IM March 2021
Electronic Engineering
Aircraft System and Avionics 55-400210
Avionic System Review Assignment
The objectives of this assignment are:
• To undertake a review of the complete avionics package for a modern aircraft.
• To evaluate detailed design options for one subsystem.
• To produce a short technical paper/report containing the review, evaluation and arguments according to a standard academic report.
Avionics Review
Select a modern aircraft for which there is sufficient detailed information about its avionics. This may typically be a commercial passenger aircraft, but you may wish to select a military aircraft if you can gain access to the detail required. Identify and review its various sub-systems, paying particular attention to interfaces between these avionic sub-systems and how these sub-systems are interdependent with each other.
Sub-system Detail
For one major sub-system within the aircraft, evaluate the technology used (without too much detail review on the historical aspect), current and future trend of design options that could have been considered. Provide a detailed analysis of the benefits and disadvantages of these options and hence argue the case for either supporting or disagreeing with the design decision made. Your critical evaluation and arguments are required and need to be demonstrated in your report.
Report
Your work will inevitably rely heavily on published material. Ensure that you have identified evidence and information from multiple sources rather than over-reliance on a single (particularly web-based) source. You must credit all sources – whether text, images or simply ideas by ensuring that all sources of information used are referenced. For guidance see http://libguides.shu.ac.uk/referencing. Please be aware that all assessments are subject to SHU’s collusion and plagiarism regulations. You may refer to:
http://libguides.shu.ac.uk/develop/skills/plagiarism
and
https://students.shu.ac.uk/shuspacecontent/assessment/plagiarism.
Information and guidance are also available via the Learning Essentials tab within SHUspace or directly via the Library Gateway http://library.shu.ac.uk/.
You must also ensure that the value of your contribution to the work is evident. Your report should contain between 2000 and 3000 words plus diagrams/tables etc.
IM March 2021
Submission
Your submission must be in the form of a report (in MS Word or PDF format) that is
submitted electronically within Blackboard (“Technical Paper (Coursework 2) – Submission
Point”). Guidance is given within the assignment section of the Blackboard site for this
module. The deadline for submission is Thursday 15th April 2021 at 15:00. Feedback will
be provided on or soon after Monday 10th May 2021.
Assessment criteria
Your assignment will be assessed according to the following criteria:
Overall System Review
Scope and detail of review. Communication/interfaces and interdependency
issues.
40%
Sub-system Detail
Range of detail and appropriateness of options considered. Quality of case for
or against. Verification.
40%
Report
The quality of the submission as a technical report, conveying the information
effectively in a professional style.
20%
IM March 2021
Assessment Criteria: Aircraft Systems and Avionics Coursework Report
Criterion First Upper Second Lower Second Third Fail
Overall System Review
Excellent scope and
detail of review.
Communication/interface
between system
elements
comprehensively
covered. Systems
functions are very well
described and
explained.
Good scope and detail
of review.
Communication/interface
between system
elements well covered.
Systems functions are
well described and
explained.
Reasonable scope and
detail of review.
Communication/interface
between the elements is
covered. Systems
functions are identified
and/or briefly explained.
Limited scope and detail
of review.
Communication/interface
between system
elements is generally
correctly described but
lacks detail. Lack of
systems functions or the
systems are poorly
described and
explained.
Unacceptably narrow
scope with little correct
the detail in the review.
Communication/interface
between system
elements are explained
very badly or with
significant errors. Little
or no coverage of
systems functions.
Sub-system detail
Excellent range of detail
and appropriateness of
options considered.
Very Good quality of
the case for or against that
is well supported by a
wide range of evidence.
Very good range of
detail and
appropriateness of
options considered.
Quality of case for or
against is well-argued
and supported by a
good range of evidence.
Good range of detail and
appropriateness of
options considered.
Quality of case for or
against is presented and
partly supported by
some evidence.
A modest range of detail
and appropriateness of
options considered.
Quality of case for or
against is weakly
presented and is
consistent with some
evidence.
Trivial range of detail
and appropriateness of
options considered.
Quality of case for or
against is very weakly
presented and evidence
is very weak or
inconsistent.
Report
Excellent report, the
presentation and
structure help convey
the information very
effectively. Only minor
polishing required.
Good report, the
presentation and
structure help convey
the information well.
Some scope for
extending the evaluation
or better articulation of
the evidence.
Generally good report,
though the presentation
and structure could be
improved by more
extensive evaluation or
better commentary.
Acceptable report but
the presentation could
be much improved –
either by more
appropriate content
and/or better
commentary and report
structure.
Unacceptable report
presentation. Little
content and/or value.