Live Case Study

Balloon Drawings & AS9102 FAI Reporting

Product: FAI Engineer
Customer: Bengaluru Aerospace & Defence MSMEs
Customer problem: To be validated with customers.

Explore FAI Product(opens in a new tab)AQIP Context →

Customer problem: to be validated

Current Hypotheses

What we suspect may be hard for the customer. None of these is known until customers confirm it.

Manual ballooning effortHypothesis — Customer Validation Required
Characteristic reconciliationHypothesis — Customer Validation Required
Report preparation effortHypothesis — Customer Validation Required
Revision reworkHypothesis — Customer Validation Required
Review burdenHypothesis — Customer Validation Required

The product

What FAI Engineer Does Today

A browser-based toolkit for engineering drawing ballooning, characteristic tables and First Article Inspection report preparation.

PDF Drawing Viewer
Prototype Foundation
Opens multi-page engineering drawing PDFs in the browser; zoom and pan.
Manual Ballooning
Prototype Foundation
Place, move and renumber balloon callouts with leader lines.
Feature Table
Prototype Foundation
Characteristic table: number, nominal, tolerances, type, comments — editable in place and linked to balloons.
AS9102 Form 3-oriented Export
Prototype Foundation
Exports the characteristic table to Excel or CSV. The product FAQ says the template follows the AS9102 Rev B characteristic accountability format.
Google Drive Save / Load
Prototype Foundation
Saves the project (drawing, balloons, table) to the user's own Google Drive; local export is also available.
OCR-assisted Extraction
Beta
Dimension and tolerance extraction from drawing text, available in Beta.
Form 1 & Form 2
Planned
Listed on the pricing table as coming soon.
Team accounts & admin portal
Planned
Listed on the pricing table as coming soon.

SAE AS9102C (revised 28 June 2023) establishes requirements for performing and documenting First Article Inspection, and is complementary to customer, statutory and regulatory requirements. Software can support the workflow; it cannot make an organisation compliant.

Source: FAI Engineer product page (opens in a new tab), accessed 26 October 2026.

For later steps

Reference

Open each one when your step reaches it.

Bengaluru Aerospace & Defence marketStep 01

Public information only. Categories are hypotheses about FAI relevance, not facts.

What the official source says

Research

of the supplier base for India's Aerospace & Defence is in Karnataka: 70%
SMEs with the capability to carry out niche sub-contracting work: 2,000+
of India's aerospace-related exports originate from Karnataka: 65%
of India's aircraft and spacecraft industry is based in Karnataka: 25%

Source: Invest Karnataka — Aerospace & Defence (opens in a new tab), accessed 26 October 2026.

These are state-level ecosystem facts as published by the Government of Karnataka's investment portal. They are not a market size for FAI software, and they do not mean every supplier prepares FAIs or has the same pain.

Ecosystem anchors

Bengaluru aerospace cluster
Home to HAL, ISRO, NAL and DRDO laboratories, and to large Airbus and Boeing research and technology centres. The official portal ranks Bengaluru among the top three global aerospace cities for attracting foreign investment.
Devanahalli Hi-tech Aerospace & Defence Park
A dedicated park of about 2,000 acres near Bengaluru, with capabilities across forging, precision machining, surface treatment and aero assemblies.
Peenya and other Bengaluru industrial areas
Large general manufacturing estates where some precision suppliers work. Many companies there do no aerospace work at all.
Verify aerospace relevance account by account.
Karnataka A&D hubs
The state is also developing A&D hubs in Belagavi, Mysuru, Tumakuru and Chamarajanagara, and an A&D SEZ at Belagavi. Bengaluru comes first in this framework.
Outside the initial Bengaluru focus.

