1 / 11

Processor Control Nadcap Implementation --- a supplement to Boeing oversight ---

Processor Control Strategy . Work together as one Boeing company and with the Aerospace Industry to right size our processor base and continually improve the certification and oversight of special processors so there are NO escapes due to special processing anywhere in the supply chain.. . -- a quality initiative that will lead to industry cost reductions --.

sandra_john
Download Presentation

Processor Control Nadcap Implementation --- a supplement to Boeing oversight ---

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


    1. Processor Control Nadcap Implementation --- a supplement to Boeing oversight ---

    3. This presentation is intended for use with Procurement Councils. Note that some of the examples are Boeing-enterprise wide, some are Boeing Commercial only, and some are Puget Sound examples. This presentation should be tailored to the experiences of the audience hearing it. Our present control of our processors, many of whom are sub-tier to some other Boeing supplier, is not meeting our needs. The target doesnt say we should choose Nadcap, only that we should choose to modify our existing methods. This presentation presents 2 alternatives: using Nadcap to supplement our own (somewhat reduced) staffs, and increasing our staffs from where they are today. No other alternatives have been presented at the American Aerospace Quality Council (AAQG), the International Aerospace Quality Council (IAQG), or by procurement councils so far. The proposal for this meeting is to make a decision on how we should move forward.This presentation is intended for use with Procurement Councils. Note that some of the examples are Boeing-enterprise wide, some are Boeing Commercial only, and some are Puget Sound examples. This presentation should be tailored to the experiences of the audience hearing it. Our present control of our processors, many of whom are sub-tier to some other Boeing supplier, is not meeting our needs. The target doesnt say we should choose Nadcap, only that we should choose to modify our existing methods. This presentation presents 2 alternatives: using Nadcap to supplement our own (somewhat reduced) staffs, and increasing our staffs from where they are today. No other alternatives have been presented at the American Aerospace Quality Council (AAQG), the International Aerospace Quality Council (IAQG), or by procurement councils so far. The proposal for this meeting is to make a decision on how we should move forward.

    4. So, I hope I have established that we cant live with the status quo costs of escapes and control methods. We must choose another path. I only know of these 2 options: beefing up the internal control we employ today, or turning to the outside for supplemental efforts. No other proposals have been floated at the IAQG or AAQG meetings. I stated that I am open to other suggestions, and Im glad I didnt get launched into a bunny trail from which I had to recover. It could happen. Be prepared for why dont we try this? Maybe youll get some good ideas, but arent they variations on doing more internally or supplementing internal with external? Going entirely external may be a third option suggested, but I dont think it is viable in todays world which lacks a single industry standard. If we dont decide today to embrace one of these methods, then arent we just hoping? I was hoping to forestall any discussion of sending me away for more data. So, I hope I have established that we cant live with the status quo costs of escapes and control methods. We must choose another path. I only know of these 2 options: beefing up the internal control we employ today, or turning to the outside for supplemental efforts. No other proposals have been floated at the IAQG or AAQG meetings. I stated that I am open to other suggestions, and Im glad I didnt get launched into a bunny trail from which I had to recover. It could happen. Be prepared for why dont we try this? Maybe youll get some good ideas, but arent they variations on doing more internally or supplementing internal with external? Going entirely external may be a third option suggested, but I dont think it is viable in todays world which lacks a single industry standard. If we dont decide today to embrace one of these methods, then arent we just hoping? I was hoping to forestall any discussion of sending me away for more data.

    5. Why is Boeing Requiring Nadcap. Nadcap is industry managed & controlled Nadcap auditors are process experts in the technologies they audit Nadcap audit process is technical and in-depth Processors that cannot attain accreditation will not be approved Allows Boeing to focus resources on Boeing specific issues and concerns

    6. Boeing Oversight Perform initial process audits Continue to perform process audits for processes not covered by Nadcap At Nadcap accredited processors - maintenance activity based on potential risk (process criticality & processor performance) Work with Nadcap to include Special Processes & Boeing Unique Criteria not currently in the scope of Nadcap

    7. Boeings Global Processor Base (Number of Boeing Approved Processors)

    9. Nadcap Transition Status (as of April 12, 2004) USA & Canada Total number of processors requiring heat treat are 285. 15% have not engaged. 1.4% waived.Total number of processors requiring heat treat are 285. 15% have not engaged. 1.4% waived.

    11. Sources of Information

More Related