ISO/IEC 29147:2018vsAS9100D:2016 - Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence
See exactly how ISO/IEC 29147:2018 controls map to AS9100D:2016 - Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
ISO/IEC 29147:2018 maps to AS9100D:2016 - Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence with 2% coverage across 2 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 40 ISO/IEC 29147:2018 controls identifies 46 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Clause 6: Receiving Vulnerability Reports.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 40 controls analysed | 706 frameworks | 324K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 2 of 2 mapped controls across 2 domains. Sign up to explore all 324K+ mappings across 706 frameworks.
Legal(1 mappings)
Clause 5: Vulnerability Disclosure Concepts(1 mappings)
Related Comparisons
Other ISO/IEC 29147:2018 comparisons
Other AS9100D:2016 - Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 706 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 706 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (324K+)
- ✓ 824 compliance assessments
- ✓ 3 AI queries & searches per day
Professional
- ✓ Unlimited AI Compliance Advisory
- ✓ Unlimited full-text search
- ✓ Framework self-assessment
- ✓ PDF, Excel & CSV exports
What are the key differences between ISO/IEC 29147:2018 and AS9100D:2016 - Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence?
ISO/IEC 29147:2018 has 40 controls across its framework, while AS9100D:2016 - Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence covers 62 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 2 overlapping controls (2% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Clause 6: Receiving Vulnerability Reports, where 7 ISO/IEC 29147:2018 controls have no direct AS9100D:2016 - Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence equivalent.
How many controls map between ISO/IEC 29147:2018 and AS9100D:2016 - Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence?
Of 40 total ISO/IEC 29147:2018 controls, 2 map directly to AS9100D:2016 - Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence controls — representing 2% coverage. The remaining 46 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping ISO/IEC 29147:2018 to AS9100D:2016 - Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence?
46 ISO/IEC 29147:2018 controls have no direct equivalent in AS9100D:2016 - Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence. The highest concentration of gaps is in Clause 6: Receiving Vulnerability Reports with 7 unmapped controls. These gaps represent areas where additional controls, policies, or documentation must be created to achieve compliance with both frameworks.
Which control domains have the most gaps between ISO/IEC 29147:2018 and AS9100D:2016 - Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence?
The domain with the highest gap count is Clause 6: Receiving Vulnerability Reports (7 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.
Related Resources
This platform provides educational compliance tools, not legal, regulatory, or professional compliance advice. Cross-framework mappings are AI-assisted interpretations and do not reproduce or replace official standards. Framework names and trademarks belong to their respective owners. Consult qualified professionals for your specific compliance requirements. See our Terms of Service.