We recently went through formal training from Bell Helicopter on the PPAP process. According to Bell, there will be flow down requirements incorporated into AS9100 rev D(though it might slip to E) and new projects are being worked to incorporate what automotive has been doing for years.
Obviously some of these items need to be adjusted, such as parts per million defects within the RPN rankings. SAE is said to be working on the official version to release in the fall of 2013. In the interim Bell has internal guidelines which I've attached to give an idea of where the numbers may be heading.
Obviously Aerospace will never reach the numbers intended for the statistics of millions of samples that are available in automotive. The idea is then to focus on the longevity of the project will be within the required 25+ years these new Aircraft are designed to be in service.
From a quality standpoint, I love the idea. I've worked in automotive and know how much some of the tools in that package can help. I have seen multiple projects schedules being impacted in the aerospace that would not have happened if the proper time was spent on the initial development way-back at the contract review stage. It is however, going to require some re-training for the bid process to really understand the engineering costs that are being flowed down as a new requirement to the suppliers.
Some have mentioned additional cost for documenting, and yes, it does require additional work. However, once a product line type has been developed, 95 percent of your work is then to copy/paste the assessments into the new project line. Develop them along the processes necessary, and you?ll realize that once you get over the first hurdle of understanding how to put the packages together and use the tools for the reason they were intended, everything else starts to flow fairly easily. We are going through our own transition now. Being an early adopter of the system before it is an actual requirement by the certifying bodies will put us ahead of the game. It is a philosophy change for some companies, it is not easy. However, once you actually get around the ?what we do now has worked since 1947? mentality, and they actually see how much smoothly the launch of a project goes, and that the schedule slipping is not going to be the norm anymore, everyone involved can see the benefit.
It also give you a pre-defined set of criteria for first party audits. What could be easier than taking your control chart out to the floor and asking the operators what they do in situation A. If it matches your chart everything is golden, if not, the charting needs to be updated as they are living documents. Have your operators and leads write down anything that is not covered on the chart as it happens, and you get 99% coverage of your actual process, not what you think is happening. That information gets fed directly to the QE or PPQE in charge, and should be updated in a matter of days.
The requirements are coming, in this form or another, and we will be flowing them down from our buyers, to our suppliers. Suppliers who cannot keep up with the requirements we have to supply, are being weeded out of our supplier base. I had a conversation with a supplier Friday about supplying individual components (around 16) for a new project (non-aerospace) so we could complete the necessary first articles. We are unable to capture all the necessary dimensions in the assembled state, so it?s not a request, it?s a necessity. I was told? I?m not selling you individual components I?m selling you an assembled product that must meet form, fit, and function?

. Suppliers like this are dropping further and further down our list, no matter what the final price may be. It?s not worth the hassle. If the requirements were laid out properly before the part was ever made, this couldn?t happen. I?ve yet to glance at the contract, but he probably was not flowed down the proper requirements. With the PPAP process, it?s only by intentional omission that something like this can happen.
Just a few thought from my end of the world.
