Search Results

This standard establishes the baseline requirements for performing and documenting FAI. Should there be a conflict between the requirements of this standard and applicable statutory or regulatory requirements, the applicable statutory or regulatory requirements shall take precedence.

This SAE Aerospace Standard (AS) establishes requirements for performing and documenting the First Article Inspection (FAI).

Operator Self-Verification can apply to a variety of processes. The primary focus is on traditional manufacturing operations, but applications can be made wherever traditional inspection methods are employed. The practices recommended in this document are intended to identify the basic elements for structuring Operator Self-Verification programs within the aerospace industry; applicable to producers of commercial and military aircraft and weapons platforms, space vehicles, and all related hardware, software, electronics, engines and composite components. Operator Self-Verification programs are applied to improve overall efficiency and product quality to processes considered mature, as judged by the organization. Operator Self-Verification programs are not stand-alone processes, but augment existing quality management system standard requirements.

The focus of Operator Self-Verification is on traditional manufacturing operations, and applications can be made wherever traditional inspection is employed. The practices recommended in this document are intended to identify the basic elements and provide a “guideline” for structuring Operator Self-Verification programs within the aerospace industry; applicable to producers of commercial and military aircraft and weapons platforms, space vehicles, and all related hardware, software, electronics, engines and composite components. Operator Self-Verification programs are applied to improve the overall efficiency and product quality of processes considered mature, as judged by the implementing organization. Operator Self-Verification programs are not stand-alone processes, but augment existing quality management systems.

This document identifies the basic elements and provides a standard for structuring operator self-verification programs within the aviation, space, and defense industry for producers of commercial and military aircraft and weapons platforms, space vehicles, and all related hardware, software, electronics, engines, and composite components. The requirements specified in this standard are complementary (not alternative) to contractual and applicable statutory and regulatory requirements. Should there be a conflict between the requirements of this standard and applicable statutory or regulatory requirements, the latter shall take precedence.

This SAE Aerospace Standard (AS) provides a harmonized process and documentation requirements for the establishment of CoCs used to attest the conformity of aviation, space, and defense products (e.g., assemblies, sub-assemblies, equipment and systems, parts, material, software) or services. It includes a CoC template and supporting instructions on how to complete it. When quoted by the customer in a contractual requirement, application of this document is mandatory. In other cases, its use is recommended, but if there is a conflict between the requirements of this standard and customer or applicable statutory/regulatory requirements, the latter shall take precedence.

This standard defines the common nonconformance data definition and documentation that shall be exchanged between an internal/external supplier or sub-tier supplier, and the customer when informing about a nonconformity requiring formal decision. The requirements are applicable, partly or totally, when reporting a product nonconformity to the owner or operator, as user of the end item (e.g., engine, aircraft, spacecraft, helicopter), if specified by contract. The process of exchanging, coordinating, and approving nonconformance data varies with the multiple relationships and agreements among all parties concerned. The information provided by this standard forms guidelines for submitting and managing of data through accurate communication. The main objective is to provide the definition of a data set that can be integrated into any form of communication (e.g., electronic data interchange, submission of conventional paper forms).

This standard is primarily intended to apply to new parts and products intended to be produced in an on-going production phase, but can also be applied to parts currently in production (e.g., manufacturing, maintenance). The standard is applicable to all production processes that influence the variation of KCs, as well as maintenance and service processes in which KCs are identified. It applies to organizations for assemblies and all levels of parts within an assembly, down to the basic materials including castings and forgings, and to organizations that are responsible for producing the design characteristics of the product. The variation control process begins with product definition, typically stated in the design documentation (e.g., digital model, engineering drawing, specification) which identifies KCs, and leads to a variation management process for those KCs. This process may also be used for producer-identified KCs (e.g., process KCs, additional/substitute product KCs).

This standard is primarily intended to apply to new parts and products, but can also be applied to parts currently in production. The standard shall be applicable to all production processes, that influence the variation of KCs, as well as maintenance processes in which KCs are identified. It applies to assemblies and all levels of parts within an assembly, down to the basic materials including castings and forgings, and to organizations that are responsible for producing the design characteristics of the product. It does not apply to lab-scale, pilot, or pre-production processes. However, particular management of some KCs might be required using other methods than those described in the standard, during these phases of a program, when required by the customer or deemed appropriate by the organization (e.g., Engineering department requirement).

