The Aircraft Engineer

[Grambo]

As i have recently found out, choosing a career is almost impossible.

The aircraft engineers seem to make around £45K if my research is accurate... I would be very happy with this, but I dont know enough about the actual job!

1. Do they work alone? Do you they talk to clients all day (I would be rubbish at this)

2. Do they make £45K or is that wrong?

3. In demand? Or impossible to find a job?

[Grambo]

Thanks Mitchaa.

So do the line engineers get the same pay as the chief/type engineers?

And can line engineers learn the job at uni via degree?

[NutLoose]

Try reading this

Kingston University - Newcastle Aviation Academy (http://www.newcastleaviation.co.uk/)

Wages can vary from that going up and down, Avionics tends to be the higher paid, god knows why they do not do a lot...

[NutLoose]

This will also help you, it gives details of courses etc and an out of date pay survey

Aircraft Engineers Bulletin Board - Powered by vBulletin (http://www.airmech.co.uk/forums/)

[Grambo]

Thanks Nutloose.

What would you say line engineers earn?

And I am 19, am I too old to start?

[spannersatKL]

You appear to be more interested in the money side of this and not why you want to do the job? What is you motivation? Do you have any real desire to actually do the job? What do you want to get out of it in job satisfaction? I'm sure any job interview you may get would be most interesting?.....for those doing the interview.

[TURIN]

It's a long haul.

You won't be on anything like 40k+ for at least 7 years, maybe 10 unless you're a complete wizard with exams and work like hell to get your type rating experience.
If you think you will enjoy the job, stick at it but don't do it for the money, you can get a lot more for a lot less effort in other industries.

Best of luck. :ok:

[Grambo]

Ofcourse.

I have studied careers for so many weeks, everyday, 2/3 hours at a time.

I am a bit introverted, and this makes the decision trickier, but I think this could be suited to an aircraft engineer (line), or am i really going to spend days talking to clients?

[a350_b787]

Careers in Aircraft Engineering
1. How to become an Aircraft Maintenance Engineer and an Aircraft Fitter

As a licensed aircraft engineer you will need to be in possession of a basic aircraft engineer's licence, at least one type rating for an aircraft, many hours/months/years spent gaining your practical experience, and a company approval to issue a Certificate of Release to Service for an aircraft. It is a highly skilled job and one which can take some years to achieve. View all of our Licensed Aircraft Maintenance Engineer jobs.

Aircraft are signed off by licensed engineers, but their unlicensed and highly skilled colleagues perform a crucial role. Aircraft Mechanics (or Aircraft Fitters) are not certified and will work under the supervision of a certified engineer, but they are highly trained and experienced in the maintenance, repair, and overhaul of aircraft (MRO jobs).
2. Aircraft Maintenance Engineering careers

Aircraft Engineers and Aircraft Mechanics work on a permanent basis as an employee of an airline or MRO organisation. Many more are employed on a contract basis, working for themselves via recruitment businesses that provide staffing services for airlines or MROs.

Aircraft Engineer Contractors tend to earn more money, but do not get the various company benefits or security offered by a permanent job.

Licensed Aircraft Maintenance Engineers will need to prove their skills. As one, you will need a basic licence (for instance a B1 EASA Part 66 licensed aircraft engineer's licence). This will require many months of study (either about aircraft avionics for a B2 licence or airframe & engine for a B1 licence).

This will then need to be followed by further study on a type rating course taken at an approved centre (for instance B747-400 type rating), and then practical experience on type to gain company approvals.

Only once you have all of this can you then become a certified aircraft engineer. Even then, you will need to maintain 'recency' on type in order to continue working on any particular type of aircraft. If you lose recency (ie, you stop working on a type of aircraft for over 2 years), you may be required to take a familiarisation course before you can again be licensed on type. This can vary from one airline to another and the civil aviation authority (country / region) you wish to work within. (See the note at the end with more information about *Aircraft Licence Types.)

3. Aircraft Maintenance Engineer Jobs / Fitter Jobs

Aircraft Fitter Jobs
If you are a fitter you will need to search for Aircraft technicians jobs, aircraft mechanics jobs or aircraft fitters jobs (various terms are used interchangeably). View our Aircraft Technician and Fitter jobs.

