Lessons Learned register for the CWP-700 Composite Wing Panel Production Program — 10 entries (8 improvement, 2 positive), each traced back to a specific risk, issue, or MRB case rather than written generically after the fact.
| ID | Type | Lesson | Traces To | Recommended Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LL-01 | Improvement | Single-source composite prepreg created schedule risk with no fallback if the material lead time slipped. | Traces to R-01 | Qualify a second material source before FAI, not after, on future composite production programs. |
| LL-02 | Improvement | NDT capacity was sized for FAI-level throughput, not full production rate, creating a queue backlog at ramp. | Traces to R-02 / I-02 | Size NDT staffing to the Phase 2 production rate from day one of the resource plan, not the Phase 1 rate. |
| LL-03 | Improvement | Tooling qualification schedule had no buffer; the FAI nonconformance consumed the entire 3-week contingency. | Traces to R-03 / I-01 | Build an explicit tooling-qualification buffer into the Phase 1 schedule on future programs, sized to at least one rework cycle. |
| LL-04 | Improvement | The layup fixture had no preventive-maintenance schedule, contributing to the ply-misalignment scrap (MRB-004). | Traces to MRB-004 | Establish a preventive-maintenance schedule for production tooling/fixtures before Phase 2 ramp, not after a scrap event. |
| LL-05 | Improvement | Raw material lot traceability gaps surfaced late, at incoming inspection, rather than at supplier qualification. | Traces to DEP-02 | Verify supplier material-certification traceability format during PPAP qualification, before the first production lot ships. |
| LL-06 | Positive | Dual NDT technician qualification, once triggered, resolved the inspection queue backlog within two weeks with no further schedule impact. | Traces to D-01 | Keep in-house NDT qualification (vs. outsourcing) as the default mitigation for inspection capacity risk — traceability stayed fully in-house. |
| LL-07 | Positive | The FAI rework-and-reinspect path (MRB-001) kept the program on schedule instead of a full FAI failure and restart. | Traces to I-01 | Build the MRB disposition path into the FAI schedule contingency by design, not as an exception path. |
| LL-08 | Improvement | Customer source-inspection scheduling for the FAI gate review was arranged reactively, close to the actual FAI date. | Traces to R-04 / DEP-01 | Request the customer source-inspection date at the same time the FAI schedule is baselined, not once FAI is imminent. |
| LL-09 | Improvement | Mandatory customer notification timing for major/structural nonconformances was not written down until mid-program. | Traces to Comms Plan | Document contractual nonconformance-notification timing (e.g., 24-hour window) in the Communications Plan from day one, not after the first case. |
| LL-10 | Positive | Undrawn program management reserve ($150,000) reflects that risk mitigations (dual NDT source, tooling buffer) were sized appropriately, not that risks didn't materialize — both R-02 and R-03 did. | Traces to Closeout Report | Reserve sizing methodology (fund the mitigation, not just the reserve) is worth carrying forward to the next production program. |
This register feeds directly into the Closeout Report and is the input Acme's next composite production program would start from — most directly LL-01, LL-02, and LL-03, which all point to the same underlying pattern: Phase 1 planning sized for FAI, not for the Phase 2 production rate.