SEA For Now

I am about to sign up with MAINFLEXX for one of their online Human Factors and Fuel Tank Safety courses. It seems a good idea especially as Im a contractor over seas. Can anyone tell me if they have dealt with this company or done one of these courses? Are the courses excepted by the airlines / agencies ( EASA QA etc ). Any info would be good before I pay the money. Thanks.

Blue Coyote

That is an excellent question. Is it acceptable in the industry. One of the basic ideas behind the HF training was that it got people together in a room where issues could be honestly and openly discussed. It gave you an opportunity to learn about potential and existing issues from your peers.

If you do this training on line then you won't get that element. The chances are that all you get is something that bores you with slides, or info, on human performance and limitations without relating it to what you do in a meaningful way.

Personally I'm a great believer in getting people together and having an opportunity to say what I really believe about HF. There are some serious issues and a lot of training doesn't address it.

Cheap and ticks the box, nothing learnt but what the hell.

Rant over, if it is acceptable to tick the box and industry is happy with it then who can fault you. Especially if it is cheap, that is what people seem to want nowadays.

ProfEng

Caution:

There is no robust (in the audit sense) way to prove beyond doubt that a Certificate issued for an on-line course was obtained by its holder doing the course properly, unless the course was done under the supervision of a trustworthy person, eg QM of a Part 145 or Part 147 organisation, who countersigns the Certificate to that effect.

As a result a QM may well reject the Certificate as proper, audit-proof evidence that you are current in Human Factors, and probably should. So your money would be wasted.

This may not be a problem in many organisations. But it could and should be. Hence the word "caution".

And another thing; there is a lot of value in a good Human Factors course to you as an individual, done with a group of working engineers with diverse backgrounds and experience. Many people who go to such a course with a negative atttude leave pleasantly aware that they have learned something. It's a pity to treat it as a timewasting box-ticking exercise.

Bus429

Before I comment on the above, I must register an interest; I'm involved in some aspects of this type of stuff as part of my business.

Part 145 does not stipulate that HF training is accomplished under Part 147; in fact, there is no provision for it under that approval other than the Module 9 stuff for Part 66. There is no specific approval - and none required - for an organisation to provide training covering regulations such as Part 145 and M (and many of the requirements stipulated therein).

Part 145 puts the onus on the AMO to satisfy itself that the HF training is suitable for its organisation (and, of course, satisfying the Competent Authority). To that end, the Part 145 AMO can provide the training from within or contract an individual or an organisation to do this; it is all covered under terms - pre-approval or already approved - of Part 145 AMO's MOE. Part 145.A.30 (e) and AMCs refer.

Personally, I believe that only HF refresher and FTS Phase 1 lend themselves to online training. All other courses are best delivered face-to-face due to the fact that both parties benefit from the interaction and, practically, it is easier to show videos, have class exercises and a general chat (particularly during HF courses using "4-walls" limits) when you are in a class.

ProfEng

I wouldn't disagree with you about on-line training working for HF Refresher and Fuel Tank Safety Phase 1 training, although it misses out on the interaction that occurs in a group of professionals in a well-facilitated HF training session.

But my point was that the Certificate that follows simply cannot stand up to a robust audit, unless the on-line course was carried out under supervision. By definition, it is impossible to show beyond doubt that the holder actually carried out the course and/or a test after it if there is one, unless someone accepted as trustworthy makes a legally binding declaration to that effect by endorsing the Certificate with an auditable signature.

One day, somewhere in the future, there will be a way that exams can be taken online with the same security as invigilated exams under Part 147 conditions. But that's a long way off. The same applies to mandatory training such as HF.

itwilldoatrip

Prof I would strongly disagree with your comment about interaction on line. When I did my course with Evaservices we had a conference call and a chalk board so there was interaction for all and able to see and follow. Regarding the validity it is all conforming and after all is a 'Refresher' done many times. I will say that if it was done in a classroom I felt knowing the topic I think the eyelids would have been a bit heavy, however on line you felt you had to be alert and this kept you on top of it all.
Regarding Manflex bit pricy isn't it or can you do it WiFi in the front seat of the Merc.

Bus429

Actually, Prof, there is no requirement for an examination for HF, regulations (Part M/145) or FTS Phase 1 training (even under Part 145 Appendix IV for foreign AMOs). FTS Phase 2 requires an examination but does not stipulate the type (within the stipulated 8 hours for FTS Ph 2, it can only be an open-book). This is why CAMEs and MOEs have to specify how and by whom such training is accomplished. With regard to start-ups, I make sure CAMOs and AMOs have run their ideas past their Competent Authority prior to contracting such training.
Your point about the certificate is well made; anyone could knock one up.

itwilldoatrip

Your point about the certificate is well made; anyone could knock one up.

And do which is why there is so much trouble about bogus licences at the moment.