Will AI Replace Safety-Critical Software Jobs?

ISO 26262 functional safety certification and ASPICE process rigour create a strong regulatory moat — every safety requirement, ASIL decomposition, and verification artefact requires human accountability that AI cannot legally provide. Safe for 10+ years, with EV/ADAS growth expanding demand.

DO-178C certification creates one of the strongest regulatory moats in all of software engineering — every line of code requires requirements traceability, structural coverage proof, and human sign-off that AI cannot legally provide. Safe for 10+ years with no viable path to autonomous AI certification.

Medical device software engineering's deep regulatory framework — IEC 62304 lifecycle compliance, ISO 14971 risk management, FDA design controls — creates structural barriers that protect the role even as AI accelerates documentation and code generation. The human must own clinical risk decisions and bear accountability for patient safety.

Safety certification overhead is the permanent moat. EN50128 mandates named, competent human engineers at every stage — from requirements through verification. AI can draft code and documentation, but cannot sign a safety case or bear accountability for a signalling system that carries passengers. Digital railway programmes are increasing demand, not reducing it.