Ecosystem categories and likely FAI relevance

OEMs / Primes / DPSUs
Lower (hypothesis)
Usually receive and review FAI packages from suppliers rather than prepare them for others.
Verify: Do they set FAI requirements that flow down to suppliers? They are customers of the ICP, not the ICP.
Tier-1 / Tier-2 suppliers
Higher (hypothesis)
Make or assemble parts to customer drawings and may both prepare and receive FAIs.
Verify: How many new or revised part introductions per year?
Precision machining MSMEs
Higher (hypothesis)
Drawing-driven parts with many characteristics; FAIs may be prepared by a small quality team.
Verify: Do aerospace customers require AS9102-style FAIs from them?
Sheet metal & fabrication
Medium (hypothesis)
Drawing-driven, but characteristic counts and FAI depth vary.
Verify: Which customers ask for first-article documentation?
Special processes
Medium (hypothesis)
Heat treatment, surface treatment and NDT providers supply process evidence more often than dimensional FAIs.
Verify: Do they prepare FAIs, or contribute certificates to someone else's?
Inspection / metrology services
Higher (hypothesis)
May prepare inspection reports and Form 3 tables for several clients.
Verify: Could they be a partner or channel rather than a customer?
Aerospace assemblies
Medium (hypothesis)
Assembly FAIs include sub-tier evidence; drawing extraction may be one part of a bigger task.
Verify: How do they collect FAIs from their sub-tier suppliers?
Tooling, jigs & fixtures
Lower (hypothesis)
Drawing-driven but often outside formal FAI requirements.
Verify: Do any customers require first-article reports for tooling?
Defence suppliers
Medium (hypothesis)
May have strict data-handling rules; cloud tools may be restricted.
Verify: What can and cannot leave their environment?
Engineering services
Lower (hypothesis)
Create drawings rather than inspect parts; possible influencers or partners.
Verify: Do they support suppliers with FAI documentation?
Quality & certification support
Medium (hypothesis)
Consultants who help suppliers with AS9100 / AS9102 could be channels or referrers.
Verify: Would they recommend tools to their clients? On what terms?

Pain hypotheses: track your evidenceStep 02

Every one is a hypothesis until customers validate it — move it with your own evidence, or invalidate it.

Evidence over assumption

Evidence ladder

AssumptionBelieved but not validated.24
ResearchSupported by secondary research.0
Customer ValidatedConfirmed through customer conversation.0
Pilot ValidatedMeasured in an agreed evaluation or pilot.0
Commercial ProofSupported by a purchase, paid pilot, renewal or contracted outcome.0

Hypotheses

Drawing / Requirement Extraction

Manual identification of dimensions, tolerances, GD&T and notes
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence
Manual ballooning
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence
Missed characteristics
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence
Duplicate / inconsistent balloon numbers
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence
Manual characteristic tables
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence
Repetitive re-entry
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence

Hypotheses

Characteristic Accountability

Drawing, inspection sheet and report drifting apart
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence
Results linked to the wrong balloon
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence
Difficulty tracing requirement → result
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence

Hypotheses

FAI / FAIR Preparation

Gathering information from multiple sources
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence
Manual Form 3 preparation
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence
Line-by-line review
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence
Incomplete packages
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence
Package rejection / return
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence
Delayed first delivery
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence

Hypotheses

Revision / Configuration

Comparing drawing revisions manually
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence
Uncertainty about partial vs full rework
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence
Risk of using the wrong revision
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence

Hypotheses

Measurement Evidence

Re-keying measurement values
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence
Transcription risk
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence
Fragmented CMM / gauge evidence
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence

Hypotheses

Audit / Customer Evidence

Evidence scattered across PDF / Excel / email / shared drives
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence
Time spent reconstructing evidence
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence
Customer approval delays
Assumption
Evidence level
Customer conversations
Invalidated by evidence

Ideal Customer Profile (ICP) & buyersStep 01

Who may buy, and every role that can say yes or no.

Bengaluru Aerospace & Defence manufacturing MSMEs that handle drawing-driven inspection / first-article documentation and may still use labour-intensive PDF, spreadsheet or mixed workflows.

