This week, we announced Epsilon3 2.0, our vision for the next evolution of the Epsilon3 platform, including the launch of Epsilon3 Connect, our solution for extending the digital thread of managing the lifecycle of complex hardware within Epsilon3 across the full supply chain. You can catch up on that news here - and don’t forget to register for our webinar on June 18th to learn more about these new capabilities rolling out to all customers soon.

Epsilon3 Connect is here. The same execution record your team trusts inside your walls now reaches every organization a program depends on, with the same controls, the same audit trail, and the same compliance posture, all within one platform.

Complex hardware typically runs on systems that were each built for a different job. PLM holds the drawings. ERP keeps the books. MES runs the line. Not one of them was built for the work itself, the procedure that gets followed, the test that runs, the part that gets swapped, the decision that gets logged. So that work ends up where it always has: in spreadsheets, PDFs, binders, and one senior engineer's head.

Welcome to the latest edition of the Epsilon3 Changelog, covering release versions v 1.209 - 1.211. Customer feedback fuels each new feature and improvement, so we’d love to hear what you think about these latest developments. Let’s keep driving mission success!

Five years ago, we set out to fix the part of hardware operations everyone else built around: the procedure itself. 100 changelogs, 350+ features, and 130+ organizations later, here's where we've been, where we are, and where Epsilon3 is going next.

New survey: manufacturing, aerospace, and defense professionals are confident in their teams — but increasingly critical of the systems underneath them.

ISO 9001 vs AS9100 is one of the most common comparisons in aerospace quality management — but most explanations stop at "AS9100 is the aerospace version." For ops teams, the real differences show up in how work gets executed: in procedures, traceability, configuration control, and the audit-ready records that prove it all happened. Here's the breakdown that matters on the floor.

Welcome to the latest edition of the Epsilon3 Changelog, covering release versions v 1.209 - 1.211. Customer feedback fuels each new feature and improvement, so we’d love to hear what you think about these latest developments. Let’s keep driving mission success!

Paper checklists have a strange kind of credibility. Aviation built a safety culture around them. Operating rooms adopted them. The form was filled out, the boxes were ticked, the signatures are there, and in a low-stakes environment that is enough. In a high-risk one, it is the start of the problem. Here is what the data on procedural noncompliance actually shows, and what paper cannot do that complex programs now require.

In regulated aerospace programs, the audit trail isn't a compliance formality. It's the foundation that everything else rests on. When a customer asks for traceability on a specific unit, when a regulator requests evidence of conformance, when an anomaly surfaces mid-program and root cause requires knowing exactly what was done, by whom, in what order, the audit trail is what you reach for. The problem is that most operations teams aren't building a digital audit trail. They're reconstructing one. And those are two very different things.

The companies that struggle through AS9100 audits aren't usually doing bad work. They're doing good work they can't prove. The audit doesn't just test your quality — it also tests your documentation of quality. Those are two different problems, and only one of them is solved by working harder in the weeks before the auditor walks in.

The commercial space industry has outpaced the software stacks built to support it. Launch cadence is accelerating, hardware complexity is growing, and engineering teams are being asked to move faster without absorbing more risk. That pressure exposes a hard truth: most manufacturing execution systems were never designed for this environment. The right question for a modern MES isn't "what happened?" — it's "was it done correctly, by the right person, with the right configuration, at the right time?"

How to Run a Mission Readiness Review (MRR): A Complete Guide

Digital Work Instructions Software for Mission-Critical Procedures