Line Maintenance Engineer Jobs
Line Maintenance Engineer jobs will require a certified aircraft engineer to sign aircraft off 'on line'. The checks a line maintenance engineer carries out are light checks and are done during turn-around or overnight. You must have a license and approvals in order to sign a 'Certificate of Release to Service'. See our Licensed Line Maintenance Engineer Jobs.

Base Maintenance Engineer Jobs
Base Maintenance Engineer jobs require a certified aircraft engineer to sign aircraft off. The nature of the work focusses on bigger aircraft maintenance projects (or heavy checks). It usually takes longer than a Line Check. Checks are categorised and a base maintenance engineer's job is typically carrying out C Checks in the hangar over a number of days or weeks. Modifications and installations will also be included as part of a Licensed Base Maintenance Engineer's job.

NOTES

*Aircraft Licence Types
Basic licences are issued by the competent authority. Licence types are, for instance, an EASA Part 66 licence or ICAO licence. Licensed Engineers tend to specialise either in mechanics or avionics. Avionics Engineers (or EASA Part 66 B2 engineers) are able to issue CRS on avionics systems, while Airframe and Engine engineers (or A&C or B1 Licence Engineers) generally sign for all mechanical parts and the engines (they need to be trained on specific engine types too).

Variety is huge but the following are probably the most common aircraft types offering jobs: B777 jobs, B737 jobs, B747 jobs, A330 jobs, A340 jobs, A320 jobs.


4. Aerospace Jobs

Aerospace Design Engineer Jobs and Aircraft Manufacturing Jobs are filled by aerospace engineers skilled in aircraft design using software like DOORS and NASTRAN. Specialisms include Aerospace Design and Stress Engineer jobs, Aerodynamics jobs, Avionics Systems Design Engineer jobs, CATIA Jobs and IT jobs. Aerospace defence jobs, especially, require software specialists.

source: Careers in Aircraft Engineering, AircraftEngineers.com (http://www.aircraftengineers.com/static/careers.php)

[HAWK21M]

Forget the salary numbers.....First ask yourself can you handle it...working odd hrs & in weird terrain/weather.need to constantly study & not much free time.If you can go for it.
You will need to enjoy this job to survive.

[Dodo56]

Does nobody do any research before asking a question here?

Read this: http://www.easa.europa.eu/ws_prod/g/doc/Regulation/reg_2042_2003_Part66.pdf

Should answer a few questions about what you need to know/do.

[lenzil]

i've complete my EASA PART 66 B1 modules at college, and i've got my basic training certificate as i've completed my 10 weeks on job training. but now its impossible to find a job. most airlines are looking for engineers with experience. does anyone know whats the best way to get into the industry? is it better to go to university and get a degree before looking for a job? any help will be much appreciated.

[AMSHMZ]

I have a B1 with 737 & 320 type! I have no Job for the past 6 months! This profession is ****! After giving my precious 12 yrs to this industry, I am worth Zero!! Now I am planning to switch over from aviation to teaching!
Advice for new comers!
Please be away of Aircraft Maintenance profession! It is completely saturated.

[simonchowder]

Problem is the industry is saturated with college trained "licensed engineers "who are actually worthless in the real world, they have been sadly suckered in by the hype, what airlines are looking for is hands on time served engineers who can actually walk the walk and do the job and not some college educated graduate who has very little hands on experiance and when the chips are down is next to useless

[bay17-20]

Simon Chowder - that is the best summing up of this industry I have read in some time.

A "Degree", learning certificate and no experience (and 10 weeks OJT does not count) makes you about as worthwhile as any other trainee mech.

Try the industry first as a mechanic/fitter and only then decide to sign up to the 20K debt you will have at the end of your course.

The ability to pass exams does not give you the aptitude, common sense, responsibility and hand skills you are going to need to get anywhere in this industry.

If you are unsure if you want to be an engineer, probably best to try something else.

