the individual member remain completely independent from line management biases while operating as a board member. The FRRB members will not be associated with the project to avoid being viewed as partial in their activities or recommendations due to over familiarity with the project or its members.

One purpose of the FRR is to elevate individual or board concerns to higher management and the project while there is still time to avert a mishap or significant re-plan. Therefore, project team members are encouraged to reveal information freely, cooperate with the review team(s), and be completely open in all exchanges including those detailing any doubts or uneasiness experienced by the project team. Invite the FRRB members to attend pertinent project meetings, wherever applicable, to provide FRRB members access to the project team for the exchange of

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the ideas or concerns. The Project Team and FRRB have a common goal, and, often, the FRRB can help the project in attaining this goal. Qualified project team personnel will provide presentations to familiarize the FRRB with overall efforts to date and specifics on all areas under evaluation.

Project personnel will ensure that all information presented is current, complete, and accurate. The project team will also ensure that all hardware, software, and equipment submitted for evaluation is properly prepared and represents actual configuration and functional characteristics intended for use. The project will identify to the FRRB all known or suspected anomalies, deficiencies, or areas of concern.

Constant communication between the FRRB and the project team can provide benefits in both directions. A concern or recommendation voiced to the project team in a timely manner may allow the project to take action without delaying the project. Likewise, the proposed action of the project team, communicated to the FRRB in a timely manner, may expose areas of confusion or misunderstanding on the part of either the board or the project that could lead to unnecessary expenditure of valuable time and/or resources.

Upon completion of the board’s review, the FRRB chairperson will prepare a written report to the AFSRB chairperson. This report will include the board’s recommendations, any unsatisfactory or marginal areas or conditions, any restrictions or limitations that will be imposed before the proposed operation may take place, and a discussion of any hazards to be presented to the Center Director for acceptance. Ordinarily, the report would be signed by all FRRB members, but the chairperson may sign in an individual’s absence if he states that the absent member either concurred in the majority report or has filed a minority report. Any member not concurring with the majority report shall submit a minority report stating any areas of non-concurrence or additional claims or recommendations as appropriate. The FRRB will deliver a written report to the AFSRB and the project manager at least two working days prior to the AFSRB meeting.

The FRRB will present an oral briefing to the AFSRB unless specifically coordinated with the Center Chief Engineer. The FRRB oral briefing to the AFSRB will summarize the material presented in the written report.

Project team members may be present to answer very specific questions that may arise. The project manager and FRRB members will prepare electronic copies of the oral presentation and will provide them to each AFSRB member two working days prior to the AFSRB meeting. The project manager will ensure that hardcopies of the presentation for each AFSRB member are brought to the AFSRB meeting.

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

Along with the presentation of the FRRB’s final report, the Project Manager will submit a report to the AFSRB chairperson addressing any open action items or recommendations that were in the FRRB report requiring action before the first flight or significant project operation. The PM will present this report to the AFSRB members one working day prior to the AFSRB meeting. Following these two report submissions, the AFSRB makes final recommendations whether the project will be allowed to continue on the planned course or undergo some plan modification before continuing.

In order to allow sufficient time for the AFSRB to arrive at a decision without undue pressure, the final FRRB briefing to the AFSRB shall precede the Project’s T/B by a minimum of three workdays.

The T/B shall precede the first flight/operation by at least two working days. The FRRB should be represented at the T/B in order to concur on any issue closures deferred to the T/B.

For smaller projects less broad in scope, the above times may be compressed upon consultation with the Center Chief Engineer.

5.2.2 FRR Outline

Appendix C provides an outline for the FRRB Chairperson’s consideration to conduct an FRR on the assigned project.

Appendix D provides a set of sample questions for the FRRB members consideration as they review the assigned project. The board’s primary concern is to investigate all matters that affect public, flight, range, and ground safety. Any items noted that may affect mission success may be reported, but, unless specifically chartered, are not the primary concern of the board.

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

6.0 AIRWORTHINESS REVIEW FLOWCHART

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

7.0 AFSR FLOWCHART REMARKS

Remark A

Plans and preparations will include:

A. project description B. operations summary C. aircraft/experiment development status/readiness D. ground systems readiness E. analyses/simulations F. system safety analysis G. schedule H. Configuration Control Board (CCB) actions closed out I. Waivers and status J. issues/project requests

Remark B

The Center Chief Engineer will serve as the AFSRB Chair, and the Deputy Center Director serves as the alternate chair. If neither are available a Chair will be appointed by the Chief Engineer with the concurrence of the Center Director.

