Abstract
The Air and Space Interoperability Council (ASIC) has adopted the European Defence Agency (EDA) process for inter-regulatory military airworthiness authority recognition. However, there are gaps in the application of this process to nations outside of the European Union. This paper proposes a model that can effectively map diverse technical airworthiness regulatory frameworks. This model, referred to as the Product-Behaviour-Process (PBP) Bow-Tie model, provides the systematic structure needed to represent and compare regulatory frameworks. The PBP Bow-Tie model identifies key points of difference that need to be addressed, during inter-agency recognition between the two regulatory authorities. With the intention to adopt global use of the EDA process, the proposed PBP Bow-Tie model can be used as a basis for the successful recognition of regulatory frameworks outside of the European Union. Iris plots produced from the implementation of this model are presented, and proposed as a suitable means of illustrating the outcome of an assessment, and of supporting the comparisons of results. A comparative analysis of the Australian Defence Force and New Zealand Defence Force airworthiness regulatory frameworks is used as a case study. The case study clearly illustrates the effectiveness of the model in discerning regulatory framework differences; moreover, it has offered an opportunity to explore the limitations of the Iris plot.
Highlights
Having to comply with a number of disparate military regulatory requirements imposes “unsustainable” costs on the European Defence industry [1]
Mirroring the civil aviation (namely the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)) approach and structure, it was agreed that a common set of European Military Airworthiness Requirements (EMARs), Acceptable Means of Compliance (AMC), and Guidance Material (GM) should be developed, accepted, and implemented into national regulation by all European Defence Agency (EDA) members [2]
Significant work on mutual recognition is being undertaken by the EDA, through the European Military Airworthiness Document – Recognition (EMAD-R) process, and within ASIC through an Airworthiness Working Group, which comprises of representatives from the United States Department of Defence (US DoD), United Kingdom Ministry of Defence (UK MoD), Canadian Department of National Defence, and Australian and New Zealand Departments of Defence
Summary
Having to comply with a number of disparate military regulatory requirements imposes “unsustainable” costs on the European Defence industry [1]. Leon Purton Mutual Recognition of National Military Airworthiness Authorities: A Streamlined Assessment Process within the European Union (EU) [2]. Mirroring the civil aviation (namely the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)) approach and structure, it was agreed that a common set of European Military Airworthiness Requirements (EMARs), Acceptable Means of Compliance (AMC), and Guidance Material (GM) should be developed, accepted, and implemented into national regulation by all EDA members [2]. The EMAD-R details an agreed process for the recognition of other Military Airworthiness Authorities (MAAs), in terms of authority, certification, and approval of products and organizations, based on the EMARs [4]. Greater global implementation of the EMARs will provide added motivation For this reason, an alternate method of recognition, or a framework for supporting the process described in the EMAD-R, is necessary. The recognition process between the Australian Defence Force (ADF) and New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) is assessed, and demonstrated as an exemplar case
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
