KNOWLEDGE · AUTOMOTIVE → AEROSPACE

Keep the experience.Review the evidence.

Moving from Automotive APQP into an aerospace program? Start by asking what your existing work proves, where it applies, and how its engineering evidence connects.

Start the free transition diagnostic →

START WITH WHAT YOU HAVE

A familiar document is a starting point.

An existing FMEA, Control Plan or PPAP package can be a valuable asset. Its title alone does not establish whether it addresses the scope, revisions, evidence and approval needs of the new program. Review one representative characteristic through the work before judging the whole package.

1. Establish applicability

Identify the program requirements, product and process scope, customer expectations and decision authority. Record what is applicable and what still needs clarification.

2. Follow the engineering link

Trace the selected characteristic through risk analysis, process controls, measurement and supporting records. Look for inconsistent identifiers, revisions or assumptions at each handoff.

3. Resolve the gap

Separate an absent record from incomplete content, weak evidence, a broken connection or an unresolved approval. Each needs a different follow-up action.

A PRACTICAL TRANSITION LENS

KEEP · VERIFY · ADAPT · ADD

KEEP

Retain an existing asset when its applicability and supporting evidence have been reviewed.

VERIFY

Check assumptions, scope or evidence before deciding whether reuse is justified.

ADAPT

Extend or reconnect work that needs program-specific content, validation or approval.

ADD

Create missing applicable deliverables or evidence and define how completion will be verified.

Trace one characteristic, not just a document list.

The Navigator uses an engineering evidence chain as a review framework:

Requirements / Risk → DRA → CI/KC → Design Record → PFD → PFMEA / Process KC → Control Plan → MSA → Capability → FAIR → PPAP → Approval / Disposition

This is a navigation framework, not a universal mandated sequence. Determine applicability and the required review depth for your program.

Terms used in this framework

DRA: Design Risk Analysis; CI/KC: Critical Items / Key Characteristics; PFD: Process Flow Diagram; PFMEA: Process Failure Mode and Effects Analysis; MSA: Measurement System Analysis; FAIR: First Article Inspection Report; PPAP: Production Part Approval Process.

A fictional review prompt

A supplier has a PFMEA and a Control Plan, but the same characteristic has different identifiers in the measurement record. Before accepting reuse, identify the intended connection, reconcile the records and verify the resulting evidence. A completed document count would miss this issue.

Independent practical guidance, not a conformity determination or customer approval. Use authorized standards and the requirements applicable to your program. Not affiliated with or endorsed by SAE International or AIAG.

NEXT · DIAGNOSTIC

Where should your team review first?

Use six screening questions to identify review priorities. No account or project upload required.

Run the free diagnostic →

Already know your gaps? Explore the Professional Work System →