To be or not to be AS 9100? Non-aircraft equipment suppliers

[FLEETWOOD]

I am trying to investigate the applicability of the AS 9100 standard to non-aircraft equipment suppliers to the aerospace industry.



Our company provides flight simulators and training systems to aircraft OEMs (Boeing, Airbus, Embraer), military customers (US, CDN, UK and others) and Airline companies (JetBlue, Quantas, Jal, Southwest). We have not been able to get clear direction as to whether or not the AS standard is applicable to us as we do not provide any equipment that is installed on an airplane. (We are currently registered to the ISO 9000:2000 standard.)

Keeping in mind that AS 9100 was developed for the Aerospace industry, would it be applicable to a company that provides non-aircraft related systems?

 

[Sidney Vianna]

IKeeping in mind that AS 9100 was developed for the Aerospace industry, would it be applicable to a company that provides non-aircraft related systems?

Even though you could technically apply for AS9100 certification, it would not make much sense. Since most of the AS9100 additional requirements (compared to ISO 9001) are meant to cover traditional aerospace hardware quality systems requirements, a bunch of these requirements would not apply to you, and you basically revert to ISO 9001.

However, due to the additional admin requirements imposed on to the CRB's, you would have FEWER available auditors and additional costs, such as the OASIS database fee, etc. You should only go for AS9100 certification IF required by your customer and you are not able to convince them otherwise.
Personally, I think that eligibility for certification to AS9100 should be "controlled" like IATF does with TS-16949.
Unfortunately, there is a misconception in the Q world that "tougher" standards such as QS-9000, TS-16949, AS9100 are of a "higher grade" than ISO 9001. And you end up like the case of a "child day care center" somewhere in Asia, certified to QS-9000.

 

[FLEETWOOD]

I see that we went to the same school of thoughts.

I see this the same way as you described, the only issue here is that there is one customer that will not allow us to even bid on a contract if we are not approved to the AS9100. In this case, what other alternatives do we have?

 

[Jim Wynne]

I see that we went to the same school of thoughts.

I see this the same way as you described, the only issue here is that there is one customer that will not allow us to even bid on a contract if we are not approved to the AS9100. In this case, what other alternatives do we have?

The potential customer can require all of a would-be supplier's employees to wear pink tutus as a condition of doing business, so long as the requirement is uniformly applied, so your only options are: 1) Get registered, 2) talk the potential customer out of the requirement, or 3) forget about that potential customer.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

Define pink

The potential customer can require all of a would-be supplier's employees to wear pink tutus as a condition of doing business, so long as the requirement is uniformly applied, so your only options are: 1) Get registered, 2) talk the potential customer out of the requirement, or 3) forget about that potential customer.

And if you go for certification and there is a customer requirement for employees to wear pink tutus, we better check it.

 

[Wes Bucey]

I suppose you would be welcome to check tutus and how they fit if you bring along enough cases of cachaca to the party

What will YOU be wearing? Be sure to :ca:

 

[Wes Bucey]

I see that we went to the same school of thoughts.

I see this the same way as you described, the only issue here is that there is one customer that will not allow us to even bid on a contract if we are not approved to the AS9100. In this case, what other alternatives do we have?

I pretty much agree with Jim on your options, with this addition:
In option 2 (talk him out of the requirement) - explain the added cost for an AS versus ISO9001:2000 and suggest that customer add "customer specific requirement" of AS which is important to him in lieu of the registration. If he won't yield on this point, what will the rest of doing business with him be like?
Added in edit: Charge him extra for customer requirements!

In option 3 (delete the customer) - balance the added cost of registration and doing business with the potential loss or gain of NET PROFIT (not gross sales) due to this customer and you may find it an easy decision to put HIM on your "don't call" list.

Having been in the commercial aerospace industry, I can attest that some airlines are terrible credit risks and I would be more likely dictating terms to them than accepting terms from them.

Does this same customer also require his luggage trucks and passenger reservation computers to be manufactured by a company registered to AS? If it is a mainframe manufacturer, does he require the manufacturer of the brooms used by his janitors to be an AS-registered organization?

Bottom line:
The pity is some short-sighted drone in the middle of the bureaucracy has made this dictate and it will be difficult to find a route over his head to get it countermanded.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

I see that we went to the same school of thoughts.

I see this the same way as you described, the only issue here is that there is one customer that will not allow us to even bid on a contract if we are not approved to the AS9100. In this case, what other alternatives do we have?

Like Jim said, if you are not able to convince your customer otherwise, you have to comply with it, as long as you want to do business with them. But, assuming that you have a good relationship with that customer, I would still argue that forcing you to comply with AS9100 might increase your internal expenditures without any significant benefit to you and/or them. In the past, I have been invited to participate in 3 way talks with my customers and their customers to make a case that attaining "additional certificates" would not necessarily translate in any gains from the customers perspective. They were somewhat puzzled that a registrar would try to convince an organization that one of their suppliers did not need this "tougher" certification. Maybe you can get your present registrar to "bat for you".
I firmly believe that a standard has to fit the business environment of the organization implementing it.
Now, in case you decide to go for AS9100 certification, attached you will find a chart with the top 10 AS CRBs in the Americas Sector. The numbers are a couple of days old and come straight from the OASIS database.
PS. If the customer in case that demands your system to be AS9100 certified is a manufacturer of regional jets located in South America, I can probably help you, arguing your case. I have several contacts there involved with supplier oversight.

 

[FLEETWOOD]

Thank you all for your feedback. It adds value, and support to my way of thinking.

We are in the process of performing a gap analysis. Basically, what we are doing is reviewing our current QMS (ISO9000), and comparing it with AS9100 and CMMI. This 'gap analysis' will hopefully provide a roadmap of the work ahead.

Once this is complete, we will then estimate hours and put a dollar value against this effort. At that point we could evaluate the return on investment. However, I believe that getting AS9100, is more of a bragging rights. And sometimes, people see this as an opportunity to become "like the others"!!!

“If they can do it, why can't we do it?” However, they do not understand the requirements.

BTW.... I mentioned CMMI. If you are ISO9000 certified, why become CMMI approved? What does this do for my company? Is it possible to come up with a QMS that satisfies both requirements?

Our company has been certified ISO 9000 since 1990. We were one of the first large companies in Canada to become certified. We have adjusted our QMS over this period, however, along comes CMMI and now our system is lacking controls!!! Of course, we have developed a whole department to address CMMI requirements. So people have vested interests in getting CMMI certified. But my question is why do I need this? I have a QMS system certified to ISO 9000!! Is anybody going through the same issues?

 

[Al Rosen]

Our company has been certified ISO 9000 since 1990. We were one of the first large companies in Canada to become certified. We have adjusted our QMS over this period, however, along comes CMMI and now our system is lacking controls!!! Of course, we have developed a whole department to address CMMI requirements. So people have vested interests in getting CMMI certified. But my question is why do I need this? I have a QMS system certified to ISO 9000!! Is anybody going through the same issues?

Could you explain what CMMI is?