IAQG SPACE FORUM

Report to General Assembly11 October 2013, Montreal

Contact: Roberto Ciaschi (European Space Agency)

The Space Forum in Montreal

• Roberto Ciaschi (ESA) [IAQG Lead]

Page 2

• Milt Jacocks (LMCO)• Larry Patzman (LMCO)• Steve Ogg (Raytheon)• Eugene Jamarillo

(Raytheon)

• Mike Swenson (Boeing)• Kevin Beard (NQA)

AA

QG

• Noriaki Shibuya (MHI)• Yoko Nishio (MELCO)• Satoshi Kikuchi (HIREC)

• Low Eng Sian (DSO – Singapore)

APA

QG

• Bénédicte Costedoat-Lamarque (Astrium)

• Andre La Croix (Astrium)

• Andreas Jain (DLR)• Jacob Haham (IAI)

EAQ

G

• Sigfried Brauner (Eurocopter)

• Axel-Gerd Weber (Cassidian)

Gue

sts

Space Forum highlights in Montreal

Strategy

• SWOT of IAQG Space Forum• Updated arrow chart

Status of 2013 tactical

objectives

• 9100:2016 revision• Space Forum process and milestones• Disposition of space comments

• 9104-3 revision

Page 3

4

Space Forum within IAQG: SWOT for its ability to bring value to the space community and

IAQG

• Good understanding as a group of the needs and issues of space community

• Very similar methods and ‘language’• Balanced participation across sectors,

industry and agencies• Active culture on project and risk

management, and design & development quality issues

• Limited resources• Lack of continuity of membership• Motivation of SF members / take work

in between meetings• Communication of added value of

IAQG initiatives to our organizations• Smaller w.r.t. Aviation and Defense

• Increased participation of final customers / agencies

• Better dialogue between space communities of the three sectors

• Influence the 9100 revision to increase value to space business

• Bringing the space views and needs in OPMT

• Raise the quality baseline of less mature suppliers

• Demonstration of benefits to our business

• Requirements / initiatives irrelevant for space or even counterproductive

• ‘Symbolic presence: being there with no effects

• Volunteers are not given the opportunity to contribute

• Bureaucracy of procedures perceived as excessive

S W

TO

5

Space Forum within IAQG: SWOT for its ability to bring value to the space community and

IAQG

• Good understanding as a group of the needs and issues of space community

• Very similar methods and ‘language’• Balanced participation across sectors,

industry and agencies• Active culture on project and risk

management, and design & development quality issues

Strengths

6

Space Forum within IAQG: SWOT for its ability to bring value to the space community and

IAQG

• Limited resources• Lack of continuity of membership• Motivation of SF members / take work in

between meetings• Communication of added value of IAQG

initiatives to our organizations• Smaller w.r.t. Aviation and Defense

Weaknesses

7

Space Forum within IAQG: SWOT for its ability to bring value to the space community and

IAQG

• Demonstration of benefits to our business• Requirements / initiatives irrelevant for

space or even counterproductive• ‘Symbolic presence: being there with no

effects• Volunteers are not given the opportunity

to contribute• Bureaucracy of procedures perceived as

excessive

Threats

8

Space Forum within IAQG: SWOT for its ability to bring value to the space community and

IAQG

• Increased participation of final customers / agencies

• Better dialogue between space communities of the three sectors

• Influence the 9100 revision to increase value to space business

• Bringing the space views and needs in OPMT

• Raise the quality baseline of less mature suppliers

Opportunities

9

1. Improve communication of sector SF with final customers and primes

• AAQG: increase customer reps to AAQG SF meeting & activities

• APAQG: JAXA & other countries’ final customers invited in JAQG/APAQG SF

• EAQG: reinforce participation of final customers

2. Flow down appropriate requirements, and reward compliant suppliers

3. Monitor IAQG initiatives with respect to space interests, and invest more resources to support & influence relevant ones