Remark C

Projects and tests that involve NASA assets (flight crew and/or high value equipment) and are flown on non-NASA aircraft will follow guidelines and policy set forth in NPD 7900.4, NASA Aircraft Operations Management and NPR 7900.3 Aircraft Operations Management. Additionally, the requirements of AFOP-7900.3-006, Aircrew Flight Operations Manual, Joint Flight Programs, will be followed when applicable.

Remark D

Determination of FRRB or IRT is based on the level of required review as determined by the Chief Engineer in consultation with AFSRB members called out in section 5.1.

The Chief Engineer develops a charter memo with team make up and specific review focus in coordination with the project team and AFSRB.

Remark E

FRRB/IRT composition depends upon vehicle, mission, and technologies involved.

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

FRRB/IRT chair will be an expert senior technical person.

Remark F

Refer to section 5.1 of this document for AFSRB membership.

Remark G

A. The written report shall be delivered to the Board and the project manager at least 48 hours prior to the meeting.

B. Electronic copies of the oral presentation shall be made available to project manager and Board members 24 hours prior to the meeting. Hard copies are provided to the Board Chair and members at the briefing to facilitate documentation of discussion items.

C. The final FRRB briefing to the AFSRB shall precede the project’s technical briefing by a minimum of three workdays. This time may be compressed with the concurrence of the AFSRB Chair.

Remark H

Representatives of the FRRB/IRT shall be present at the technical briefing in order to concur on any issue closures that were deferred to the tech brief.

8.0 TECHNICAL BRIEFS & MINI-TECH BRIEFS

The Technical (i.e., Tech) Briefing is one of the more important tools used by the Center to ensure the safe and efficient conduct of the flight test mission. T/Bs are used to continue safety and technical review processes after the AFSRB makes final recommendations and once the flight program moves into the flight phase.

The T/B provides the reviewed project office an opportunity to present its goals and plans to a group of peers. These peers represent disciplines at the Center with special emphasis on the particular areas of interest that are being explored during the proposed flight tests. In this way, a project receives the benefit of the experience and expertise of previously conducted projects. Using past experiences, peer review is a proven way of bringing overlooked items to light.

Lastly, T/Bs present a current assessment of project risks to allow management to reconsider its understanding of the risks involved prior to each flight. This ensures that any risks that cannot be eliminated or reduced are accepted at the appropriate level of authority and responsibility.

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

Holding a T/B prior to each research aircraft flight allows adequate time to process and thoroughly review data received from the previous flight. This forces a more comfortable and safe pace without project participants feeling they are being rushed into proceeding with a flight program after only a cursory review of available data.

A T/B may be held for a block of research aircraft flights. This is typically allowed for more well-established research projects (e.g., flights being conducted contain similar maneuvers, flights are deemed to be low risk by the project and chief engineer, etc.).

This block flight approval can allow the project to proceed through the flight test plan more efficiently and present a more complete picture of the flight test results. A tech brief may be called for mid-block if unexpected results are encountered or flight test plan changes are proposed.

Tech Brief (T/B) Board

The members of the T/B Board or their designated representative are:

• Center Chief Engineer (Chairperson)

• Director, Research and Engineering Directorate

• Director, Programs and Projects

• Director, Flight Operations

• Director, Safety & Mission Assurance

• Director, Mission Operations

• Chief Pilot

• ASO

• RSO (UAS activities only)

• Other Organization’s representatives (for joint projects)

The T/B quorum consists of the Board Chairperson and the Directors for Research and Engineering, Flight Operations, and Safety & Mission Assurance and RSO (UAS missions only). The Chief Pilot and ASO may be represented by a qualified director. In the event any quorum position or their designated representative is not present, the Project Manager will cancel the T/M and reschedule it.

The following project personnel or designated representatives shall attend the T/B:

• Project Manager

• Project Chief Engineer (if one is appointed)

• Project Operations Engineer (if one is appointed)

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

• Project Pilot It is highly desired that the principal investigator or technical monitor for each project attend the T/B.

FRRB/IRT members will attend the first tech brief after their report to the AFSRB Chair to ensure that actions directed by the AFSRB Chair have been complied with by the project. The FRRB/IRT chairperson will notify the members regarding the tech brief.

