Populate knot indexes and critical ATA tasklists with PHM-specific content

Co-authored-by: AmedeoPelliccia <164860269+AmedeoPelliccia@users.noreply.github.com>

Author: Copilot

AMPEL360-SPACE-T-PORTAL/STK_PHM-phm-physical-hardware-mechanical-engineering/KNOTS/K01_certification-authority-basis/00_AMPEL360_SPACET_Q10_CERT_PLUS_BB_GEN_LC01_K01_PHM__k01-certification-authority-basis_IDX_I01-R01_ACTIVE.md

@@ -8,22 +8,60 @@ stakeholder_id: "PHM"
 affected_atas: ["00", "01", "04", "05", "18", "20", "21", "22", "24", "26", "27", "28", "42", "100", "109", "115"]
 ---
 
-# Backlog Knot K01 — certification-authority-basis
+# Backlog Knot K01 — Certification Authority Basis (PHM Scope)
 
 ## Problem Statement
-_Define the uncertainty precisely; specify the decision required._
+
+Define the regulatory framework, compliance basis, and certification authority relationships for all PHM-owned ATA chapters. Establish means of compliance (MoC) for structural, mechanical, and hardware domains covering airframe, flight controls, fuel/propellant, and hydraulic systems.
 
 ## Scope Boundary
-- In-scope: ...
-- Out-of-scope: ...
+- In-scope: Certification specifications mapping (CS/FAR/ECSS), means of compliance matrices, equivalent safety findings for novel materials/configurations, DER/CVE/ODA delegation structure for PHM disciplines
+- Out-of-scope: Software certification (SW AoR), avionics qualification (CY AoR)
+
+## PHM ATA Impact Breakdown
+
+| ATA | Chapter Title | K01 Relevance |
+|-----|--------------|---------------|
+| 00 | General | Cross-cutting certification framework |
+| 01 | Operations | Operational certification requirements |
+| 04 | Airworthiness Limitations | Structural airworthiness limits |
+| 05 | Time Limits / Maintenance Checks | Maintenance-driven certification |
+| 18 | Vibration & Noise Analysis | Vibration certification basis |
+| 20 | Standard Practices - Airframe | Structural certification basis |
+| 21 | Air Conditioning / ECS | ECS airworthiness |
+| 22 | Auto Flight | Auto-flight hardware certification |
+| 24 | Electrical Power | Power system certification |
+| 26 | Fire Protection | Fire protection compliance |
+| 27 | Flight Controls | Control surface airworthiness |
+| 28 | Fuel / Propellant Systems | Propellant containment certification |
+| 42 | Integrated Modular Avionics | Hardware integration certification |
+| 100 | SpaceT-specific | Novel configuration certification |
+| 109 | SpaceT Thermal | Thermal protection certification |
+| 115 | SpaceT Structural | Structural substantiation |
+
+## Tasks (minimum set)
+
+1. Map applicable certification specifications (CS/FAR/ECSS) to PHM ATA chapters
+2. Define means of compliance matrix for structural substantiation
+3. Identify equivalent safety findings needed for novel materials/configurations
+4. Establish DER/CVE/ODA delegation structure for PHM disciplines
+5. Record decisions; update baseline and trace links
+
+## Cross-Dependencies
 
-## Impacted ATAs
-- ATA 00, ATA 01, ATA 04, ATA 05, ATA 18, ATA 20, ATA 21, ATA 22, ATA 24, ATA 26, ATA 27, ATA 28, ATA 42, ATA 100, ATA 109, ATA 115
+- **CERT** — Regulatory framework owner
+- **SAF** — Safety case integration
+- **SE** — Architecture-level ICD compliance
+- **TEST** — Test plan alignment with MoC
 
 ## Decision & Closure Criteria
-- Decision owner: ...
-- Evidence required: ...
-- Acceptance criteria: ...
+- Decision owner: CERT + PHM leads
+- Evidence required: Certification basis document, MoC matrix, equivalent safety findings
+- Acceptance criteria:
+  - [ ] Certification basis document approved by CERT AoR
+  - [ ] MoC matrix complete for all PHM ATA chapters
+  - [ ] Equivalent safety findings identified and documented
+  - [ ] Baseline updated (CM)
 
 ## Pathways
 1) Requirements/ConOps

AMPEL360-SPACE-T-PORTAL/STK_PHM-phm-physical-hardware-mechanical-engineering/KNOTS/K01_certification-authority-basis/ATA_TASKS/ATA_27/27_AMPEL360_SPACET_Q10_GEN_PLUS_BB_GEN_LC01_K01_PHM__k01-ata-27-tasklist_IDX_I01-R01_ACTIVE.md

