AS9100 and ISO/IEC 17025 address different aspects of quality and measurement, and understanding their scope is essential for calibration professionals who encounter both. AS9100 is a quality management system standard for the aviation, space, and defense industries. It builds on ISO 9001 and adds sector-specific requirements for configuration management, risk management, product safety, counterfeit part prevention, and — relevant to calibration — monitoring and measuring resource control under Clause 7.1.5. AS9100 applies to organizations that design, manufacture, or service aerospace products. It is not a calibration-specific standard. ISO/IEC 17025 is a competence standard for testing and calibration laboratories. It defines the management system and technical requirements that a laboratory must meet to demonstrate it operates competently and generates valid results. ISO 17025 is the standard against which calibration laboratories seek accreditation from bodies like A2LA, NVLAP, and UKAS. It is entirely focused on laboratory competence. The fundamental difference: AS9100 asks whether your quality system controls measuring equipment properly. ISO 17025 asks whether your laboratory is technically competent to perform calibration and testing. An aerospace manufacturer needs AS9100 certification. Their calibration lab — whether internal or external — should meet ISO 17025 requirements, and ideally hold accreditation.
The calibration requirements in AS9100 Clause 7.1.5 and ISO 17025 Clause 6 differ significantly in depth and specificity. AS9100 requires that monitoring and measuring resources are suitable for their intended purpose, calibrated or verified at specified intervals against traceable standards, identified to determine their status, and safeguarded from adjustments or damage that would invalidate results. These requirements are concise and outcome-focused — they tell you what to achieve but not how to achieve it. ISO 17025 goes much deeper. It requires documented calibration procedures with specific methods, measurement uncertainty evaluation for every calibration result, environmental condition monitoring and recording, equipment qualification and validation, method validation or verification, interlaboratory comparisons and proficiency testing, and detailed competence requirements for calibration technicians. ISO 17025 also requires documented decision rules for stating conformity (pass/fail) when measurement uncertainty is taken into account. This is a technically demanding requirement that AS9100 does not explicitly address. In practice, an aerospace manufacturer can satisfy AS9100 calibration requirements with relatively straightforward procedures and records. A calibration laboratory seeking ISO 17025 accreditation must demonstrate a significantly higher level of technical rigor in every aspect of its calibration operations.
Despite their different scopes, AS9100 and ISO 17025 share several foundational requirements that calibration management software can address simultaneously. Both standards require metrological traceability — an unbroken chain of calibrations linking your working instruments to national or international standards. Both require documented calibration records that include the instrument identity, calibration date, reference standards used, results obtained, and the identity of the person performing the calibration. Both require that out-of-tolerance conditions trigger an evaluation of the impact on previous measurements. Both require controlled calibration intervals with a systematic approach to determining and adjusting those intervals. And both require that calibration records be retained and accessible for a defined period. These overlapping requirements mean that a well-implemented calibration management system satisfies the core requirements of both standards simultaneously. The additional effort for ISO 17025 compliance is concentrated in areas like uncertainty budgets, method validation, and proficiency testing — not in the fundamental tracking and documentation functions. Organizations that hold both AS9100 certification and ISO 17025 accreditation — common for aerospace companies with internal calibration labs — benefit significantly from a single calibration management platform that addresses both sets of requirements without maintaining parallel systems.
The answer depends on what your organization does and what your customers require. If you manufacture, assemble, or service aerospace products, you need AS9100 certification. Your calibration program must satisfy Clause 7.1.5, which requires controlled, traceable calibration of measuring equipment. Whether you calibrate in-house or outsource to an accredited lab, your quality system must document the process. If you operate a calibration laboratory that provides calibration services — either internally for your organization or externally for customers — ISO 17025 accreditation is the gold standard. Accreditation provides independent verification that your laboratory is technically competent, and it is increasingly required by customers, prime contractors, and regulatory bodies. Many organizations need both. An aerospace manufacturer with an in-house calibration lab needs AS9100 for the manufacturing operation and should pursue ISO 17025 accreditation for the laboratory. This dual compliance is common and manageable with the right systems in place. CalibrationOS supports both standards from a single platform. Equipment tracking, calibration records, and traceability chains satisfy AS9100 Clause 7.1.5. Uncertainty budgets, measurement data management, and certificate generation support ISO 17025 technical requirements. The result is one system, one data set, and two compliance standards addressed.
Yes. The core calibration tracking requirements overlap significantly. A well-designed calibration management platform like CalibrationOS addresses both standards from a single system, avoiding the need for parallel documentation.
Using an ISO 17025 accredited laboratory satisfies the traceability and competence requirements of AS9100 Clause 7.1.5.3. However, the aerospace manufacturer must still maintain their own records of which equipment was calibrated, when, and by whom.
ISO 17025 accreditation is not legally mandatory in most jurisdictions, but it is increasingly required by customers, prime contractors, and regulatory bodies. DCMA, for example, expects calibration sources to be accredited or to demonstrate equivalent competence.
Measurement uncertainty. AS9100 mentions uncertainty implicitly through traceability requirements, but ISO 17025 requires laboratories to evaluate, document, and report measurement uncertainty for every calibration result.
Start managing calibrations in minutes. Free plan with 25 assets — no credit card.
Get Started Free