Assumption

Tier A — High Fit
Research deeply, multi-thread, pursue discovery.
- Recurring aerospace manufacturing
- Drawing-driven inspection
- Frequent new / revised part introductions
- Visible quality team
- Recurring FAI / first-article requirements
- Customer-driven quality documentation
- Potential need for traceable characteristic management
Tier B — Medium Fit
Research further before outreach.
- Some relevant signals, but not enough evidence yet
Tier C — Research / Nurture
Nurture with content; do not chase.
- Weak or unclear fit

User
Champion
Technical Evaluator
Decision Maker
Economic Buyer
Procurement / IT / Security

What each buyer cares about and fears

User
Often: Quality engineer / FAI coordinator / inspector
Cares about: Less repetitive entry, fewer reconciliation errors, finishing packages on time.
Fears: A new tool that adds work, or errors blamed on them.
Champion
Often: Senior quality engineer or quality lead
Cares about: Fixing a problem they own; recognition for improving the process.
Fears: Backing a tool that fails in front of management or a customer.
Technical Evaluator
Often: Quality head / QA manager
Cares about: Accuracy, fit with customer requirements, how records are reviewed.
Fears: Non-conforming documentation reaching a customer.
Decision Maker
Often: Quality head, operations head or MD in an MSME
Cares about: Delivery, customer satisfaction, team capacity.
Fears: Disruption during a busy delivery period.
Economic Buyer
Often: Owner / MD / finance
Cares about: Payback, cash, customer retention.
Fears: Paying for software nobody uses.
Procurement / IT / Security
Often: Purchase team, IT admin, customer security flow-down
Cares about: Vendor onboarding, data handling, contract terms.
Fears: Engineering data leaving controlled environments.

Evidence & approved claimsStep 04

Research is not customer validation, and customer validation is not commercial proof. Never let an unsupported claim look validated.

AssumptionBelieved but not validated.
ResearchSupported by secondary research.
Customer ValidatedConfirmed through customer conversation.
Pilot ValidatedMeasured in an agreed evaluation or pilot.
Commercial ProofSupported by a purchase, paid pilot, renewal or contracted outcome.

Approved claims registry

A browser-based toolkit for drawing ballooning, characteristic tables and FAI report preparation.
Verified
Published product description.
Drawing PDFs are rendered in your browser and are not uploaded to EV.ENGINEER servers.
Verified
Published security section and FAQ.
Projects can be saved to your own Google Drive, or exported locally.
Verified
Published features and FAQ.
Exports the characteristic table in an AS9102 Form 3-oriented Excel / CSV format.
Verified
Published features. The FAQ names the Rev B format.
Designed to support workflows used in preparing and documenting First Article Inspection.
Verified
Accurate description of the current scope.

The Form 3 export follows AS9102 Rev C.
Hypothesis
The product FAQ states Rev B. Rev C alignment needs product team confirmation.
Say instead: Say the export is Form 3-oriented and that the team should review exported forms against their customer's requirements.
Reduces manual ballooning effort by up to 80%.
Hypothesis
Stated on the product page; no measurement basis is published. Not to be repeated by interns until a pilot measures it.
Say instead: Offer to measure preparation time before and after on the customer's own drawings.
Manual ballooning is time-consuming for Bengaluru aerospace MSMEs.
Hypothesis
Assumption until customer conversations validate it.

Guarantees AS9102 compliance.
Restricted — Do Not Claim
No software can guarantee compliance; AS9102 complements customer and regulatory requirements.
Say instead: Designed to support workflows used in preparing and documenting First Article Inspection.
Gets your organisation certified / approved.
Restricted — Do Not Claim
Certification is granted by certification bodies and customers, not software.
Say instead: Helps keep characteristic records organised for review.
AI automatically creates complete FAI reports.
Restricted — Do Not Claim
Ballooning is manual today; OCR is Beta and needs human review; Form 1 and 2 are coming soon.
Say instead: Manual ballooning with Beta OCR assistance; every value is reviewed by a person.
Guaranteed time or cost savings.
Restricted — Do Not Claim
Savings depend on the customer's workflow and must be measured.
Say instead: We can estimate a range from your inputs and measure it in a pilot.
Recognises GD&T symbols.
Restricted — Do Not Claim
Listed on the product roadmap as not available today.
Say instead: GD&T recognition is on the roadmap; today characteristics are entered and reviewed by your team.

