FAR145 repair station

[shumway76]

Anyone here working in the US in an FAR145 repair station?

I have a few questions, just to compare how things are in the US compared to an EASA 145 repair station, eg. "trade" (under EASA there's mechanical & avionics) and type ratings etc etc...

[grounded27]

I have worked in several. Generally they are 100% buyback, this allows the repair station to hire a large percentage of UN licensed people. I have seen it so bad that only the supervisor, leadman and inspector on the aircraft are licensed. There are usually a large amount of contractors, they come and go with the business.You can basically perform any task you want to.

[wrench1]

Shum...

FAA 145 Repair Stations come in all shapes and sizes...from a small 1 or 2 person Specialized Services business all the way up to a large MRO employing 100's of people. I have about 30 years working in and around repair stations mainly in the rotorwing side...but they all follow the same rules.

Main difference I've seen between any FAA vs EASA operation is the fact that EASA is a fee driven authority and the FAA is a tax-payer/government driven authority. Bottom line being there is more flexibility and diversity in the FAA system.

Since this is a huge subject...I can answer more specific questions here or via PM...

w1

[shumway76]

I'm with EASA 145 working on large commercial aircraft.
Basically my questions are regarding 145 MRO doing large passenger aircraft, but I think all 145 run with roughly the same rules

Under EASA system, there's the B1(mechanical) & B2(avionics) license issued by the authority.
Under B1, there are a list of privilege & limitations. But when working under a 145 MRO, they normally restrict you even further.
Example, as a B1, you can certify for certain structural repair, but under a 145, they normally have an internal system where they have "specialist" structural repair persons, who certify for the repair themselves.

As for the US system, I believe A&P covers everything (no trade like EASA mechanical & avionics). But with new large aircraft being more complex, does a FAR 145 station have "specialists" instead of an all in one A&P guy who can certify for everything?

[grounded27]

I have a few questions, just to compare how things are in the US compared to an EASA 145 repair station, eg. "trade" (under EASA there's mechanical & avionics) and type ratings etc etc...

Thought I answered the post question.. Any position can be filled by a freaking TOOL that has no further qualifications further than cutting soy beans. There are many AV tech's with military electronical experience on subs etc, those boys do mod's/run wire etc, they can though replace an ADIRU, have a licensed inspector verify it is locked down and move on to the next job. A mechanic can change any part, have the inspector verify everything is torqued to spec and move on to the next job etcetera....

Having said that, usually systems guys, normally certified with an inspector behind them would take a pile of cards requiring ops checks as an aircraft was in or near to post-dock stage knock out all in question during systems checks.

This is in the USA, cards written by the MANUFACTURERS. Each CAA has different standards, the goal of the manufacturer is to make maintenance as cheap as possible.

Having said that it is the responsiblity of the operator to ensure that they maintain an airworthy fleet.

[wrench1]

Shum...

I don't have much experience with the big MRO types but the ones I do know about employ between 100 to 270 workers. While the 145 rules are the same for all each one can be different based on their ratings.

FAA issues two different certificates and one authorization that allows an individual to sign off work on aircraft: A&P Certificate and Repairman Certificate, plus the Inspection Authorization (IA). All three can be used under a 145 operation, but only the A&P and IA can be used outside of a Repair Station (RS).

How the certificate privileges are used under a Repair Station (RS) is determined by the FAA approved Repair Station Manual (RSM). In the case of Repairman Certificates, The FAA allows and approves the RS to develop their own Repairman program which is documented in the RSM. Normally there will be a separate program for each specialty: airframe structures, powerplant, avionics, composites, welding, NDT, QA inspector, etc, etc....whatever the RS needs to accomplish and sign off. Each program usually has a minimum experience requirement, etc that an individual is required to meet before it can take the RS Repairman Test. Once the FAA approves the RS request for an additional Repairman, the person takes a test and when passed the FAA will issue the Repairman Certificate.

Normally there is a more pronounced Quality Assurance component within a 145 RS and they normally are required to sign off behind any work a Repairman or A&P signs off...whatever the RSM dictates.

The RS also has the ability to use non-certificated people and does so usually at a ratio of 1 Repairman to 10 workers, with the Repairman signing off behind any work performed by his "crew"

A lot of the smaller RS use A&P's especially if the RS is affiliated with any type of a 135 Ops just because it provides more flexibility with personnel.

