Safety consulting
Functional safety engineering delivered as a scoped work package or as engineers embedded in your programme.
Who this is for
- Safety consultancies and engineering houses at capacity. You have signed more programmes than your bench can absorb and hiring a senior safety engineer takes months. Overflow capacity is a purchasing decision, not a headcount decision, and it reverses cleanly when the pipeline normalises.
- Robotics manufacturers and machine builders. You need a risk assessment, a performance level determination or a safety case, and you have no functional safety function in house — nor a reason to build one for two projects a year.
- Rail suppliers needing lifecycle deliverables and support through independent safety assessment.
- Automotive tier suppliers who need ISO 26262 work products produced properly rather than reverse-engineered from the design after the fact.
What we produce
| Area | Deliverables |
|---|---|
| Hazard analysis and risk assessment | HARA, hazard logs, ISO 12100 risk assessment for machinery. The reasoning is written down and traceable, because that is the part an assessor actually reads. |
| Safety analyses | FMEA, FMEDA, FTA, dependent and common-cause failure analysis, reliability calculations. |
| PL and SIL determination | ISO 13849 performance level, IEC 62061 SIL, and IEC 61508 where the underlying architecture needs to be argued rather than assumed. |
| Robot and cell safety | ISO 10218 for industrial robots, ISO/TS 15066 for collaborative applications, safeguarding concepts, speed and separation monitoring, safe stop categories. |
| Automotive functional safety | ISO 26262 work products: item definition, HARA, functional and technical safety concepts, ASIL decomposition, and a safety case that holds together. |
| Rail | EN 50126, EN 50128 and EN 50129 lifecycle deliverables, hazard management, and support through independent safety assessment. |
| Lifecycle and certification strategy | Safety plans, competence and confirmation measures, and the sequencing that stops assessment from becoming a surprise in the final quarter. |
Where safety meets security
This is the part most suppliers cannot cover, and it is the reason a safety practice sits on this site at all. The regulatory wall between functional safety and cybersecurity has come down:
- Machinery. Regulation (EU) 2023/1230 applies from January 2027 and requires that safety-related control systems and software resist deliberate corruption, not only accidental failure. prEN 50742 and IEC 62443 are where that argument gets made.
- Automotive. ISO 26262 and ISO 21434 have to agree with each other, and increasingly an assessor will ask how a security control interacts with a safety mechanism.
- Products with digital elements. A robot controller is one. That puts it inside the Cyber Resilience Act, with the Article 14 reporting duty from 11 September 2026 — and a reported vulnerability in a safety function is not a routine patch.
A safety argument that assumes nobody can reach the safety function is no longer a safe argument.
Most safety houses stop at the safety boundary; most security firms never cross into it. We can hold
both sides of that conversation, and we would rather be hired for that than for headcount.
How we engage
| Work package | Fixed scope, fixed price, named deliverables and a date. Best for a defined analysis or a set of work products. |
| Embedded engineer | Allocated to your programme and working to your process and tooling. Monthly, three-month minimum, so the ramp-up is not wasted. |
| Overflow capacity | A standing call on engineering time for when your pipeline spikes. You hold the client relationship and the deliverable carries your name. |
| Review and assessment support | A second pair of eyes on analyses before an assessor sees them, and support in the room when they do. |
How we staff it
We are a small firm working with a vetted network rather than a large bench, and we would rather say that plainly than imply otherwise. For any engagement we name the engineers before you commit — standards experience, sector background, and what they have actually signed off — and you approve them. Where the work needs a competence we do not have, we say so instead of learning it on your programme. Nobody's first exposure to ISO 13849 should be your safety case.
Start with an exploratory discussion. Forty-five minutes, free, no deck. Tell us what is
queued and what is slipping, and we will tell you whether we can take it, what it would cost, and
what we would not touch. If the honest answer is that you need a permanent hire rather than a
supplier, we will say that too.
Useful to send first: the standards in play, the sector, roughly how many engineer-months you are short, and whether the deliverable carries your name or ours.
Write to [email protected].
Useful to send first: the standards in play, the sector, roughly how many engineer-months you are short, and whether the deliverable carries your name or ours.
Write to [email protected].
More safety work than engineers?
That is a solvable problem and a temporary one. Tell us what is queued and we will tell you honestly what we can carry, in which standards, and by when.