Directorate management will ensure that designated representatives report issues and results to the directorate management to ensure continuity of directorate technical and safety monitoring.

Tech Brief

In consultation with the Chief Engineer, the project manager will coordinate the agenda, scheduling, and presentation of the T/B. The presentation may include as applicable:

A. Review of past flight(s)

This review will address the data analysis results from previous flights of the aircraft with particular emphasis on envelope expansions or any unexpected results, whether or not they are expected to present a problem. These results should provide a smooth transition to the objectives of the proposed flight plan. Pilot comments from past flights will be addressed, particularly where the flying qualities of the aircraft are unexpected or not as good as have been expected. Significant anomalies or failures from previous flights will be reviewed.

B. Objectives of the proposed flight(s)

The objectives of the flight or block of flights will be presented in light of the results of previous flight(s) and as part of overall program objectives. Rationale and justification for the proposed flight will be shown based on an orderly progression from data points already obtained.

C. Flight Plan

The planned approach to obtaining the data maneuvers will be explained with emphasis on the technique and rationale for using it.

Any risks, limits, or constraints on the aircraft or maneuvering will be presented and clearly explained with no assumptions made as to understanding of these critical areas. Preplanned alternatives will be presented to allow for unforeseen contingencies that may occur during

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the flight. This plan will cover the entire flight period from takeoff to landing and give a clear and concise understanding of the pilot's duties at all times. If there is to be a period of pilot familiarization during flight, that will be briefed at the T/B. This is not meant to limit the pilot's freedom, but to constrain all research aircraft flying to activity that has been preplanned and briefed.

D. Configuration Changes

A brief review will be made of the configuration that the aircraft will be in for flight. This is particularly important where there has been a change made to the aircraft between flights, no matter how small or seemingly unimportant. The status of the configuration documentation and waivers will be briefed to verify the completion of the changes or to identify any incomplete work and its effect on the proposed flight test.

Additional risks perceived to have been incurred because of the changes will be briefed in the T/B.

E. Control Room Operations

For those projects requiring a control room, the presentation of the control room procedures will include the room layout, the required people involved in the flight and minimum staffing levels, data they will be looking at, and instrumentation requirements. Any changes to the room or its functions will be explained. The communication network, both with the aircraft and in the Control Room, will be briefed. Any required control room training accomplished prior to flight will be presented.

F. Accepted Risk List

At every tech brief, the project will present the list of any known safety risks that are being taken by the project. These risks may have arisen through various analyses such as a hazard analysis or may have shown up on previous flights or tests as discrepancies and processed through the normal discrepancy reporting system. The project will clearly explain and justify the level of the associated hazards and the rationale for accepting them. This list often takes the form of a Hazard Action Matrix (HAM) (TEM-001 a-b) that shows risk to human safety and risk to assets supported with a table of risk title, category and probability, causes, and mitigations.

G. Mandatory Requirements

Every research aircraft flight has lists of specific set of conditions, personnel, instrumentation, and equipment required in order to conduct

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the the flight as planned. The project will present these lists at the T/B along with the action to be taken in the event a condition is not met or a person or item is not present or not operating. These could include cancellation, flight abort, or deletion of a specific maneuver or series of tests, but the goal is that all possibilities are given detailed consideration in advance of the mission and precise alternatives planned and prepared for. These lists are:

1) Mission Rules – Required facilities, test systems, and their constraints.

2) Aircraft Operating Limitations – Test specific aircraft system or maneuver limits.

3) Weather Constraints – Test specific weather related limits or constraints.

4) Go/No-Go Instrumentation – Safety or mission critical instrumentation required to conduct the mission or specific portions of the mission.

5) Required Documentation – Specific documentation, checklists, or procedures for the mission.

6) Required Personnel – In addition to control room and flight crew, any ground crew required to conduct the operation.

H. Open Items

Occasionally, items may represent a major problem area and the Project is delayed until the items can be closed out satisfactorily. More often, the items are less severe and simply lack the necessary information at the time of the tech brief. These may normally be carried forward and closed out with the Center Chief Engineer before the project is cleared to proceed.

