.png)
How Do You Make Sure a Customer's Key Characteristics Are in the Inspection Plan Before Production Starts?
You make sure by identifying key characteristics during contract review and carrying them into the routing, the inspection plan and the FAIR before the job is released.
If that step is left to whoever happens to spot a note on the drawing, a key characteristic will eventually be missed, and the customer will usually find it before you do.
Why are key characteristics missed in the first place?
The designation rarely sits in one obvious place. It might be a symbol on the drawing, a line in the purchase order, or a requirement in a customer specification that arrived as an attachment nobody opened after quoting.
Each department then works from the part of the information it can see. Sales quotes from the geometry, Planning builds the routing from the model, and the inspection plan is written from the drawing balloons by whoever has time that day.
Who should own the check?
Whoever runs contract review should own it, because that is the only point where the drawing, purchase order and customer specification are read together. In many businesses that is a Sales or a Contracts role, with Planning accountable for carrying each item into the routing.
Problems start when ownership is shared by everyone. The reviewer assumes Planning will spot it, Planning assumes the reviewer already did, and the inspection plan is written from the drawing alone.
What does VAELO commonly see when consulting?
The most common pattern is a contract review that exists only as a signature on the order acknowledgement. There is no record of what the customer designated, so Planning and Inspection have nothing to check against.
The second is an inspection plan copied from a previous part or an earlier revision. A drawing revision adds a key characteristic flag, the plan is not updated, and the job runs exactly as it always did.
We also see FAIRs where every dimension has been measured, but the key characteristic is not identified as such. It gets the same sampling frequency and the same measuring method as a general tolerance, even though the customer expects tighter control.
Is it still a problem if the feature was measured anyway?
Sometimes the dimension was inspected as part of the normal dimensional check, so data exists. That reduces the risk, but it does not close the gap, because the characteristic was still not controlled, sampled or recorded the way the customer expects.
Treat existing data as useful evidence for your containment decision. It does not prove the process worked.
What should you do when you realise it has been missed?
Start with containment before anyone debates the cause. Establish what is in WIP, in stores and already shipped, and find out what measurement data exists for that characteristic on each batch.
Then check what your contract and customer requirements say about notification. Depending on the customer, you may need to tell them promptly, and it is far better they hear it from you with a containment plan than ask for data you cannot produce.
Raise it as a nonconformance and look at the process gap rather than blaming the inspector. Adding the characteristic to the plan and carrying on leaves the same gap open for the next order.
What process change stops it happening again?
Add a key characteristic check to contract review, and make it a recorded step with a named owner.
That sheet travels with the job and drives three checks:
→ Planning transfers each key characteristic into the routing and the inspection plan, clearly flagged, and a second person confirms it
→ Quality Inspectors check the inspection plan and FAIR against the sheet before the job is released to production
→ Any drawing or purchase order revision goes back through the same check before the next batch starts
The plan should also state how each key characteristic will be measured, how often, and where the result is recorded. A gauge that suits a general tolerance may not suit a tight key feature, so confirm that before first-off rather than after.
What about repeat orders and revisions?
Repeat orders are where this slips most often, because the job feels familiar. The routing is pulled from the last order, the inspection plan is reused, and nobody reads the drawing again.
Make the check apply to every order, not only new parts. If the revision on the purchase order matches the revision the plan was built from, the check takes a minute, and if it does not, you have found the problem before the first part is cut.
How do you know the fix is working?
Pick three live jobs and trace each one from the purchase order to the inspection plan. If you cannot find the customer's key characteristics, flagged at every step, within a few minutes, the control is not working yet.
Repeat the trace regularly, and again whenever a new customer or a new family of parts starts. If your customers flow down variation management requirements for key characteristics, the same trace shows whether your records will stand up when they ask for them.
How can VAELO Aerospace help?
VAELO Aerospace works with precision engineering, manufacturing, and aerospace and defence supply businesses to tighten contract review, inspection planning and FAIR processes without adding paperwork nobody uses.
We can review a handful of live jobs with your team, find where customer requirements drop out between order and inspection, and set up a simple check that fits how you already work.
If you want a second pair of eyes on it before a customer finds the gap, get in touch:
Comments