Guide · ~13 min read · Aerospace

AS9100, in plain English.

AS9100 is ISO 9001 plus the things aerospace primes have learned the hard way over 40 years. For an SMB tier-2 or tier-3 supplier, the requirements that move audit needles are configuration control, First Article Inspection records, FOD prevention, and counterfeit parts. This guide explains each in plain English and how a tablet- based MES closes the gap without buying a system designed for a Lockheed-scale balance sheet.

AS9100 vs. ISO 9001

What's actually different

AS9100 (latest revision: 9100D, with 9100E in industry discussion) extends ISO 9001 with about 80 additional shall statements specific to aerospace. The big ones for shop-floor execution: configuration management throughout the product lifecycle (clause 8.1.2), First Article Inspection on first production runs (8.5.1.3 referencing AS9102), FOD prevention programs (8.5.1.4), counterfeit parts prevention (8.1.4), product safety (8.1.3), and risk management as a continuous activity (6.1). For a supplier going from ISO 9001 to AS9100, the workload almost doubles, mostly in records, not in actual operations.

  • AS9100 = ISO 9001 + ~80 aerospace-specific shall statements
  • Configuration management across the entire product lifecycle
  • First Article Inspection (FAI) per AS9102
  • FOD (Foreign Object Debris) prevention program required
  • Counterfeit parts prevention with documented controls
  • Product safety + risk management as continuous activities
Configuration management

What changed, when, on which serial

AS9100 clause 8.1.2 expects you to know exactly what configuration every shipped unit has. Design revision, work-instruction revision, sub-assembly revisions, component lot numbers. And to keep that record forever. The classic SMB failure is one shop-floor revision letter mismatching the engineering master when an auditor walks the line. With database-backed WIs, the configuration recorded on every build is the configuration the kiosk rendered to the operator. No drift possible by design. Every shipped serial carries its full configuration tree as part of the build record.

  • WI revision on every build record. Automatically, never manually
  • Sub-assembly revisions captured at the parent-serial merge
  • Component lots captured at consumption (per AS9100 8.5.2)
  • Full configuration tree retrievable for any shipped serial
  • Engineering bumps a revision → floor renders it on next badge-in
  • Closes 8.1.2 configuration drift findings structurally
Version history current v4
  • v4
    Eric Flint current
    May 17, 2026 · 2:22 PM · changed torque to 12 ft-lb
  • v3
    Maya Rodriguez
    May 14, 2026 · 9:48 AM · updated bolt callouts
  • v2
    Jorge Lee
    May 09, 2026 · 11:04 AM · added rotor close-up photo
  • v1
    Eric Flint
    May 05, 2026 · 4:15 PM · initial publish
First Article Inspection (FAI)

AS9102 records that hold up under prime audit

First Article Inspection per AS9102 is the aerospace ritual: before a production run, you build one unit, document every characteristic of the design (Form 1. Part Number Accountability, Form 2. Product Accountability, Form 3. Characteristic Accountability), and the customer (or your QE) signs off that this unit matches the design. AS9102 forms are records, separate from the build record itself. Ignite Lean doesn't generate AS9102 forms (yet), but it captures the underlying evidence: operator, station, WI revision in use, every component scanned, every photo, every torque-tool reading. The QE filling out Form 3 has a complete reference source for every line item.

  • Build record per FAI unit: operator, station, WI revision, components
  • Photos at every critical characteristic step
  • Searchable history: filter by part number + "first article" tag
  • Configuration tree provides every revision for Form 1 / 2 / 3 reference
  • Pairs with existing AS9102 form tools (we own the evidence, not the form)
FOD prevention

Foreign object debris controls that operators actually use

FOD prevention (AS9100 clause 8.5.1.4) is one of the few aerospace clauses where a paper-based system can match a digital one, because FOD is mostly about housekeeping and tool control, not records. Where the digital system pulls ahead: capturing the pre-build FOD walk-around as a checkbox on the kiosk, capturing tool count-in / count-out as a scan, photographing closed-area inspections as part of the build record. Each becomes another piece of evidence the auditor can sample. And another step the operator can't skip without a record of skipping it.

  • Pre-build FOD walk-around as a required step in the build sequence
  • Tool count-in / count-out via scan, attributed to the operator
  • Closed-area inspection photos attached to the build record
  • FOD reports flagged in the kiosk feed the supervisor approval queue
  • Auditable trail per build: who did the FOD check, when, photographic proof
Counterfeit parts prevention

Lot-level traceability on every consumable

AS9100 clause 8.1.4 requires a documented counterfeit parts prevention process. Meaning every consumable on every unit needs to be traceable back to its source. In practice, this means lot numbers captured at consumption. The operator scans the fastener kit barcode at the build step, the build record captures lot F-26044-12, and that lot ties back to your incoming inspection record (which validated the cert from the supplier). If a counterfeit alert hits the industry, you can reverse-lookup every shipped unit that consumed the suspect lot in minutes, not weeks.

  • Lot capture at consumption via scan. Operator-driven, no QE bottleneck
  • Reverse lookup: given a lot, find every shipped serial
  • Ties to incoming inspection records (kept in your QMS of choice)
  • Counterfeit alerts → impact analysis in clicks
  • Auditable evidence per build that lot tracing happened
Risk + safety as continuous activities

NCs that feed real risk reviews

AS9100 clauses 6.1 (risk-based thinking) and 8.1.3 (product safety) are continuous, not annual. Audit evidence is the ongoing flow of non-conformances, dispositions, and corrective-action follow-ups. Not a binder of risk assessments updated once a year. Ignite Lean's NC workflow (operator flag → supervisor disposition → reason text → all attributed and timestamped) gives the QE a queryable stream for the monthly safety review and the quarterly management review. The same data that runs the floor runs the QMS.

  • Every NC: operator + photo + reason + supervisor + disposition + timestamp
  • Filter NCs by part / station / reason for trend analysis
  • Monthly safety review pulls a date range, exports, done
  • Defect pareto in Insights → KPIs feeds 8.1.3 product-safety reviews
  • No "binder of risk assessments updated quarterly"
AS9100 audit prep timeline

A 6-month prep that fits between OEM PO releases

AS9100 audits are typically 3–4 days for a tier-2 supplier, run by an IAQG-recognised certification body (BSI, DEKRA, DQS, Intertek, NSF-ISR). The prep cycle that works: month 1–2, inventory existing documentation and gap-analyse against the AS9100 clauses; month 3, convert top-priority WIs to the new system and pilot at two stations; month 4, plant-wide rollout and retire paper for converted WIs; month 5, dry-run the document review and floor walk with your QMS manager; month 6, audit. Most SMB suppliers compress this into 6 weeks and fail. Six months is generous. And the system you stand up is what runs the next 10 years of audits, not just the first.

  • Months 1–2: gap analysis against AS9100 clauses, prioritise WIs
  • Month 3: convert top-priority WIs, pilot at two stations
  • Month 4: plant-wide rollout, retire paper for converted WIs
  • Month 5: dry-run document review + floor walk with QMS manager
  • Month 6: audit
  • Same system carries you through every subsequent annual surveillance
Get started

Ready to run your line on Ignite Lean?

Free during early access — 1 manager seat included, unlimited operators.

Get early access