@@ -8,13 +8,22 @@ ata: "27"
 ---
 
 # K01 — certification-authority-basis
-## ATA 27 — Tasklist
+## ATA 27 — Flight Controls
 
 ## Uncertainty to Resolve (ATA-specific)
-- ...
+- Which certification specification (CS 25.671-703 / ECSS-E-ST-60C) governs flight control actuation?
+- What redundancy requirements apply to fly-by-wire control surfaces?
+- Are equivalent safety findings needed for novel actuation mechanisms?
 
 ## Tasks (minimum set)
-1. Define ATA-specific scope, interfaces, owners.
-2. Define decision criteria and evidence package.
-3. Execute validation/verification activities.
-4. Record decision; update baseline and trace links.
+1. Define ATA 27 scope: control surfaces, actuators, servos, flight control computers (hardware).
+2. Map applicable requirements (CS 25.671 controllability, CS 25.672 stability augmentation).
+3. Define means of compliance for control surface flutter, divergence, and fatigue.
+4. Execute validation/verification planning for control system hardware.
+5. Record decision; update baseline and trace links.
+
+## Evidence Package
+- [ ] Applicable requirements mapping (CS/FAR/ECSS)
+- [ ] Means of compliance proposal
+- [ ] Flutter analysis plan
+- [ ] Control surface fatigue substantiation plan

AMPEL360-SPACE-T-PORTAL/STK_PHM-phm-physical-hardware-mechanical-engineering/KNOTS/K01_certification-authority-basis/ATA_TASKS/ATA_28/28_AMPEL360_SPACET_Q10_GEN_PLUS_BB_GEN_LC01_K01_PHM__k01-ata-28-tasklist_IDX_I01-R01_ACTIVE.md

@@ -8,13 +8,22 @@ ata: "28"
 ---
 
 # K01 — certification-authority-basis
-## ATA 28 — Tasklist
+## ATA 28 — Fuel / Propellant Systems
 
 ## Uncertainty to Resolve (ATA-specific)
-- ...
+- Which certification specification governs propellant containment (CS 25.963 / ECSS-E-ST-35C)?
+- What leak rate criteria apply to cryogenic propellant tanks and distribution lines?
+- Are equivalent safety findings needed for novel propellant containment designs?
 
 ## Tasks (minimum set)
-1. Define ATA-specific scope, interfaces, owners.
-2. Define decision criteria and evidence package.
-3. Execute validation/verification activities.
-4. Record decision; update baseline and trace links.
+1. Define ATA 28 scope: tanks, lines, valves, pumps, propellant management hardware.
+2. Map applicable requirements (CS 25.963 fuel tank, CS 25.967 fuel tank installation).
+3. Define means of compliance for containment integrity and crash survivability.
+4. Execute validation/verification planning for propellant system hardware.
+5. Record decision; update baseline and trace links.
+
+## Evidence Package
+- [ ] Applicable requirements mapping (CS/FAR/ECSS)
+- [ ] Containment integrity analysis plan
+- [ ] Crash survivability assessment plan
+- [ ] Material compatibility matrix (propellant-wetted surfaces)

AMPEL360-SPACE-T-PORTAL/STK_PHM-phm-physical-hardware-mechanical-engineering/KNOTS/K03_hazmat-cryo-propellants-safety-case/00_AMPEL360_SPACET_Q10_GEN_PLUS_BB_GEN_LC01_K03_PHM__k03-hazmat-cryo-propellants-safety-case_IDX_I01-R01_ACTIVE.md

@@ -8,22 +8,53 @@ stakeholder_id: "PHM"
 affected_atas: ["12", "18", "26", "28", "47", "78", "81", "84", "110"]
 ---
 
-# Backlog Knot K03 — hazmat-cryo-propellants-safety-case
+# Backlog Knot K03 — Hazmat / Cryo Propellants Safety Case (PHM Scope)
 
 ## Problem Statement
-_Define the uncertainty precisely; specify the decision required._
+
+Establish the safety case for handling, storage, and containment of hazardous materials and cryogenic propellants across PHM-owned hardware. Define material compatibility, leak detection, and containment integrity requirements for novel propellant configurations.
 
