Compare

GroundControl vs Net-Inspect: author or portal?

Q: Should we use GroundControl or Net-Inspect for FAI?

Often the choice is made for you: if your prime requires FAIR submission through Net-Inspect, you will use Net-Inspect at least as the destination. The real question is where the FAIR gets authored. Net-Inspect can author it in the browser with integrated auto-ballooning; GroundControl authors it in a GovCloud-hosted workspace with AI ballooning, CMM import, and approval workflows, then exports to Net-Inspect. Teams with ITAR requirements or many suppliers tend to author in GroundControl; teams fully inside a prime's Net-Inspect ecosystem often stay there.

Q: Can multiple team members work on ballooning and data entry at the same time?

Both are cloud products with multi-user access. GroundControl markets reviewer roles and approval workflows across teams and suppliers; Net-Inspect is built as a shared portal where suppliers enter data and customers review it in real time. For simultaneous work on the same FAIR, both handle team access; check each vendor's current documentation for concurrent editing of a single drawing, since public docs do not spell out same-sheet co-editing.

Q: Does GroundControl export to Net-Inspect?

Yes. GroundControl publicly documents export to Net-Inspect and customer templates, which is exactly how shops satisfy a prime's submission requirement while authoring elsewhere. Mavlon exports Net-Inspect-compatible Form 3 data the same way.

Q: Do GroundControl or Net-Inspect interpret drawing tolerances automatically?

Both publicly market automated detection and form population: OCR and AI find dimensions and GD&T and fill AS9102 forms. Applying general note tolerances by dimension size, expanding fit classes to limits, and mapping flag notes to features remains the engineer's work in both. That interpretation step is what Mavlon automates upstream of either.

One is where you build the FAIR. The other is often where your customer insists it arrives. They overlap less than the question implies.

By Atishay Jain, founder of Mavlon · Updated July 2026

Full disclosure: we build Mavlon, which competes with the tools reviewed here. Every claim comes from public documentation as of mid 2026. Spot an error? atishay@mavlon.co

The short answer: if your prime requires FAIR submission through Net-Inspect, you will use Net-Inspect; that part is not a choice. The real decision is where the FAIR gets authored. Net-Inspect can author it in the browser with integrated auto-ballooning, keeping everything in one portal. GroundControl authors it in an ITAR-registered GovCloud workspace with AI ballooning, CMM import, and approval workflows, then exports to Net-Inspect. Both are multi-user cloud tools, so a team can share the work in either. Neither interprets the drawing for you; for that, see the wider field.

Mavlon competes in this market and also exports Net-Inspect-compatible Form 3 data, so we have a stake. Claims below reflect public documentation as of mid 2026.

Side by side

The comparison

Criterion	GroundControl	Net-Inspect	Mavlon
Role in the workflow	FAIR authoring workspace	System of record, often prime-mandated	The reading and Form 3 authoring
Deployment	Cloud, AWS GovCloud	Cloud, browser	Cloud, any browser
Ballooning	AI auto-balloon	Integrated auto-balloon with OCR	Full-drawing read in 2 to 3 min, around 90 percent, rest flagged
Tolerance interpretation	Detection-first	Detection-first	General notes applied by size, fit classes expanded, flag notes mapped
AS9102 forms	Forms 1 to 3, exports to Net-Inspect	Forms 1 to 3 in-portal, e-sign, customer buy-off	Form 3 pre-filled; AS9102, Net-Inspect, PPAP dimensional export
Team collaboration	Reviewer roles, supplier approval workflows	Shared supplier-customer portal, real-time review	Multi-user review of the interpreted drawing
CMM import	Any CMM via CSV and Excel	Supplier CMM data flows in	Results map back onto the Form 3
Compliance posture	ITAR-registered, NIST 800-171, GovCloud	Established aerospace supply-chain platform	Standard secure cloud

Vendor columns reflect public documentation as of mid 2026. Corrections: atishay@mavlon.co.

The decision factors

How to actually choose

Who mandates what. Start from your customer list. If the primes you supply require Net-Inspect, it is in your stack regardless. The question narrows to whether Net-Inspect is also where your team should do the ballooning and data entry, or only where the finished FAIR lands.

Multiple people on the same FAIR. The reason this comparison gets asked is usually team workflow: several people ballooning and entering data. Both platforms are cloud multi-user. GroundControl structures it as roles and approvals; Net-Inspect structures it as a shared portal where the supplier enters and the customer reviews live. If simultaneous same-drawing editing matters to you, make both vendors demo exactly that, because public documentation stays vague on it.

ITAR posture. GroundControl's GovCloud residency and ITAR registration is the stronger formal answer for defense programs authoring sensitive drawings in the cloud.

One system or two. Staying entirely inside Net-Inspect means no export step and one login. Authoring in GroundControl buys a stronger workspace at the cost of maintaining two systems. Shops with heavy FAI volume tend to accept the second system; shops doing occasional FAIRs for one prime tend not to.

What neither column changes

The slow part happens before either tool

Wherever the FAIR is authored, someone first reads the drawing: applies the general note tolerance to every untoleranced dimension, expands the fit classes, chases the flag notes across sheets, checks every datum reference. Both platforms receive that work; neither does it. On a dense multi-sheet drawing it is the majority of the FAI hours.

That reading step is what Mavlon does. Upload the PDF and get back a Form 3 with the interpretation already done and the uncertain 10 percent flagged. Then send it wherever your process lives: Mavlon exports Net-Inspect-compatible data and standard AS9102 formats, so it slots in front of either tool on this page. First drawing free.

Author the Form 3 in three minutes first.

Upload a drawing, get the interpreted Form 3, then decide which portal deserves it.

Try with One Drawing

First drawing is free. No signup. No salesperson.

Frequently asked questions

Should we use GroundControl or Net-Inspect for FAI?

If your prime requires submission through Net-Inspect, that part is decided. The real question is where the FAIR is authored: in Net-Inspect's portal with its integrated ballooning, or in GroundControl's GovCloud workspace with export to Net-Inspect at the end. ITAR-heavy, multi-supplier operations lean GroundControl; teams living inside one prime's ecosystem often stay in Net-Inspect.

Can multiple team members work on ballooning and data entry at the same time?

Both are cloud multi-user platforms. GroundControl markets reviewer roles and approval workflows; Net-Inspect is a shared supplier-customer portal with real-time review. For simultaneous editing of the same drawing, ask each vendor to demo it live, since public documentation does not spell out same-sheet co-editing.

Does GroundControl export to Net-Inspect?

Yes, GroundControl publicly documents Net-Inspect and customer template export. Mavlon exports Net-Inspect-compatible Form 3 data the same way.

Do GroundControl or Net-Inspect interpret drawing tolerances automatically?

Both market automated detection and form population. Applying general note tolerances by size, expanding fit classes, and mapping flag notes stays with the engineer in both. That interpretation is what Mavlon automates upstream of either.