The objective of any organization, as part of continual improvement, is to reduce the number of issues (i.e., undesirable conditions, defects, failures) and to minimize their impact on quality, delivery performance, and cost. This includes having processes in place to detect and eradicate significant and recurrent issues, which implies having well identified problems, a common understanding of their impact and associated root causes, and having defined and implemented adequate actions so that these problems, including similar issues will not happen again.

This standard is applicable to AQMS COs listed in the Online Aerospace Supplier Information System (OASIS) database. This standard is intended for the management and resolution of AQMS CO’s major QMS nonconformities. This standard is not intended to address QMS nonconformities classified as minor or nonconformities related to the products or services provided by the CO.

These requirements are applicable to IAQG sector schemes when making use of ABs, CRBs and their auditors, for the assessment and certification/registration of supplier quality systems in accordance with the requirements of this document. The quality management system standard used by the CRB shall be 9100/9110/9120, as appropriate to the supplier’s activities. It shall be applied to the supplier’s complete Quality System that covers aerospace products. Sectors may use these requirements for other standards. IAQG members have committed to recognize the equivalence of certification/registration of a suppliers quality management system to either of the AS, EN or JISQ/SJAC standards. This AS provides the approval process for Auditor Authentication Bodies (AAB), training course providers, trainers and auditors who meet the requirements of AIR5493 and outlines the America’s sector specific process to implement AS9104. This document is created to be in conformance with AS9104.

These requirements are applicable to IAQG sector schemes when making use of ABs, CRBs and their auditors, for the assessment and certification/registration of supplier quality systems in accordance with the requirements of this document. The quality management system standard used by the CRB shall be 9100/9110/9120, as appropriate to the supplier’s activities. It shall be applied to the supplier’s complete Quality System that covers aerospace products. Sectors may use these requirements for other standards. IAQG members have committed to recognize the equivalence of certification/registration of a suppliers quality management system to either of the AS, EN or JISQ/SJAC standards. This AS provides the approval process for Auditor Authentication Bodies (AAB), training course providers, trainers and auditors who meet the requirements of AIR5493 and outlines the America’s sector specific process to implement AS9104. This document is created to be in conformance with AS9104.

This document is intended to prescribe consistent requirements for CSI management for organizations and suppliers who perform work for prime contractors receiving direct contracts from U.S. government agencies (i.e., first-tier or prime suppliers).

The basic requirements of AS9100A apply with the following clarifications. This document supplements the requirements of AS9100A for deliverable software. This supplement contains Quality System requirements for suppliers of products that contain deliverable embedded or loadable airborne, spaceborne or ground support software components that are part of an aircraft Type Design, weapon system, missile or spacecraft operational software and/or support software that is used in the development and maintenance of deliverable software. This includes the host operating system software including assemblers, compilers, linkers, loaders, editors, code generators, analyzers, ground simulators and trainers, flight test data reduction, etc., that directly support creation, test and maintenance of the deliverable software.

Limited to the Commercial Aerospace industry where a request is made for a Production Organization (PO) to have Direct Delivery Authorization (DDA), which includes an Appropriate Arrangement (AA) between the PO and the Design Organization (DO). In this process the DO is responsible for ensuring the continuous updating of design and airworthiness data to the PO, whilst the PO is responsible for assurance that the manufactured article conforms to Approved Design and Airworthiness Data. The PO is responsible to provide airworthiness release documentation.

Limited to the commercial aerospace industry where a request is made for a PO to have Direct Delivery Authorization (DDA), which includes an Appropriate Arrangement (AA) between the PO and the Design Organization (DO). In this process the DO is responsible for ensuring the continuous updating of design and airworthiness data to the PO, whilst the PO is responsible for assurance that the manufactured article conforms to approved design and airworthiness data. The PO is responsible to provide airworthiness release documentation.

Limited to the Aerospace industry where an approved manufacturer requests a supplier to ship an article against the approved manufacturer's quality system directly to a customer. The direct ship process is not required or applicable to standard parts or military parts. In this process the approved manufacturer is responsible for assurance that the article conforms to Type Design information.

Limited to the Aerospace industry where an approved manufacturer requests a supplier to ship an article against the approved manufacturer’s quality system directly to a customer. The direct ship process is not required or applicable to standard parts or military parts. In this process the approved manufacturer is responsible for assurance that the article conforms to Type Design information.

Limited to the aerospace industry, where an approved manufacturer requests a supplier to ship an article against the approved manufacturer’s quality system directly to a customer. The direct ship process is not required or applicable to standard parts or military parts. In this process the approved manufacturer is responsible for assurance that the article conforms to type design information.