Check a message for restricted claims

Check a draft message before you send it

Checked here, in your browser. Not saved or sent anywhere.

What not to do

Do not start with "Do you want to buy our software?"
Do not assume the customer has a manual problem.
Do not insult Excel, PDF tools or existing processes.
Do not claim "AI solves everything."
Do not say the software guarantees AS9102 compliance.
Do not promise certification.
Do not promise savings before measurement.
Do not promise features not approved by the product team.
Do not ask basic questions already answered publicly on the customer's website.
Do not send confidential information between customers.
Do not upload customer drawings without explicit authorisation.
Do not pressure a prospect to disclose controlled information.
Do not ask for defence-sensitive data unnecessary for discovery.
Do not quote price without understanding scope and approved commercial policy.
Do not use a pilot without success criteria.
Do not keep chasing an account with no pain / urgency / fit.
Do not confuse activity with pipeline quality.
Do not use unapproved compliance language.

Value proposition V1Step 03

Problem → solution → outcome → business value. Each part carries its evidence.

For: Quality engineers at Bengaluru aerospace machining MSMEs who prepare first-article packages Research
Who: may spend skilled hours ballooning drawings and reconciling balloon numbers with the Form 3 table Assumption
FAI Engineer: keeps the ballooned drawing and the characteristic table together in one browser workspace and exports a Form 3-oriented table Research
So that: re-entry and reconciliation effort could fall — to be measured in a pilot, never promised Assumption

AlternativesStep 03

The biggest competitor is usually the status quo. Describe each so a happy user of it would agree.

Manual process
Strength: No cost, fully understood, flexible.
Limit: Depends on individual experience; effort grows with volume.
Excel templates
Strength: Familiar, customisable, already approved by customers.
Limit: Balloon numbers and rows are reconciled by hand.
PDF annotation tools
Strength: Already installed; good for markup.
Limit: Balloons and the characteristic list live in separate files.
Internal macros
Strength: Built for the team's exact process.
Limit: Maintained by one person; fragile when they leave.
Specialist ballooning / FAI software
Strength: Mature, feature-rich, established in aerospace.
Limit: Cost and implementation effort may not suit every MSME — verify per account.
QMS modules
Strength: Integrated with the wider quality system.
Limit: May not cover drawing ballooning in depth — verify per account.
Do nothing
Strength: Zero risk of change, zero cost today.
Limit: Any existing pain continues; the customer decides if that is acceptable.

Approved demo — 15 minutesStep 07

Current product only, on a fictitious drawing. Diagnose before demonstrating.

Recap the customer's validated problem in their own words.
Open a fictitious drawing PDF in the browser.
Place and renumber balloons; show leader lines.
Edit the linked characteristic table.
Export the Form 3-oriented table to Excel or CSV.
Save the project to the user's own Google Drive, or export locally.
Only if relevant and labelled Beta: OCR-assisted extraction, with every value reviewed by a person.
Agree what an evaluation should measure.

ROI calculatorStep 07

Value from the customer's own numbers, as a range, measured later in a pilot.

Estimates depend on customer-provided inputs and measured workflow performance. They are not guaranteed savings. Estimate based on supplied assumptions. Not guaranteed.

Example values — replace them

Customer-provided inputs

FAIs per month

Drawings per FAI

Preparation hours per drawing

Ballooning, characteristic table and Form 3.

Review hours per FAI

Rework hours per FAI

Loaded engineering cost per hour

Product annual cost

Example only — not a price. Use approved commercial pricing.

Optional pilot cost

Placeholder assumptions — replace with measured pilot values

Scenarios

Conservative

Preparation time saved

Rework avoided

Expected

Preparation time saved

Rework avoided

Optimistic

Preparation time saved

Rework avoided

Review time is never reduced here: a qualified person still reviews every record.

