Conditions for approval required by: Martin Russell
_________________________
Certification of Aerospace Products to international quality Standards
Certification of Aerospace Products to international quality Standards
Form restricted to registered, logged in users. Please return to the home page and use the Create Account option.
Condition: The requirements for ACP006 format have not been included in the web data- i.e. declarations of part volumes, customer quality issues, etc over the last 3 years. Ref page 40-47/62 of the ASD-CERT Quality Manual.
Observations:
Web pre Paras- Applicant not agreed to reimburse the Auditor.
Web Para 2 –
QTP para 4- Noted VAD samples included in the test sampling plan? Confirm products from all VAD sources are represented. i.e. it is not clear if samples from France & Morocco are tested, etc……?
QTP Para 5- Group 1 Test EN2591-303 req’t identified as N/A (replaced by test -305). ASD-STAN D2S3 to be notified to confirm the correction in the Prod’ St’d. This is in the QTR Para 3 but was not realised in the QTP. Accepted.
QTP Para 5- Group 1 Test EN2591-206 replaced by -205. This is a deviation from the Tech Spec. Why is test -206 omitted? Note the addition/replacement with test -205 is included at m’fr risk but does not state the reasoning why it was used to replace -206?
QTR Appx 2- ASD-STAN D2S3 to be notified of the dimensional anomalies identified. Noted QTR Para 3. Accepted.
QTR Appx 3- Non-conformance of dimension S (Dim’n No 50). Can this be realigned on the Souriau definitions if it only conforms under MMC or is this not possible?
QTR page 7/92 Group 2 list of tests & test sequence does not align with the QTP or the Tech Spec’n? However QTR page 41-55/92 align with the req’t? Correct Group 2 on Page 7/92.
Condition: The requirements for ACP006 format have not been included in the web data- i.e. declarations of part volumes, customer quality issues, etc over the last 3 years. Ref page 40-47/62 of the ASD-CERT Quality Manual.
Souriau sent me the ACp006 completed (see doc attached). I will complete the WebSIte with all this informations.
Observations:
Web pre Paras- Applicant not agreed to reimburse the Auditor.
Desk review? ok
Web Para 2 –
QTP para 4- Noted VAD samples included in the test sampling plan? Confirm products from all VAD sources are represented. i.e. it is not clear if samples from France & Morocco are tested, etc……?
The QTR (JQP2018-018 ) para 7 Sampling mentions the sources for each par numbers. The connectors from all our VAD have been tested. The part number noted with SOURIAU as Manufacturer, have been manufactured in France (SOURIAU Sarthe Plant) and in Morocco ( SOURIAU Maroc Plant) for the Final assembly in accordance with our Flow Chart.
Extract from the QTR JQP2018-018 § 7.1 p.10
QTP Para 5- Group 1 Test EN2591-303 req’t identified as N/A (replaced by test -305). ASD-STAN D2S3 to be notified to confirm the correction in the Prod’ St’d. This is in the QTR Para 3 but was not realised in the QTP. Accepted.
I will inform this point a the next D2S3
QTP Para 5- Group 1 Test EN2591-206 replaced by -205. This is a deviation from the Tech Spec. Why is test -206 omitted? Note the addition/replacement with test -205 is included at m’fr risk but does not state the reasoning why it was used to replace -206?
Regarding the previous tests, Salt spray and Mechanical Endurance, checking the electrical continuity (EN2591-205) seems more pertinent that checking the insulation resistance (EN2591-206). Moreover the insulation resistance (EN2591-206) is checking several times:
• in the group 1 after the test Rapid Change of Temperature (EN2591-30)
At the end of the group 2, after the tests Endurance of Temperature (EN2591-301) and Contact retention system effectiveness ( EN2591-206)
QTR Appx 2- ASD-STAN D2S3 to be notified of the dimensional anomalies identified. Noted QTR Para 3. Accepted.
I will inform this point a the next D2S3
QTR Appx 3- Non-conformance of dimension S (Dim’n No 50). Can this be realigned on the Souriau definitions if it only conforms under MMC or is this not possible?
The SOURIAU definitions are conform with the standards. There is no risk for fixing the receptacle on the panel.
The location of the holes to fix the receptacle on the panels is conform with the standards.
The standard defines no tolerance for this length but a tolerance were mentioned by the person who performs the measurements that is why this measurement appeared in red “Non conforme” for one Part number The correction has been done in the QTR revision B.
The QTR revision B will be added in the website
QTR page 7/92 Group 2 list of tests & test sequence does not align with the QTP or the Tech Spec’n? However QTR page 41-55/92 align with the req’t? Correct Group 2 on Page 7/92.
The QTR JQP2018-018 has been updated with correction in the §4.