New Realities for Quality Systems
In recent years, defense spending has sharply increased across NATO, the EU, and the United States. This has led to the active involvement of civilian enterprises—primarily foundries, forges, and engineering plants—in the production of military equipment. These companies are now manufacturing mortar shell casings, armored and structural castings, components for tracked vehicles, parts for drives and transmissions, and high-precision investment castings for small arms. This is all production with quality requirements entirely different from those of typical civilian orders. And while an ISO 9001 certificate was once the most important document for a plant, it is no longer sufficient. It is being replaced by defense-grade standards, most notably AQAP 2110.
The difference between civilian and military approaches to quality management becomes clear when examining the key provisions of these standards. ISO 9001 was created as a universal tool for all industries. It outlines general rules: how to organize the system, manage documentation, and handle non-conformities. But for the defense sector, such universality falls short. What is required is not just the existence of a system, but its effective operation under the customer’s constant supervision. This is where AQAP 2110 comes into play.
One of the most telling differences is the Quality Plan. Under ISO 9001, it remains a supplementary tool; a company can either create one or rely on general procedures. In AQAP 2110, the Quality Plan is a mandatory document. Furthermore, it is developed for each specific contract, approved by the customer, and becomes a roadmap for the entire project. Production cannot begin until the plan is approved. This simple distinction clearly demonstrates the much higher level of transparency and accountability in defense contracts.
But the Quality Plan is only part of the picture. AQAP requires the mandatory involvement of a customer representative in the production process. While previously an external auditor might visit the plant once a year for a certification audit, a customer representative now has the right to be on-site continuously, participate in testing, review documentation, and even audit subcontractors. The company thus operates, quite literally, under the customer’s watchful eye, fostering an entirely different atmosphere of openness and, simultaneously, heightened responsibility.
An equally important innovation is the concept of critical characteristics. ISO 9001 does not directly address them, whereas in AQAP, they are a key element. Any characteristic that affects the safety or reliability of a product must be identified and placed under special control. For foundries and forges, this means that the strength of a mortar casing, the wear resistance of a track link, or the reliability of a transmission part must be controlled far more rigorously than other parameters. This is no longer just about internal control but about creating a system that records every measurement and provides the customer with a complete picture.
All these requirements are gradually changing the very philosophy of quality within companies. If quality control was once associated primarily with the QC department, it is now an integral part of everyone’s responsibilities: from the designer who builds reliability into the product, to the technologist who documents melting or forging parameters, and the production worker who understands that their operation will be inspected and recorded. Management must also play a more active role by approving plans, participating in risk analysis, and preparing for customer audits. The result is a new culture of transparency, where non-conformities cannot be swept under the rug but must be documented and openly discussed.
It can be confidently predicted that these changes will not disappear when the defense boom ends. Industrial history shows that practices first introduced for military purposes gradually become the norm in the civilian sector. This was the case with quality systems in the automotive and aerospace industries, and it is happening again now. Even after defense orders decline, companies will continue to maintain AQAP certification to remain eligible for future tenders. In turn, civilian customers will start demanding the same level of transparency their partners have grown accustomed to in the defense industry. The plants themselves will see the direct benefits: reduced defects, less rework, and more stable processes.
The next step in this evolution is digitalization. Systems are already being implemented that allow test results to be recorded electronically and automatically sent to the customer. In the future, they will become even smarter: data will stream directly from sensors and equipment, be analyzed by artificial intelligence algorithms, and the results will be displayed on user-friendly dashboards. This goes beyond mere defect detection. Modern machine learning algorithms can predict the probability of a defect’s occurrence and explain its causes. For example, a system could warn a technologist that a specific combination of temperature and metal chemical composition increases the risk of crack formation. And if a defect does appear, AI can help identify patterns and suggest corrective actions. For engineers, this means faster, more accurate diagnostics; for the customer, it means a new level of trust, knowing they can see not only the inspection results but also how the company manages problems.
All of this aligns perfectly with the Industry 5.0 philosophy, which focuses on collaboration between humans and digital technologies. Here, artificial intelligence does not replace the engineer but assists them: it analyzes data, highlights vulnerabilities, predicts risks, and suggests solutions. For the engineer, it is a tool for greater efficiency; for the customer, a guarantee of transparency; and for the company, a way to reduce costs and enhance resilience.
Thus, we are witnessing a familiar pattern in industrial history: best practices from the defense sector are gradually taking root in the civilian world. New quality standards, digital tools, and a culture of transparency and accountability are becoming the norm, not the exception. For the philosophy of quality, this signifies a transition to a new level, where trust, predictability, and collaboration are the keywords.
At GussMaker, we see this as a key direction for our own research and development. We see our mission as contributing to the creation of next-generation quality systems that unite engineers and digital technologies to help predict defects, explain their causes, and manage quality in real time. It is here, at the intersection of defense standards and Industry 5.0, that the future of industry is being shaped, and it is here that we believe that the focus will shift in the coming years.