Ranges, not promises

Estimate

Current annual labour estimate: ₹4 lakh; 612 hours across 72 FAIs a year
Possible annual value: ₹28,080 – ₹1.1 lakh; Expected: ₹60,840

ROI by scenario
Scenario	Hours saved / year	Annual value	Net, first year	Payback	ROI
Conservative	43	₹28,080	−₹21,920	21.4 months	-44%
Expected	94	₹60,840	₹10,840	9.9 months	22%
Optimistic	166	₹1,07,640	₹57,640	5.6 months	115%

Before vs after (expected scenario)

Current hours / year612
Estimated hours / year518

Sensitivity — expected scenario

Half the FAI volume: ₹30,420 a year
As entered: ₹60,840 a year
1.5× the FAI volume: ₹91,260 a year

Loading the calculator…

ObjectionsStep 09

Objections are information. Some are right — agree and record them.

No need
The pain may not exist for them — which is useful evidence.
Thank them, ask what works well today, and record it. Do not argue.
No priority
Pain exists but is not urgent.
Ask what is a priority, and when this might become one. Nurture, do not chase.
Already have a tool
An alternative is in place.
Ask what they like about it and where it falls short. Respect it.
Security concern
Security Review Needed
Engineering data protection matters.
Use only approved answers from the Trust Checklist; route the rest.
Accuracy concern
Technical Review Needed
Fear of errors reaching a customer.
Explain that every value is reviewed by a person; offer to measure on a fictitious or authorised sample.
Price
Commercial Review Needed
Value not yet clear, or budget not available.
Return to value with their numbers; never discount without a trade.
Procurement
Commercial Review Needed
Vendor onboarding takes time.
Ask for the process and documents early; respect it.
Management approval
The decision maker is not in the room.
Ask what management will need to see; help the champion build it.
Internal build
They prefer their own macro or tool.
Ask about maintenance and ownership; respect the choice.
Timing
Busy period, audits or deliveries.
Agree a specific date to reconnect, and keep it.

Pilot measuresStep 08

A pilot that cannot fail cannot prove anything. Agree success criteria and a baseline first.

What a pilot could measure

Preparation time per drawingExtraction review effort (Beta OCR)Correction countCompletenessReport preparation effortUser acceptance

Open the pilot charter →

Product feedbackStep 06

One mention: record. A pattern: investigate. An evidence-backed pattern: product review. Never promise features.

1 request → RecordRepeated pattern → InvestigateEvidence-backed pattern → Product review

Do not let sales promise features. Describe what you heard without customer names or confidential details.

New

Balloon Drawings & AS9102 FAI Reporting

Current Hypotheses

What FAI Engineer Does Today

PDF Drawing Viewer

Manual Ballooning

Feature Table

AS9102 Form 3-oriented Export

Google Drive Save / Load

OCR-assisted Extraction

Form 1 & Form 2

Team accounts & admin portal

Reference

Bengaluru aerospace cluster

Devanahalli Hi-tech Aerospace & Defence Park

Peenya and other Bengaluru industrial areas

Karnataka A&D hubs

OEMs / Primes / DPSUs

Tier-1 / Tier-2 suppliers

Precision machining MSMEs

Sheet metal & fabrication

Special processes

Inspection / metrology services

Aerospace assemblies

Tooling, jigs & fixtures

Defence suppliers

Engineering services

Quality & certification support

Tier A — High Fit

Tier B — Medium Fit

Tier C — Research / Nurture

User

Champion

Technical Evaluator

Decision Maker

Economic Buyer

Procurement / IT / Security

Approved claims registry

Manual process

Excel templates

PDF annotation tools

Internal macros

Specialist ballooning / FAI software

QMS modules

Do nothing

Before vs after (expected scenario)

Sensitivity — expected scenario

No need

No priority

Already have a tool

Security concern

Accuracy concern

Price

Procurement

Management approval

Internal build

Timing

Deployment model

Local / offline capability

Cloud use

Data residency

Access control

Customer data ownership

Drawing retention

Model-training policy

Audit logs

Encryption

Export / download controls

User roles

Support access

Incident handling

NDA requirements

Customer-specific IT / security review

Before vs after (expected scenario)

Sensitivity — expected scenario