Our machines are old and have no network interface. Is this still possible?

Often, yes, and it's the common case rather than the exception. Options range from retrofit sensors for the specific signals that matter, to a tablet at the station where an operator records output and downtime reasons. The tablet option is unglamorous and frequently delivers most of the value for a fraction of the cost.

Do we need a full MES?

Usually not as a first step. Most mid-market plants get the majority of the benefit from production visibility, structured downtime capture and quality digitisation — which is a fraction of an MES implementation's cost and disruption. If you later need full MES functionality, that foundation makes the case for it with real data.

What happens if your system goes down mid-shift?

Production continues exactly as before, because nothing we build sits in the production path. Data collection buffers locally and syncs when connectivity returns. Any architecture where a business system can halt a line is one we'd refuse to build.

How do you handle plant network security?

Segmentation between control and business networks, a defined gateway for data crossing it, no business credentials that reach the control layer, and hardened remote access for anyone who needs it. Our security practice reviews this as part of the engagement, since it's the highest-consequence risk on a plant network.

Manufacturing IT Solutions — MES, IoT & Plant Floor Integration

Production visibility, machine data collection, ERP integration and analytics — architected so nothing we build can reach into the control network.

Start a project Contact sales

Manufacturing has two networks with fundamentally different risk profiles. Operational technology — PLCs, SCADA, the machines themselves — controls physical equipment where a fault is a safety incident, not an error page. Information technology is everything above it, where a bad deploy is an inconvenience.

The mistake that causes real harm is treating them as one estate. Business software reaching directly into the control layer is how a routine update stops a line, and occasionally how a safety system gets bypassed. So the boundary is architectural, not a matter of convention.

The practical picture on most plant floors is mixed-age equipment: some machines with modern interfaces, many with none, and production data still recorded on paper and keyed in later. Meeting that reality matters more than an idealised Industry 4.0 diagram.

Five recurring problems.

No real-time production visibility

Output known at end of shift from a handwritten sheet. Getting to near-real-time visibility is usually the first project and the one that changes the most.

ERP and plant floor disagree

Planned production, actual output and inventory diverge, and the gap is reconciled manually. Integration and a defined source of truth per field fix it.

Machines that can't talk

Older equipment with no network interface. Options range from retrofit sensors to operator tablets at the station — we'll be honest about which is worth it.

Quality data trapped on paper

Inspection results recorded on forms, filed, and never analysed. Digitising capture makes the pattern visible, which is where the value actually is.

Downtime nobody can explain

Everyone knows a line stops often; nobody can say why or for how long in aggregate. Structured reason-code capture turns anecdote into a ranked list.

The services that carry most of our manufacturing work.

Enterprise Integration

Connecting historians, ERP and quality systems across the OT/IT boundary — read-only from the plant side, with buffering for network interruptions.

Custom Software Development

Production dashboards, downtime capture, quality workflows and the shop-floor tools that replace paper forms.

Data & Analytics

OEE, downtime analysis, scrap and yield reporting — built on definitions production and finance have both agreed.

Mobile App Development

Tablet and handheld apps for operators, inspectors and maintenance — offline-first, because plant wifi is rarely as good as the survey said.

Cybersecurity

Network segmentation review, remote-access hardening and the boundary controls that keep the control network isolated.

Four rules we hold to on every manufacturing engagement, without exception.

Read-only from the OT side

We consume data from a historian or an OPC-UA gateway. We do not write to PLCs, modify control logic or place software inside the control network. Anything requiring that involves your controls engineer or a specialist integrator.

The boundary is enforced, not assumed

Data crosses through a defined gateway in a DMZ with one-way flow where possible. No business application holds credentials to the control network.

Production never waits for us

Collection buffers locally and syncs later. If our systems are down, the line runs exactly as before — nothing we build sits in the path of production.

Changes happen in planned windows

Anything touching data collection is deployed during scheduled maintenance, with a rehearsed rollback. Never during a run, whatever the urgency.

If a project genuinely requires writing to control systems, that's a controls engineering engagement and we'll say so rather than attempt it.

We're a good fit above the control layer: production visibility, downtime and quality capture, ERP and historian integration, analytics, and the operator-facing tools that replace paper. This is where most of the untapped value sits in mid-market manufacturing.

We are not controls engineers. We don't program PLCs, modify SCADA logic, commission machinery or work on safety instrumented systems. Those require specific competence and liability cover we don't carry, and we'd expect to work alongside your controls partner rather than substitute for them.

No. We consume data from a historian, an OPC-UA gateway or a similar boundary system — read-only. We don't connect to PLCs directly, and we don't place software inside the control network. If a requirement genuinely needs that, it's a controls engineering job and we'll say so.