TL;DR SE Newsletter – Mar 2025

Apr 6, 2025

—

by

The BLUF without the fluff. TL;DR:

INCOSE SE Handbook Study Group: The second cohort of 2025 has started, focusing on Organizational Project-Enabling Processes.
INCOSE SE Handbook Flash Cards: Flash cards for the INCOSE SEP exam are being developed, expected by end of May.
Update on the Jan 29th Mid-air Collision near DCA: Faulty pressure readings and intolerable minimum vertical separation distances.
Blue Ghost Lunar Lander Mission: Firefly’s Blue Ghost successfully completed its mission on March 17, 2025, with key architectural decisions ensuring stability.
Physical Buttons in Cars: Euro NCAP will require physical controls for key driving functions from 2026 due to safety concerns with touchscreens.
Cybertruck Crash: A Cybertruck crash highlighted issues with electronic latches, raising safety concerns.
Canadian Aviation BVLOS: Canada has updated regulations to expand BVLOS operations for remote piloted aerial systems.
INCOSE Guide to ISO 42020: INCOSE released a comprehensive guide on architecture processes.
NASA FRET v3: NASA released FRET v3.0, enhancing requirement specification and test case generation.

2nd INCOSE SE Handbook Study Group Cohort of 2025 is underway

March 24th saw the kick off of the second cohort of 2025 and this time I’m joined by a group as geographically diverse as Japan and Washington State! Presently we’re just about to tackle Organizational Project-Enabling Processes and I’m happy that Dominic Hong of the Jan 13th 2025 cohort has joined me as a co-facilitator.

Next cohort will start July 7th – limited spaces available.

INCOSE SE Handbook Flash Cards

I will dedicate another post to the flash cards but I’m in the process, with the help of Dominic Hong, collating a series of flash card decks to support professionals preparing for the INCOSE SEP exam. I expect to have these flash cards (the license to use the handbook for the flash cards has been granted by Wiley Publishers) by end of May.

Update on the Jan 29th Mid-air Collision near DCA

On Jan. 29, a U.S. Army Sikorsky UH-60L Black Hawk helicopter and a Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) RJ Aviation (Bombardier) CRJ700 airplane, operated as American Airlines flight 5342, collided midair over the Potomac River.

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued a media advisory¹ introducing their preliminary report² and urgent recommendation report³. In the report the NTSB disclose verified facts and their analysis is still ongoing. There are two facts that I would like to draw attention to:

The pressure altitude readings, which were presented as barometric altitude in the Sikorsky data record, were revealed to be inconsistent with other data. How were these faulty pressure altitude readings used elsewhere in the helicopter?
The vertical separation of Route 4 corridor (helicopter) and the PAPI-guided approach to runway 33 was 75 ft by (unintentional) design. This vertical separation decreases if the helicopter is operated further from the Potomac shoreline.

The red area indicating the rough point of collision is added by myself based on ~750 ft from shoreline and ~275 ft radio altitude.

Blue Ghost Lunar Lander Mission Complete

“Firefly met 100% of its mission objectives for Blue Ghost on March 17th, 2025” and has transitioned to ‘Monument mode’!⁴ The design and operation of Blue Ghost is worthy of study but I want to zoom in on a key architectural decision they made – to support successful landing the development team made a conscious decision to

Lower the center of gravity,
Widen the foot print further stabilizing it and,
Incorporate shock absorbers in the lander feet.

Compare this architectural decision to Intuitive Machine’s Nova-C lunar lander Athena which landed on March 6th, 2025 but tipped over⁵, pre-maturely ending its mission.

If Athena tipped over then what’s the chance of a successful landing of a SpaceX Starship?

Physical buttons making a comeback

To my memory physical buttons went out of fashion on the dawn of the smartphone and then taken one step further by EV car manufacturers, with Tesla in the vanguard, which had the design freedom to re-imagine the driver’s infotainment user interface.

“Based on research⁶ that suggests touchscreens increase driver distraction, the European New Car Assessment Program (Euro NCAP) is introducing new safety criteria in 2026 that will require physical controls for key driving functions.”⁷

These key driving functions include turn signals, hazard warning lights, horn, windshield wipers and the emergency call system.

This follows a growing recognition, in my opinion, away from software and automation for safety critical functions. A case in point is the terrifying story⁸ of a bystander unable to open the doors of a crashed Cybertruck that occurred November 27, 2024 when three passengers died by asphyxiation caused by an explosion at the Cybertruck’s front hood after collision. Alarmingly, so goes the article, the truck relies on electronic power to disengage electronic latches which then opens the doors. If there is no power then the latches remain intact. Honestly, I can’t imagine this architecture passing a preliminary safety review.

BVLOS has entered the Canadian Aviation chat

Canada Aviation made a giant leap to grow domestic Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) operations of remote piloted aerial systems (RPAS) as well as allow facilitate medium sized RPAS. Small RPAS are now classed as systems with operating weight (which includes any payloads) 250 g to 25 kg, and medium RPAS are greater than 25 kg and less than a whopping 150 kg. Presently you would need to piece together the amendment⁹ with the original law¹⁰ to get a clear picture of the new law.

INCOSE Guide to ISO 42020 – Architecture Process

INCOSE released a guide to ISO 42020 – Architecture Processes, providing a comprehensive guide on the application of architecture processes.¹¹

NASA Sw V&V team release FRET v3

NASA Sw V&V have released Formal Requirements Elicitation Tool (FRET) v3.0, a framework for specifying, formalizing, understanding and analyzing system requirements. “FRET allows users to express requirements in restricted English, ensuring unambiguous specification. To enhance understanding of semantics, it automatically translates requirements into multiple representations, including natural language descriptions, formal mathematical logic, and diagrams.”¹²

Version 3.0 introduces probabilistic requirement specification and formalization, allowing users to model uncertainty—an essential capability for autonomous systems. FRET v 3.0 also introduces automated test case generation based on FRETish requirements.

Did you like this newsletter? Did you hate it? Let me know by filling this 1 min survey: Microsoft Forms

Fitzgerald Systems