Services
Engineering services built on certified, flight-proven experience
Six focused practice areas, each traceable to direct aerospace and embedded systems experience — from requirements through certification and verification.
Requirements development and allocation, system architecture, and interface control for aerospace and embedded programs.
Good systems engineering is the difference between a program that converges smoothly through certification and one that discovers its architecture problems during flight test. We build and maintain requirements sets that are complete, verifiable, and correctly allocated across hardware, software, and operational procedures — with full traceability from stakeholder need down to test evidence.
Our practice covers system and subsystem architecture definition, interface control documentation, trade studies, and DOORS-based requirements management, informed by MBSE-adjacent modelling practices where they add clarity without adding process overhead.
This work is grounded in real programs: turbine engine control systems, satellite payload software, and safety-critical avionics, where a missed interface or an unallocated requirement carries real schedule and safety consequences.
DO-178B/C development up to DAL A and DO-297/IMA, with structured lifecycle artifacts and model-based tooling.
We develop embedded software under DO-178B/C, up to and including Design Assurance Level A, and under DO-297 for Integrated Modular Avionics platforms. That means disciplined planning (PSAC, SDP, SVP, SCMP, SQAP), requirements-based design, and structured lifecycle data that will withstand audit and stage-of-involvement review.
Where a model-based approach fits — SCADE and similar qualifiable code-generation environments — we use it to reduce manual coding error and to keep design and implementation traceable to a single source of truth. Where hand-written C is the right tool for the constraint set, we write it to the coding standards and structural coverage targets the DAL demands.
We work with an informed awareness of tool qualification obligations (DO-330) so that development and verification tooling choices don't create certification liabilities later in the program.
Certification planning from PSAC through SAS, authority liaison, and ARP4754A/ARP4761 safety assessment.
Certification succeeds or stalls on the quality of the plan behind it. We build certification plans that hold together from the initial Plan for Software Aspects of Certification (PSAC) through the final Software Accomplishment Summary (SAS), and we support stage-of-involvement engagement with certification authorities — Transport Canada, the FAA, and EASA.
On the safety side, we conduct and support ARP4754A development assurance activities and ARP4761 safety assessments (FHA, PSSA, SSA), and we plan DO-160 environmental qualification campaigns so hardware and software evidence line up with the certification basis.
For organizations approaching certification for the first time, or inheriting a program with gaps, we run focused gap analyses and internal audits that surface issues while they're still cheap to fix.
Requirements-based test development, structural coverage analysis, and independent V&V team leadership.
We build test cases directly from requirements, so every verification activity has a clear, defensible link back to what the system is supposed to do — and we measure structural coverage (statement, decision, and MC/DC where the DAL requires it) to close the gap between requirements-based testing and the code as written.
Our V&V work spans test automation and tooling selection, hardware-in-the-loop and test-cell campaigns, and flight-test support, always with an eye to keeping evidence organized and traceable rather than merely voluminous.
For programs that need demonstrable independence between development and verification, we stand up or lead independent V&V teams, whether embedded with your engineering organization or operating as a separate function reporting directly to program management.
Interim engineering management, distributed team leadership, and measurable process improvement.
Programs stall for management reasons as often as they do for technical ones. We take on interim engineering management roles — leading offsite and nearshore engineering teams, owning program risk registers, and restoring schedule and technical confidence when a program has drifted.
This includes hands-on process improvement: streamlining requirements and configuration management workflows, removing rework loops, and instituting review discipline that catches defects earlier. On past programs this kind of work has delivered productivity gains of 30% or more without adding headcount.
The goal is always organizational change that survives our departure — teams that keep the improved cadence and discipline after the engagement ends, not a dependency on continued outside leadership.
Technology strategy, toolchain selection, and infrastructure advisory for engineering organizations.
Engineering organizations run on their tooling as much as on their people: requirements management, configuration management, and continuous integration systems either quietly support the work or quietly undermine it. We advise on technology strategy and help select and integrate toolchains that fit how your engineering teams actually work.
For small and medium engineering firms without a dedicated IT function, we provide pragmatic infrastructure advisory — sized to the organization, not to a Fortune 500 template — covering everything from development environments to data backup and access control.
