First article inspection (AS9102 Rev C): a filled-in FAI report, when you need one, and why it gets rejected

Morsa publishes this guide. Morsa is software with an AI agent that works in your ERP, email and Teams; for an FAI it gathers the certs and chases the missing ones before the ship date, and your quality engineer reviews and signs. The bracket and the hour estimates are our worked examples.

Quick answer

• Your customer’s PO comes first: it can add requirements to AS9102, and it wins over this page.

• Revision: AS9102 Rev C, revised 28 June 2023 [1], still current on the IAQG standards register [2].

• One-off jobs need an FAI too, one per part number: Rev C requires a separate FAI for each item and removed the exemption for single-run production orders [3].

• Production break: follow your contract. Lockheed Martin UK requires an FAI after a break of more than 2 years [6]; IAQG says to re-verify at least every characteristic the break could affect, and document why you skip the rest [4].

• Time: 2.7 to 6.3 hours for 25 characteristics and 15.5 to 31 for 300, by hand (our estimate, arithmetic below).

When you need a full, partial or delta FAI

For a partial FAI, fill in only the affected fields on all three forms and name the baseline FAI in Form 1, field 14 [5][7]. Inspect a part from the first production run, made by the planned process; prototypes and qualification units do not count [4][5].

What Rev C changed that matters day to day: a documented plan for each FAI is now required, and Forms 2 and 3 lost their signature fields, so Form 1 carries the sign-off [3].

A filled-in AS9102 Rev C example

The part: a machined 6061 aluminum bracket, anodized, with two holes, a slot and two threads. Field numbers follow IAQG’s blank Rev C forms [7].

Form 1: part number accountability

Form 2: materials, special processes and functional tests

Aluminum 6061-T651 plate

• 6 Specification: AMS 4027, plate

• 8 Supplier: Metals service center, code 20817

• 9 Customer approval: N/A

• 10 Certificate number: Mill test report, heat 58213

Anodize

• 6 Specification: MIL-PRF-8625, Type II, Class 1

• 8 Supplier: Anodizing house, code 30155

• 9 Customer approval: Yes: Nadcap, checked on eAuditNet

• 10 Certificate number: C-55812

Part marking

• 6 Specification: MIL-STD-130

• 8 Supplier: In house

• 9 Customer approval: N/A

• 10 Certificate number: Router R-2207, op 70

No functional test is called out, so fields 11 and 12 are blank. Put the specification revision in field 6 when the PO names one: missing spec revisions are a common rejection [5].

Form 3: one line per balloon

1

• 6 Location: Sheet 1, B3

• 8 Requirement: Length 4.000 ±.010

• 9 Result: 4.003

2

• 6 Location: B4

• 8 Requirement: Width 1.500 ±.005

• 9 Result: 1.498

3

• 6 Location: C2

• 8 Requirement: Thickness .250 ±.005

• 9 Result: .251

4

• 6 Location: C3

• 7 Designator: KC

• 8 Requirement: Hole Ø.257 +.003/-.000, 2X

• 9 Result: .258, .259

5

• 6 Location: C3

• 7 Designator: KC

• 8 Requirement: Position Ø.010 to A, B, C, 2X

• 9 Result: .004, .006 (CMM report CMM-2207-01)

6

• 6 Location: D2

• 8 Requirement: Slot .375 ±.005

• 9 Result: .377

7

• 6 Location: B2

• 8 Requirement: Flatness .003

• 9 Result: .004

• 11 NC no.: NC-1182

8

• 6 Location: B2

• 8 Requirement: Surface finish 63 Ra max

• 9 Result: 42 Ra

9

• 6 Location: D4

• 8 Requirement: Radius R.125, 4X

• 9 Result: Pass

• 10 Tooling: Radius gauge RG-14

10

• 6 Location: A3

• 8 Requirement: Thread 10-32 UNF-2B, 2X

• 9 Result: Pass

• 10 Tooling: Thread plug gauge TG-0331

11

• 6 Location: Note 2

• 8 Requirement: Break edges .005 to .015

• 9 Result: .008 to .012

12

• 6 Location: Note 4

• 8 Requirement: Anodize per MIL-PRF-8625 Type II Class 1

• 9 Result: Conforms, cert C-55812 (Form 2)

13

• 6 Location: Note 5

• 8 Requirement: Mark part number and revision per MIL-STD-130

• 9 Result: Conforms, visual

The balloon to characteristic tie-out

• Every balloon on the drawing has exactly one Form 3 line with the same number [5].

• A measured feature required in several places gets every actual, or the minimum and maximum: characteristics 4 and 5 [5].

• A feature checked with a go/no-go gauge is recorded as pass or fail, with the gauge named in field 10: characteristics 9 and 10 [5].

• A note that contains a dimension gets a measurement. “OK” or “accept” is not allowed [5].

• An attached CMM report must use the same characteristic numbers as Form 3 [5].

• What happens to characteristic 7: log NC-1182, mark Form 1 field 19 “Yes”, and disposition the part through your nonconformance process. If it would ship as is or after repair, get the customer’s approval where your contract requires it. Lockheed Martin treats the FAI as not complete until the nonconformance is closed and a partial FAI on the next run clears it [5].

How long an FAI takes, by feature count

Our estimate. Ballooning (0.6 to 1.0 minutes a characteristic) and typing Form 3 (0.2 to 0.4) come from Net-Inspect’s 300-characteristic example [8]; auto-ballooning software removes both. Measuring and recording at 2 to 4 minutes with hand tools is our own estimate, and the largest share. Forms 1 and 2, certs and sign-off add 1.5 to 4 hours.

Hours = characteristics × minutes each ÷ 60 + 1.5 to 4. By hand that is 2.8 to 5.4 minutes each; with auto-ballooning, 2 to 4.