4. Contribute to definition of space competences of auditors and to oversight activities to identify opportunities for improvement

5. Share lessons learned and good practices at SF meetings. Liaise with other cooperation mechanisms between space organizations

1. Engagement of final customers’ and primes’ level of continuity of interaction is uneven

2. 9100 is an accepted standard for QMS of space organizations, but not completely deployed

3. Consideration of space aspects in IAQG documents is inadequate

4. Added value of audits of space organizations sometimes affected by limited competence of auditors

5. Progress made, but exchange of experience across sectors is not sustained

1. Final customers and primes are consistently engaged, communicating their needs and obtaining solutions

2. 9100 valued and implemented by all applicable suppliers of the space supply chain

3. Space needs reflected and incorporated in IAQG documents

4. ICOP provides added value auditing & certification to space organizations

5. Space Forum facilitates the exchange of lessons learned and good practices

IAQG Space Forum - Strategy

Current State Future StateIdeas on How to Proceed

A global forum for space quality issues – Space perspective across IAQG initiatives Update: 8 October 2013

10

Final customers and primes

are consistently engaged,

communicating their needs and obtaining

solutions

9100 valued and

implemented by all

applicable suppliers of the space

supply chain

Space needs reflected

and incorporated

in IAQG documents

ICOP provides

added value auditing &

certification to space

organizations

Space Forum

facilitates the

exchange of lessons

learned and good practices

IAQG Space Forum - StrategyFuture state

Update: 8 October 2013

2013 Objectives Status

Space Forum

Collect and provide consolidated space inputs to the 9100:2016 revision, in accordance with the 9100 team requirements and timeline

Space Forum

Support the completion of the 9104-3 revision, with a satisfactory incorporation of space comments and needs

2013 Tactical ObjectivesSpace Forum

Page 11

On plan

Off plan, but recoverable

Off plan, not recoverable

Legend

• Step 1 – • Initial collection of comments from space sectors based on the

current 9100:2009 - DONE• First consolidation in the IAQG Space Forum meeting in Moscow -

DONE• Opportunity for additional comments and provision of consolidated

comments by the deadline of 31 July - DONE

• Step 2 – • Next round(s) on comments, based on new ISO 9001structure &

‘service oriented‘ text + existing 9100 supplements • Working Draft (fall 2014) – 9100 based on ISO DIS• Coordination draft (Q2 2015) – 9100 based on ISO FDIS

12

Space Forum contribution to 9100 revision -Process and milestones -

• Statistics• Rejected

10• Noted & closed 1• Pending SF action

3• Pending sub-team

2• Pending ISO DIS

1• Noted with action

1Total18

Page 13

Space Comments: statistics & outcome

• Main comments are through (i.ie. NOT rejected)• Prevention and mitigation of

counterfeit and suspect parts• Supplier’s oversight of sub-tier

suppliers• Root cause analysis for

nonconformances• Validation of test reports of

critical materials

Rigorous filter applied by 9100 Team,

driven by the Design Specification

• Proposals for SCMH• Synergies between Lean

Management and 9100• Consideration of System

Engineering

• 9104-3 WG has produced Draft V0.A (30-SEP-2013)• General principle defined in Annex F - competence requirements –

is fully shared• NOTE: This standard is not attempting to generate specific

competencies for each Industry sector, but the overall minimum competencies to be able to audit effectively in any one of the three areas.

• The technical competencies described shall support the professional development of Aerospace Auditors.

• Space Forum has developed a draft of specific Knowledge and Skills for Space

• Small Task Force established in Montreal to refine current draft• Comments to will be provided 9104-3 WG by mid December

Contribution to 9104-3 revision

Page 14

• SWOT of Space Forum’s ability to bring value to the space community and IAQG has been a useful exercise

• Limited resources is our biggest weakness• Updated arrow chart has confirmed our basic

aims• Our objectives for 2013 are achieved or on track

Page 15

Conclusions