T/Bs are scheduled a minimum of two working days, preferably five, in advance of the proposed flight date. If not, the Project Manager contacts each of the mandatory attendees and notifies them of the upcoming briefing. Actual scheduling is done through the project’s administrative office but remains the responsibility of the project manager. The keeper of the Center calendar will be notified as soon as a date and time has been established so that no conflicting meetings are scheduled. Center management has given T/Bs the highest priority.

The project shall provide a copy of the T/B package to each of the Board Member Offices at least two working days prior to the scheduled T/B. Hard copies for each board member are presented at the T/B

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the meeting. It has been customary to circulate a draft of the proposed plan to all the interested parties a few days in advance of the tech brief. This is a desirable policy and will be exercised whenever possible. It provides the attendees with the benefit of being fully prepared at the T/B as well as giving the project team the benefit of potential feedback at a much earlier point in the planning process. It also allows each of the mandatory attendees enough time to ensure that they, or their representatives, can attend the actual briefing.

Following the T/B, the Board members approve and sign the appropriate AFRC Form 70129, Flight Request, AFRC Form 70129g, Ground Test Request, or AFRC 70129u, UAS Flight Request. The Chief Engineer’s signature on the appropriate form(s) indicates approval to conduct the operation.

Any of these rules may be altered to fit a special case through negotiation with the Chief Engineer's office. One example of a rule change that is permitted is the "Block Tech Brief," where a series of flights is briefed collectively. This would also include aerial refueling of a research aircraft where "one" flight is, in effect, two or three normal ones.

Although block briefing is often allowed, there is good reason and benefit to have the project take the necessary time between flights to analyze data before proceeding with the flight program. This is especially true where an envelope is being expanded and data maneuvers proposed for a flight are highly dependent upon results from a previous flight. The usual technique is to expand the envelope on the first flight of a series and then use the remaining flights to fill in data points, or to expand an envelope in a different disciplinary area.

A T/B is then conducted before further expansion takes place.

Mini-Tech

A "Mini-Tech" covers only a limited agenda aimed at a few items requiring approval before continuing with a flight series. Mini-T/Bs address minor system anomalies, review flight test results, and cover changes to briefed blocks of flights or for other purposes. Management may use Mini-T/Bs to provide increased supervision of more hazardous testing. It is not a substitute for a technical briefing. Typically, a mini-tech can be conducted in less than 20 minutes.

There is no mini-T/B briefing guide. The project manager, in consultation with the Chief Engineer and other T/B Board members, will determine each meeting agenda. The final decision on what is or is not allowed for any given project remains a decision to be made by the Center Chief

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

Engineer, a decision based on what facilitates the safest and most efficient flight test program possible.

Approved agenda items are prior flight results, relatively minor changes in configuration, prior flight anomaly explanation and analysis, minor changes to the tech briefed flight plan or mandatory requirements, and closeout items from project reviews.

The signatures of the appropriate entities on the previously briefed T/B flight request are reaffirmed by initials and dated. The initials show approval of the flight as briefed at the tech and mini-tech briefings.

The "two-day-before-flight" requirement is relaxed with mini-techs to facilitate a safe but rapid conduct of the mission. A mini-tech may be held immediately prior to the crew brief for most block-briefed flights, after the first flight.

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

9.0 T/B OR MINI-T/B FLOWCHART

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

10.0 T/B OR MINI-T/B FLOWCHART REMARKS

Remark A

The project manager in consultation with the Chief Engineer will schedule the T/Bs or mini-T/Bs. The project manager will inform all mandatory attendees and the Center Director's Office to include the meeting place and time on the Center calendar.

T/Bs will be scheduled at least two working days in advance of the proposed flight date.

Briefing materials will be distributed to mandatory attendees two days before briefing.

Hard copies of the presentation will be provided at the T/B to facilitate Board member note taking and situational awareness.

One paper copy of the as presented briefing material will be provided by the project to the T/B Board Chair for the record.

Remark B

Mini-T/Bs are typically less than 20 minutes and may be combined with the crew brief to explain minor anomalies and to brief incremental flight plans.

There is no requirement to provide briefing materials in advance.

One paper copy of the briefing material presented will be provided by the project to the T/B Board Chair for the record.

Remark C – Attendees

1. Tech Brief Board Members or Designee per section 8.1

2. Project Members or Designee per section 8.1

3. Desired Attendees

a) Principal investigator

b) Appropriate discipline representatives / technical monitors from Research

Engineering

A qualified director or designee may fill the Chief Pilot and ASO position. The RSO is a required attendee only when unmanned aerial system (UAS) operations are being conducted.

