Our existing QA Manual written a few years ago would appear to be similar in structure to your suggested templates.
I have come from a ISO9001 background where we built a lot of the QMS around process flow charts and split the relevant sections on a software platform designed to support such standards. In other words it wasn’t just one chunky manual. Each section was owned by its relevant process owner and document control was built into the support platform. So we deconstructed the QA manual into something more relevant and usable for the organisation.
I don’t have a background in AS9100 and I’m trying to understand what the current accepted options for QMS document management are relating to AS9100 given Clause 4.4.2:
Am I to understand that all the industry still stick to the traditional single QA Manual format?
For AS9100 clause 4.4.2 it is important to realize that the sentence you quoted in your question is not a requirement, but rather a suggestion (i.e. it does not tell you that you “shall” do this). So, the important part of clause 4.4.2 is that the listing of things that AS9100 asks you to document are documented (e.g. description of interested parties, scope of the QMS, etc.) and if you want to put these together into one document and call it a Quality Manual you can; however, it is not required to do so as long as these things are documented.
Additionally, if you do choose to document a Quality Manual, you can choose any format you wish as there is no one way to do this dictated in AS9100. So, a format like you have suggested is acceptable, providing it also meet any other requirements you have such as customer or legal requirements. To answer you final question, these other requirements are the reason that many in the aerospace industry are keeping a traditional single quality manual, because they have customer or legal requirements to do so, but where these don’t exist you are free to do as you see appropriate.