10/13/2026
One of the easiest ways to lose four weeks on a program: send the enclosure to one shop and the harness to another.
It's a common sourcing pattern. Sheet metal comes from Vendor A, the harness from Vendor B, and final integration happens at the OEM or a third shop.
On paper, it looks flexible. In practice, it creates four failure points:
• Fit issues don't surface until integration
• Each vendor points to the other's tolerance stack
• Expedites multiply because no one owns the full assembly
• Quality records live in two systems when the customer wants one packet
For aerospace and defense box builds, the schedule risk usually outweighs the piece-price savings.
That's why we keep metal fabrication, cable harnesses, and electro-mechanical assembly under one roof. We control the build from start to finish, so fit issues get caught early, one team owns the schedule, and our customers get a single, complete quality packet.
It also means added security. Fewer handoffs mean fewer companies handling your drawings, data, and hardware.
To be fair, one roof won't fix a bad design. But it does remove the handoff most programs underestimate.
For those managing electro-mechanical assemblies: do you still split fab and harness, or have you moved to a single source?