The Chief Engineer has the authority to augment the T/B mandatory attendee list, as appropriate, to cover project areas where additional expertise is warranted.

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

Remark D – Briefing Guide

Use this as a guide to determine topics to be presented. Further information on these items may be found in section 8.2.

1. Review of past flight conduct and results (if applicable)

2. Objective of proposed flight or flight block

3. Flight plan

a) Maneuvers

b) Flight profiles

4. Aircraft status

a) Maintenance status

b) Time Compliance Technical Order (TCTO), Technical Directive (TD), Airworthiness Directive (AD), Service Bulletin (SB) status

c) Instrumentation status

d) For non-Center aircraft, is an aircraft inspection required in accordance with

AFOP-7900.3-006, Aircrew Flight Operations Manual, Joint Flight Program for external aircraft operations

5. Configuration

a) Configuration changes

b) Status of configuration management (CM) documentation

c) Open waivers

6. Control Room operations

a) Staffing plan/responsibilities

b) Radio procedures (Control room, inter-plane, etc.)

c) Intercom procedures (Control room, intra-plane, etc.)

d) Call definition and maneuver terminate procedures

7. Hazard review

a) List of all identified hazards

b) Human Safety and Loss of Asset HAM charts

c) Accepted risk list, including mitigations and mitigation type for each

8. Range safety analysis

9. Mandatory mission requirements

a) Go/No Go list, with changes highlighted

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

b) Mission rules, with changes highlighted

c) Weather constraints

d) Operating limitations

e) Test-specific emergency procedures

f) Required documentation

10. Center range and facility requirements

a) Normal operations

b) Effect of scheduled outages

c) Contingency plan for unscheduled outages

11. Information Technology (IT) and Cybersecurity

a) Cybersecurity tech brief template

b) Authority to Operate

12. Open items from AFSRB, if required

Draft the appropriate AFRC Flight Request form, AFRC Form 70129, Flight Request, AFRC Form 70129g, Ground Test Request, or AFRC 70129u, UAS Flight Request.

With Chief Engineer approval, a T/B may cover a block of flights. Additional envelope expansion requires an additional T/B.

Remark E – Hazard & Risk Reporting Guidelines

Mitigation types fall into one or more of the following categories: design, safety device, procedure, training, or warning/placard.

For all accepted risks, the project will provide a very brief discussion on how residual risk levels were derived (i.e., through what level(s) in the hierarchy of risk management:

design, devices, processes / procedures, training, placards).

The project will provide a depiction of accepted risks and remaining residual hazards based on phase of flight (if appropriate). This is generally done using the HAM.

Test point risk level will be assessed as HIGH, MEDIUM, or LOW. MEDIUM risk test points will have an accompanying accepted risk requiring Center Director approval for flight. HIGH risk test points will have an accompanying accepted risk requiring NASA Headquarters approval for flight.

Provide assessment of probability of achieving technical objectives for flight / flight block being briefed.

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

Remark F – Hazard Action Matrix (HAM)

Multiple versions of the HAM (human safety and loss of asset) are presented. There may be HAMs for each flight phase for complex, multi-phased flight activity.

Remark G

Briefing materials may be distributed electronically prior to the T/B.

Sufficient paper copies will be provided at the T/B by the project for the mandatory attendees at the briefing to facilitate note taking.

The project will provide for the record one paper copy of the briefing material presented at the T/B to the T/B Board Chair.

Remark H

Verification of closure may be provided via a mini-T/B or email to the Chair. The method of reporting closure of action items will be provided to the project at the end of the T/B by the T/B Board Chair.

Remark I

T/BBoard approval refers to signatures on the appropriate request by the attending Board members or their designees.

At the conclusion of a mini-T/B, all required attendees will either sign the unsigned Flight Request or initial or date an already signed Flight Request (AFRC Form 70129, Flight Request, AFRC Form 70129g, Ground Test Request, or AFRC 70129u, UAS Flight Request).

11.0 MANAGEMENT RECORDS & RECORDS RETENTION

Destruction of any records, regardless of format, without an approved schedule is a violation of Federal law.

AFSRB and T/B records will be kept per the Office of the Director record types and plans for the records associated with this procedure.

