01 Sep AC7104 vs. AS9100 Quality Systems: Our Direct Comparison
In aerospace and defense manufacturing, certifications define trust, reliability, and compliance. For prime contractors such as Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Airbus, and Raytheon, subcontractor qualifications often hinge on two critical standards: AC7104 and AS9100. While both serve essential roles in ensuring product quality and supply chain consistency, their focus areas are distinct—and understanding that distinction is crucial for purchasing agents, planners, and estimators.
Overview of AC7104 and AS9100
- AS9100: A comprehensive quality management system standard tailored to aerospace, it encompasses the entire production process. It ensures documentation, traceability, risk management, and customer satisfaction across all manufacturing functions.
- AC7104: An industry-specific standard governed by Nadcap (National Aerospace and Defense Contractors Accreditation Program), it verifies that coating and surface finishing processes—paint, powder coating, dry film lubricants, and plating—are carried out in strict compliance with aerospace requirements.
Together, these certifications address both system-wide quality controls (AS9100) and process-specific technical compliance (AC7104).
Key Differences and Their Impact
- Scope of Coverage
- AS9100 evaluates the entire business system: management accountability, procurement, corrective actions, and customer communication.
- AC7104 narrows in on coating processes, validating the technical precision of application, cure, adhesion, and finish.
- Documentation vs. Process Control
- Under AS9100, traceability, supplier management, and document control are the primary focus areas.
- Under AC7104, auditors examine process repeatability, equipment calibration, operator training, and sample testing.
- Cost and Resources
- Pursuing AS9100 is resource-heavy for smaller firms, requiring system-wide investment.
- AC7104, while technical, is more targeted. It demands facility readiness, operator competency, and stringent process checks.
Why Prime Contractors Require Both
When OEMs like Airbus or Lockheed Martin issue subcontractor qualifications, they often reference AS9100 for overall quality systems and AC7104 for coating-specific compliance. This dual requirement reduces risk:
- AS9100 ensures the subcontractor can manage the program.
- AC7104 ensures that the surface finish meets the requirements of engineering drawings and military specifications.
For purchasing agents and planners, this means vendor approval hinges not only on paperwork but also on proven finishing capability.
Challenges for Smaller Manufacturers
Many smaller aerospace suppliers can machine or fabricate complex parts, but struggle to meet coating specifications. Common challenges include:
- Maintaining controlled environments for Class A finishes.
- Documenting every process step for traceability.
- Passing Nadcap audits without prior coatings expertise.
This creates bottlenecks in production schedules, particularly when coatings are a late-stage requirement.
The Role of a Certified Coatings Partner
By working with a coatings applicator that holds both AS9100 compliance and AC7104 accreditation, subcontractors streamline their production and approval cycles. At Royal Coatings, we:
- Operate enclosed booths, ovens, and pre-treatment systems built to handle aerospace-class requirements.
- Maintain documented compliance under AS9100 while executing process-specific controls for AC7104.
- Reduce risk for subcontractors by ensuring coatings meet prime contractor requirements the first time.
Conclusion
For aerospace and defense subcontractors, AS9100 and AC7104 are complementary—not interchangeable. One governs the quality system, while the other certifies the coating’s capability. Together, they form the assurance that prime contractors demand.
Royal Coatings bridges that gap. By partnering with us, subcontractors eliminate uncertainty in finishing, reduce the risk of rework, and deliver parts that pass inspection with confidence.