Originally Posted by
Buster Hyman
As a Load Controller, I held licences for every (foreign) airline we handled, bar our own (AN) as it wasn't required. Even trained overseas for some airlines. I think that we held a certain level of responsibility up to an altitude of 500ft. After that, it was generally not a trim problem, or so I've been told.
When working in Flight Ops, I held a licence for Ground to Air & even had an ARN. In my current role, we're required to attend the same ground schools as the crews, to a certain extent.
There's probably an argument there about 'risk vs reward' but, if CASA were to mandate similar testing to key roles, I'd have no objection.
In QF it was similar except that the QF Load Controllers were all licensed as well. The GM of Airport Ops was the 'CASA Delegate' who signed the licenses. I always wondered why AN didn't do the same as it wasn't an international vs domestic thing (talking when QF was INTL only), but rather I think a case of QF implementing it in the 70s and CASA just not being bothered to police it at other airlines and TN didn't either. I have no objection to regular testing, I think to have the rigor of a Pilot would be a little too much but areas like AMCO, Movement Control, etc should at the very least have classes on problem-solving and multi-disruption planning. You would have had an ARN because the Part 64 licensing equivalent required it for what was then called a ROC required an ARN. It is now covered by Part 64 and requires recency and while areas like AMCO and Movement Control used to get away with it because they weren't communicating 'safety critical information' (e.g. they weren't transmitting fight data, etc.) now they are required to have it just to communicate on an 'aeronautical frequency' which are covered in the Reg.