 ## Scope Boundary
-- In-scope: ...
-- Out-of-scope: ...
+- In-scope: Propellant containment design, cryo-material compatibility, leak detection hardware, hazmat handling procedures for PHM hardware, fire/explosion protection
+- Out-of-scope: Operational procedures (OPS AoR), spaceport ground handling (SPACEPORT AoR)
+
+## PHM ATA Impact Breakdown
+
+| ATA | Chapter Title | K03 Relevance |
+|-----|--------------|---------------|
+| 12 | Servicing | Propellant servicing hardware |
+| 18 | Vibration & Noise Analysis | Cryo-induced vibration effects |
+| 26 | Fire Protection | Propellant fire/explosion protection |
+| 28 | Fuel / Propellant Systems | Primary propellant containment |
+| 47 | Inerting Systems | Tank inerting for propellant safety |
+| 78 | Exhaust / Thrust Reverser | Propulsion exhaust safety |
+| 81 | Turbine / Turbopump | Cryo turbopump material compatibility |
+| 84 | Propellant Systems | Cryo propellant distribution hardware |
+| 110 | SpaceT Propulsion | Novel propulsion containment |
+
+## Tasks (minimum set)
+
+1. Define cryo-material compatibility matrix for PHM hardware
+2. Establish containment integrity requirements and leak rate criteria
+3. Map hazmat classification to PHM hardware components
+4. Define fire/explosion protection design requirements
+5. Record decisions; update baseline and trace links
+
+## Cross-Dependencies
 
-## Impacted ATAs
-- ATA 12, ATA 18, ATA 26, ATA 28, ATA 47, ATA 78, ATA 81, ATA 84, ATA 110
+- **SAF** — Safety case owner, hazard analysis
+- **CERT** — Regulatory compliance for hazmat
+- **SPACEPORT** — Ground handling interfaces
+- **TEST** — Cryo test campaign planning
 
 ## Decision & Closure Criteria
-- Decision owner: ...
-- Evidence required: ...
-- Acceptance criteria: ...
+- Decision owner: SAF + PHM leads
+- Evidence required: Material compatibility matrix, containment integrity analysis, hazmat classification
+- Acceptance criteria:
+  - [ ] Cryo-material compatibility verified for all propellant-wetted hardware
+  - [ ] Containment integrity criteria defined and accepted
+  - [ ] Hazmat handling procedures aligned with PHM hardware design
+  - [ ] Baseline updated (CM)
 
 ## Pathways
 1) Requirements/ConOps

AMPEL360-SPACE-T-PORTAL/STK_PHM-phm-physical-hardware-mechanical-engineering/KNOTS/K03_hazmat-cryo-propellants-safety-case/ATA_TASKS/ATA_28/28_AMPEL360_SPACET_Q10_GEN_PLUS_BB_GEN_LC01_K03_PHM__k03-ata-28-tasklist_IDX_I01-R01_ACTIVE.md

@@ -8,13 +8,23 @@ ata: "28"
 ---
 
 # K03 — hazmat-cryo-propellants-safety-case
-## ATA 28 — Tasklist
+## ATA 28 — Fuel / Propellant Systems
 
 ## Uncertainty to Resolve (ATA-specific)
-- ...
+- What cryo-material compatibility requirements apply to propellant tanks and distribution lines?
+- What leak detection and containment integrity criteria apply to cryogenic propellants?
+- What hazmat classification applies to novel propellant formulations?
+- What fire/explosion protection is required for propellant handling hardware?
 
 ## Tasks (minimum set)
-1. Define ATA-specific scope, interfaces, owners.
-2. Define decision criteria and evidence package.
-3. Execute validation/verification activities.
-4. Record decision; update baseline and trace links.
+1. Define ATA 28 hazmat scope: propellant types, containment hardware, distribution lines.
+2. Establish cryo-material compatibility requirements for all propellant-wetted surfaces.
+3. Define leak rate criteria and containment integrity requirements.
+4. Map hazmat classification to propellant handling hardware.
+5. Record decision; update baseline and trace links.
+
+## Evidence Package
+- [ ] Material compatibility matrix (propellant-wetted surfaces)
+- [ ] Leak rate criteria and test plan
+- [ ] Hazmat classification mapping
+- [ ] Fire/explosion protection design requirements

AMPEL360-SPACE-T-PORTAL/STK_PHM-phm-physical-hardware-mechanical-engineering/KNOTS/K05_model-fidelity-verification-credit/00_AMPEL360_SPACET_Q10_GEN_PLUS_BB_GEN_LC01_K05_PHM__k05-model-fidelity-verification-credit_IDX_I01-R01_ACTIVE.md