Meeting records include at a minimum:

A. Attendance list of required attendees B. Action Items and Closures

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

C. T/B and AFSRB Presentation material D. FRRB/IRT written reports when applicable

Projects will maintain T/B and mini-T/B records per their respective Office of the Director record types and records plan for the records associated with this procedure (e.g., For T/B or Mini-T/B, a copy of signed Flight Request (AFRC Form 70129, Flight Request, AFRC Form 70129g, Ground Test Request, or AFRC 70129u, UAS Flight Request).

12.0 RELEVANT DOCUMENTS

AFRC documents may be found at https://odie.ndc.nasa.gov/SitePages/Home.aspx.

12.1 Authority Documents

NPR 7900.3 Aircraft Operations Management NPD 7900.4 NASA Aircraft Operations Management AFPR-7123.2-001 Waivers and Deviations to Technical Requirements and Standards

12.2 Referenced Documents

AFOP-7900.3-006 Aircrew Flight Operations Manual

12.3 Forms

AFRC 70129 Flight Request AFRC 70129u UAS Flight Request AFRC 70129g Ground Test Request

12.4 Templates

TEM-001 a-b Hazard Action Matrix https://odie.ndc.nasa.gov/SitePages/Home.aspx

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

APPENDIX A, DEFINITIONS

Can or may Denotes discretionary privilege or permission.

Mini-Tech Brief

A short (typically 20 minutes in length) review to approve readiness for a flight, addressing only one or two issues (close-out of a problem, resolution, or experimental data). Attendees are the same as those for a standard Tech Brief.

Shall All mandatory actions (i.e., requirements) are denoted by "shall."

Should Denotes a good practice and is recommended, but not required.

Tech Brief A review by various designated Senior Management personnel to assure readiness for a research/science flight (or block of flights).

Will Denotes a future action or expected outcome. If a “will” statement implements an external requirement, it is auditable.

APPENDIX B, ACRONYMS

AD Airworthiness Directive AFG Armstrong Flight Guidance (document type) AFOP Armstrong Flight Operational Procedure (document type) AFPR Armstrong Flight Procedural Requirements (document type) AFRC Armstrong Flight Research Center AFSR Airworthiness and Flight Safety Review AFSRB Airworthiness and Flight Safety Review Board AIL Aircraft In the Loop ASO Aviation Safety Officer ATO Authorization to Operate CCB Configuration Control Board CDR Critical Design Review CG Center of Gravity CISO Chief Information Security Officer CM Configuration Management COTS Commercial Off the Shelf EMI Electromagnetic Interference

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

FMEA Failure Mode and Effects Analysis FRR Flight Readiness Review FRRB Flight Readiness Review Board FTA Fault Tolerance Analysis G Gravity GVT Ground Vibration Test HAM Hazard Action Matrix HIL Hardware In the Loop HQ Headquarters IRT Independent Review Team ISSO Information System Security Officer IT Information Technology IV&V Independent Verification and Validation MARS Managed Archive and Repository System MOA Memorandum of Agreement NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NPD NASA Policy Directive NPR NASA Procedural Requirement OGA Other Government Agency OPS Operations ORR Operational Readiness Review PDR Preliminary Design Review PM Project Manager PRA Probabilistic Risk Analysis RPV Remotely Piloted Vehicle RSO Range Safety Officer SAA Space Act Agreement SB Service Bulletin SBU Sensitive but Unclassified S&MA Safety & Mission Assurance SME Subject Matter Expert SMI Structural Mode Interaction SSP System Security Plan T/B Tech Brief

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

TCTO Time Compliance Technical Order TD Technical Directive TEM Template UAV Unmanned Aerial Vehicle UAS Unmanned Aerial System U.S. United States V&V Verification & Validation

Before use, check the Master List to verify that this is the current version. For reference only when printed. This document does not contain export-controlled content and may be distributed outside the

APPENDIX C, REVIEW BOARD CHECKLIST

The purpose of a review is to provide Center management assurance that a satisfactory approach has been taken to achieving safe and productive flight operations. Reviews communicate an approach, demonstrate an ability to meet requirements, and establish status.

The objectives of a review are to establish that all interfaces are compatible and function as expected, confirm that the system and support elements are properly configured and ready for flight, and receive assurance that flight operations can proceed with acceptable risk.

This checklist provides a partial list of items to address for review team guidance when conducting an independent review.