25

• Typical part: Simple turned or flat part

• Hours by hand: 2.7 to 6.3

• Hours with auto-ballooning: 2.3 to 5.7

75

• Typical part: Machined bracket or housing

• Hours by hand: 5.0 to 10.8

• Hours with auto-ballooning: 4.0 to 9.0

150

• Typical part: Complex 5-axis part

• Hours by hand: 8.5 to 17.5

• Hours with auto-ballooning: 6.5 to 14.0

300

• Typical part: Large machined structure

• Hours by hand: 15.5 to 31.0

• Hours with auto-ballooning: 11.5 to 24.0

500

• Typical part: Assembly with sub-assemblies

• Hours by hand: 24.8 to 49.0

• Hours with auto-ballooning: 18.2 to 37.3

The 500-feature row fits the “in excess of 40 hours” suppliers reported to Quality Magazine [9].

How to submit an FAI, and where the forms come from

• Blank forms: IAQG gives away the Rev C Forms 1, 2 and 3 as Word files [7]. The standard itself is sold by SAE International; its price is not shown on SAE’s public page [1].

• Your own format: customers accept the AS9102 forms or an equivalent that carries every field [5].

• Where it goes: the PO says. Raytheon requires Net-Inspect, with drawing, reports and certs attached, unless the supplier is outside the US or the program is classified [10]. Lockheed Martin MFC uses its Apriso Supplier Portal, at least 10 working days before the planned inspection [5]. With no portal named, we suggest one PDF of forms, ballooned drawing, CMM reports and certs.

• Shipping before approval: usually not allowed. Raytheon forbids it unless authorized in writing, and email does not count [10]; Lockheed Martin MFC requires approval before any shipment when the PO note applies [5].

• Who signs: the person who verified the FAI in field 20, and a different person who reviews and approves in field 22 [5].

Why FAI reports get rejected

Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control lists these as common mistakes in submitted FAI packages [5]:

FAI software

A spreadsheet or the IAQG Word forms are enough for a few parts a year. 1factory publishes $75 per QC user a month with a 5-user minimum ($375 a month), billed annually [11]. Ideagen Quality Control, sold as InspectionXpert, offers a 14-day free trial and no public price [12]; Net-Inspect publishes no price on the pages we read [8].

The slow part of an FAI: chasing the cert packet

The inspector still measures the part. What holds the ship date is the paperwork around it: a mill test report in a receiving email, a cert that never came. Morsa is software with an AI agent that works in your ERP (JobBOSS2, ProShop, Global Shop or whichever you run), email and Teams. For this bracket:

1. It reads the PO and drawing notes, lists every cert the FAI needs, and files the mill test report already received against lot 26-1104.

2. The anodize cert is missing, so it emails the anodizer from the buyer’s mailbox, under a chase rule the buyer approved, and follows up until the cert arrives.

3. It fills Form 2 from the certs, flags any spec revision that does not match the drawing, and assembles the packet with the certificate of conformance. The quality engineer reviews and signs.

To see it build a packet for one of your parts, book a 30-minute walkthrough.

What each industry expects in the packet: material cert packet checklist.

What to check before Form 1 is signed

• Every characteristic and note is ballooned and has a Form 3 line.

• Every actual is recorded, or the min and max; gauge checks name the gauge.

• Every material and process is on Form 2 with its cert and spec revision.

• Two different people sign fields 20 and 22, and the package goes where the PO says before the part ships.

Suppliers who make your FAI parts belong on your approved supplier list with their special processes in scope.

For the ERP side of AS9100 work, including ITAR hosting and where CMMC stands after the July 2026 suspension, see aerospace and defense ERP.

Sources

1. SAE International, AS9102C Aerospace Series: First Article Inspection Requirements: https://saemobilus.sae.org/standards/as9102c-aerospace-series-first-article-inspection-requirements (read 8 November 2026)

2. IAQG, Standards Register (revision October 2025): https://iaqg.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/2025-10-31-Standards-Register.pdf (read 8 November 2026)

3. IAQG, 9102 Summary of Changes, Rev B to Rev C (11 July 2023): https://iaqg.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/9102_Changes_07112023.pdf (read 8 November 2026)

4. IAQG, First Article Inspection 9102 Updated FAQs (19 February 2015): https://iaqg.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/9102-FAQ.pdf (read 8 November 2026)

5. Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control, Supplier First Article Inspection Guidebook (2026 edition): https://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed-martin/eo/documents/suppliers/mfc/mfc-quality-fai-guidebook.pdf (read 8 November 2026)

6. Lockheed Martin UK, SQAG 001 First Article Inspection Guidebook, Issue 6 (February 2026): https://lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed-martin/uk/documents/suppliers/SQAG001.pdf (read 8 November 2026)

7. IAQG, 9102 Rev C Form 1 (Word file; Forms 2 and 3 at the same address ending -2 and -3): https://iaqg.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/9102C-Form-1.docx (read 8 November 2026)

8. Net-Inspect, How Automated Ballooning Accelerates First Article Inspection: https://www.net-inspect.com/blog/how-automated-ballooning-accelerates-first-article-inspection/ (read 8 November 2026)

9. Quality Magazine, Enhance First Article Inspection: https://www.qualitymag.com/articles/85036-enhance-first-article-inspection (read 8 November 2026)

10. Raytheon, Quality Note DX, First Article Inspection, Revision 18 (15 September 2021): https://qnotes.raytheon.com/files/RQN_DX_18.pdf (read 8 November 2026)

11. 1factory, Pricing: https://www.1factory.com/pricing.html (read 8 November 2026)

12. Ideagen Quality Control (InspectionXpert): https://www.inspectionxpert.com/ondemand-2 (read 8 November 2026)