@@ -8,22 +8,61 @@ stakeholder_id: "PHM"
 affected_atas: ["05", "06", "07", "08", "18", "21", "22", "24", "27", "32", "53", "57", "100", "101", "109", "110", "113"]
 ---
 
-# Backlog Knot K05 — model-fidelity-verification-credit
+# Backlog Knot K05 — Model Fidelity & Verification Credit (PHM Scope)
 
 ## Problem Statement
-_Define the uncertainty precisely; specify the decision required._
+
+Define the model fidelity requirements and verification credit strategy for PHM structural and mechanical analyses. Establish which analytical models (FEA, CFD, DTA) can earn verification credit and what testing is required for model validation across primary structure, flight controls, and landing gear.
 
 ## Scope Boundary
-- In-scope: ...
-- Out-of-scope: ...
+- In-scope: Structural FEA model fidelity, fatigue & damage tolerance analysis, flight control simulation fidelity, landing gear load models, thermal-structural coupling models
+- Out-of-scope: Avionics/software models (CY/SW AoR), AI/ML model governance (AI AoR)
+
+## PHM ATA Impact Breakdown
+
+| ATA | Chapter Title | K05 Relevance |
+|-----|--------------|---------------|
+| 05 | Time Limits / Maintenance Checks | Analysis-based maintenance intervals |
+| 06 | Dimensions and Areas | Dimensional analysis models |
+| 07 | Lifting and Shoring | Load analysis models |
+| 08 | Leveling and Weighing | Mass properties models |
+| 18 | Vibration & Noise Analysis | Vibration model fidelity |
+| 21 | Air Conditioning / ECS | Thermal model verification |
+| 22 | Auto Flight | Auto-flight simulation fidelity |
+| 24 | Electrical Power | Power system models |
+| 27 | Flight Controls | Control surface aero/structural models |
+| 32 | Landing Gear | Gear loads and fatigue models |
+| 53 | Fuselage / Pressure Vessel | Pressure vessel FEA/DTA |
+| 57 | Wings / Lifting Surfaces | Wing structural analysis |
+| 100 | SpaceT-specific | Novel configuration analysis |
+| 101 | SpaceT Avionics | Hardware-in-loop models |
+| 109 | SpaceT Thermal | Thermal-structural coupling |
+| 110 | SpaceT Propulsion | Propulsion structural loads |
+| 113 | SpaceT Mechanisms | Mechanism simulation fidelity |
+
+## Tasks (minimum set)
+
+1. Define model fidelity requirements per PHM ATA domain
+2. Establish verification credit matrix (analysis vs. test)
+3. Identify structural test campaign for model validation (static, fatigue, DTA)
+4. Define acceptance criteria for model correlation
+5. Record decisions; update baseline and trace links
+
+## Cross-Dependencies
 
-## Impacted ATAs
-- ATA 05, ATA 06, ATA 07, ATA 08, ATA 18, ATA 21, ATA 22, ATA 24, ATA 27, ATA 32, ATA 53, ATA 57, ATA 100, ATA 101, ATA 109, ATA 110, ATA 113
+- **SE** — Architecture models and system-level analysis
+- **TEST** — Test campaign for model validation
+- **CERT** — Verification credit acceptance
+- **SAF** — Safety-critical model requirements
 
 ## Decision & Closure Criteria
-- Decision owner: ...
-- Evidence required: ...
-- Acceptance criteria: ...
+- Decision owner: PHM + TEST leads
+- Evidence required: Model fidelity matrix, verification credit proposal, test-analysis correlation plan
+- Acceptance criteria:
+  - [ ] Model fidelity requirements defined for all certification-critical analyses
+  - [ ] Verification credit matrix accepted by CERT
+  - [ ] Test campaign planned for model validation
+  - [ ] Baseline updated (CM)
 
 ## Pathways
 1) Requirements/ConOps

AMPEL360-SPACE-T-PORTAL/STK_PHM-phm-physical-hardware-mechanical-engineering/KNOTS/K05_model-fidelity-verification-credit/ATA_TASKS/ATA_27/27_AMPEL360_SPACET_Q10_GEN_PLUS_BB_GEN_LC01_K05_PHM__k05-ata-27-tasklist_IDX_I01-R01_ACTIVE.md

@@ -8,13 +8,22 @@ ata: "27"
 ---
 
 # K05 — model-fidelity-verification-credit
-## ATA 27 — Tasklist
+## ATA 27 — Flight Controls
 
 ## Uncertainty to Resolve (ATA-specific)
-- ...
+- What aeroservoelastic model fidelity is required for flight control certification?
+- Can hardware-in-the-loop simulation earn verification credit for control system qualification?
+- What test-analysis correlation is needed for control surface flutter and actuation loads?
 