If a RS does work for a Part 121 or 135 operator then they must also follow the operators maintenance manual requirements and if those require specifically A&P or IA individuals then the RS must supply those people also.

There really is no set structure for manning a RS. Just depends on what you want to do and what the FAA approves you to do.

Here is some dry reading that may give some more insight...
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC%20145-9%20CHG%201.pdf

http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC%20145-11.pdf


w1

[shumway76]

wrench1,

Thank you for the explanation.
I see 145 is almost the same whether you're EASA or FAA or whatever else, only difference I see is FAA 145 "specialists" need a Repairman issued by FAA.

I know of EASA 145 where "specialists" don't need any Authority license / cert, but is fully in house, governed by Quality within 145.

Just out of curiousity, if a FAA 145 Repairman leaves the company, the "repairman" certificate becomes invalid?

[wrench1]

Yes...when a person leaves the employment of a repair station they surrender their Repairman Certificate. However, there can be one exception...per se...when a repairman leaves one repair station to work at another repair station his previous Repairman Certificate can be used as a basis to obtain a new certificate under their new employer's repair station. This is only possible pending the local governing FAA FSDO acceptance..etc...etc...etc...

w1

[shumway76]

I am also comparing US A&P system against EASA B1 & B2 system.

I find it that in general A&P covers EVERYTHING - turbine & piston engines, fixed & rotary wing, avionics - while EASA licensing is so specialized - mechanical for turbine engine fixed wing, piston engine for rotary wing, avionics etc etc.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in the US, holding A&P & working in general aviation, you can sign for basically everything (trade wise - eg. one day you can sign for some one's Cessna 172, next day R22).
But I believe an A&P working in a 145 on large aircraft would probably require "specialist" training (eg. turbine engines only or avionics only), or as wrench1 says maybe a Repairman cert will do, A&P not necessary.

Another thing I noticed is when it comes to type course - In an EASA type course (eg. 737NG), they conduct "mechanical" or "avionics" course, but when it is FAA approved type course (eg. conducted by Alteon) there is no such thing as mechanical or avionics, it's only 1 course...

[wrench1]

Good luck on the comparison…there have been a number of discussions over the years on the differences between the FAA system and other regulatory systems…some good…some bad. It mainly boils down to where you are in the food chain in either system and how the system works for you.

While the A&P certificate does provide a carte blanche authorization in one respect…there are a number of defined performance requirements and experience minimums before you can use it to sign off something. A new A&P straight out of school...or an "old" opinionated one...has to satisfy one of 3 basic experience requirements before signing a job: been previously instructed on the job, work under supervision of A&P who has done it, or by a method acceptable to the Administrator (FAA). So its not a true “blank check” sign off on anything and everything.

Also instead of “type ratings” like pilots have, the FAA system is driven by type of maintenance performed. In its most basic form by Airframe and/or Powerplant (A&P)…then whether work performed is a major or minor repair /alteration/inspection (IA)…then by ops type Part 91, 121, 125, 129, 135, 145etc.

Now as you move up the food chain of operations types (Part 121, 135, 145) then you start to see requirements for specific qualifications like factory schooling on specific models, minimum times of performing jobs before qualification, etc. These requirements are dictated by the operator’s manual through the FAA approved Air Carrier Certificate and Ops Specs. So while there is not a defined “type rating” at the basic mechanic level…like EASA system…there is a similar structured system of specific “type ratings” or qualifications farther down the line.

Final note on Repairman…normally an A&P provides a much greater level of privileges than a Repairman Certificate…but there are exceptions…Repairman with rated RS can certify a transponder but a straight A&P can’t…etc.

w1

[shumway76]

Thanks for your replies wrench1.

I get a better picture now.
I was initially trained under CAA Sect L (the old A&C & XE & XI & XR categories), then went on to EASA B1 B2 stuff.
Then I did some research on A&P.

From what I can see, they are both very different but yet is some ways similar...
In CAA / EASA, you study in quite detail on a specific 'small' topic (eg. airframe, physics, maths etc) but in FAA A&P you study not too detail, but it covers a lot more topics.