 ## Tasks (minimum set)
-1. Define ATA-specific scope, interfaces, owners.
-2. Define decision criteria and evidence package.
-3. Execute validation/verification activities.
-4. Record decision; update baseline and trace links.
+1. Define flight control model hierarchy (aeroservoelastic, actuation loads, flutter).
+2. Establish model fidelity requirements for control law simulation.
+3. Define verification credit proposal (HIL simulation vs. flight test).
+4. Plan test campaign for control system model validation.
+5. Record decision; update baseline and trace links.
+
+## Evidence Package
+- [ ] Aeroservoelastic model description
+- [ ] HIL simulation verification credit proposal
+- [ ] Control surface flutter analysis plan
+- [ ] Iron bird / integration test plan

AMPEL360-SPACE-T-PORTAL/STK_PHM-phm-physical-hardware-mechanical-engineering/KNOTS/K05_model-fidelity-verification-credit/ATA_TASKS/ATA_32/32_AMPEL360_SPACET_Q10_GEN_PLUS_BB_GEN_LC01_K05_PHM__k05-ata-32-tasklist_IDX_I01-R01_ACTIVE.md

@@ -8,13 +8,22 @@ ata: "32"
 ---
 
 # K05 — model-fidelity-verification-credit
-## ATA 32 — Tasklist
+## ATA 32 — Landing Gear
 
 ## Uncertainty to Resolve (ATA-specific)
-- ...
+- What landing gear load model fidelity is required for drop test correlation?
+- Can simulation replace some landing gear qualification tests (fatigue, endurance)?
+- What model validation is needed for novel gear configurations (retraction, steering)?
 
 ## Tasks (minimum set)
-1. Define ATA-specific scope, interfaces, owners.
-2. Define decision criteria and evidence package.
-3. Execute validation/verification activities.
-4. Record decision; update baseline and trace links.
+1. Define landing gear structural model hierarchy (loads, stress, fatigue).
+2. Establish model fidelity requirements for drop test simulation.
+3. Define verification credit proposal (simulation vs. physical drop/fatigue test).
+4. Plan test-analysis correlation campaign for gear qualification.
+5. Record decision; update baseline and trace links.
+
+## Evidence Package
+- [ ] Landing gear loads model description
+- [ ] Drop test simulation correlation plan
+- [ ] Gear fatigue substantiation approach
+- [ ] Verification credit proposal (analysis vs. test)

AMPEL360-SPACE-T-PORTAL/STK_PHM-phm-physical-hardware-mechanical-engineering/KNOTS/K05_model-fidelity-verification-credit/ATA_TASKS/ATA_53/53_AMPEL360_SPACET_Q10_GEN_PLUS_BB_GEN_LC01_K05_PHM__k05-ata-53-tasklist_IDX_I01-R01_ACTIVE.md

@@ -8,13 +8,23 @@ ata: "53"
 ---
 
 # K05 — model-fidelity-verification-credit
-## ATA 53 — Tasklist
+## ATA 53 — Fuselage / Pressure Vessel
 
 ## Uncertainty to Resolve (ATA-specific)
-- ...
+- What FEA model fidelity is required for pressure vessel certification (global vs. detail models)?
+- What fatigue & damage tolerance analysis philosophy applies to the composite fuselage?
+- Can analysis earn verification credit or is full-scale static/fatigue testing mandatory?
+- What test-analysis correlation criteria apply to pressure cycle simulation?
 
 ## Tasks (minimum set)
-1. Define ATA-specific scope, interfaces, owners.
-2. Define decision criteria and evidence package.
-3. Execute validation/verification activities.
-4. Record decision; update baseline and trace links.
+1. Define FEA model hierarchy: global fuselage model, detail models (joints, cutouts, repairs).
+2. Establish model fidelity requirements (mesh density, material modeling, boundary conditions).
+3. Define verification credit proposal (analysis vs. test matrix for static, fatigue, DTA).
+4. Plan test-analysis correlation campaign (coupon → element → component → full-scale).
+5. Record decision; update baseline and trace links.
+
+## Evidence Package
+- [ ] FEA model description and fidelity justification
+- [ ] Verification credit proposal (analysis vs. test)
+- [ ] Test-analysis correlation plan
+- [ ] Building block test matrix (coupon to full-scale)