[simonchowder]

Totally agree, and as someone who is employed in the recruitment side of things i honestly think this whole concept of colleges churning out licensed engineers is seriously flawed, these people just do not have the hands on grounding that is required, its not their fault of course but the only way to get that grounding is to do the time on the hanger floor learning all the essential basics, which is why the apprentice system is unbeatable, you just cannot with the best will in the world substitute four years spent working with highly skilled fitters and engineers in the real world with ten weeks OJT working on some old cessna.
However the industry is of of course well aware of these shortcomings and in general steers well clear of college trained engineers much prefering the guy who has worked his way up from the bottom by learning the trade properly and then studying for his /her ticket.
These people are being done IMHO a great misservice by the system, there being hoodwinked into laying out a lot of money with promises of walking out of the college and into well paid postions as licensed engineers and sadly its not going to happen in the majority of cases, the whole system needs looking at very closely because at present its litle more than a money making scheme which is doing niether the student nor the industry any favours

[ericferret]

I very accurate assessment of the current situation. This is one of the reasons why the ex military engineer is still in great demand. They have had good basic training and loads of practical experience. Getting the licence is their problem, however the adage adapt and overcome applies. They do and hey presto good quality licensed engineers. Further more the work ethic ingrained in them. Some of the civvies seem to think they are still at school and turning up for work is optional.

What comes out of some of the civvy training schools is truly appalling. They are setting their own exams which have a very narrow theory base and if you can read it's hard to fail. The lack of relevent practical experience and negligable hand skills makes the problem worse. A return to the old style apprentice scheme would be best but who is prepared to pay the price.

[smudgethecat]

Spot on chowder and others, however its not all doom and gloom i think the industry is at last waking up to the fact they need well trained pratical engineers who can cut the mustard with the spanners and they aint gonna get them from the likes of brunell college,

I can think of two big MRO,s who recently have re -introduced the traditional apprentice scheme because they have at last realised there is no substitute for it , its not cheap but it works.

[GAZIN]

Apprenticeships, apprenticeships, apprenticeships.
IMO this is the best way for the industry to get the skilled & dedicated engineers it needs.
Unfortunately with less airlines doing their own base maintenance & the loss of specialist organisations like SRT, getting a good range of trade experience isn't easy. Colleges are very good for theory & regulations but without broad practical experience you wont get good aircraft maintenance engineers.
You need to work in the industry to understand what it's about & whether or not it's for you. Going to college first could be a mistake.

[SeldomFixit]

Aircraft Engineering is a mindset, just as Piloting is a mindset. Aviation, is a Rubik's cube of mindsets

[Tranwell]

I'm ready to be shot down....

The B1's 'churned out' by the colleges are not licenced engineers - they are fitters who have the B1 modules. The rational behind this approach is to provide fitters who have the POTENTIAL to reach B1 status after experience. Employers then have less training to worry about since their new fitters at least have a theoretical background and know what an accumulator is or why we fill the tyres with nitrogen.

The colleges and academys are constantly being informed by EASA that the industry is 75% under-manned, hence the need for each such establishment to 'churn out' up to 50 fitters a year - some of which will progress to employment, some will stay in education, and others will realise that they hate aircraft!

In this huge recession it has turned into survival of the fittest, and usually most experienced so the jobs are not there right now (hence I am now teaching in one of these academy's and not contracting)....

These college graduates are good people with the capacity to be excellent engineers - give them a chance!

[EGT Redline]

The B1's 'churned out' by the colleges are not licenced engineers - they are fitters who have the B1 modules.

I beg to differ. Some 10 week mickey mouse job placement pumping petrol into an old cessna down the local flying club does not classify you as a fitter. Fitters or mechanics are time served having completed some kind of recognised apprenticeship be it civvy based or ex-forces. In addition, they have many years hands on experience to supplement their basic training.

These college graduates are good people with the capacity to be excellent engineers - give them a chance!

I agree. However, what the majority of these guys fail to realise is the fact it takes many years experience to develop the necessary knowledge, skills and attributes to become a competent licensed aircraft engineer. In my experience, some of their attitudes are quite frankly shocking and passing a few exams is not a god given right to automatic licensed status within an organisation. The MRO I work for has finally woken up and realised that taking on adult trainees who used to fit exhausts for kwik fit or guys fresh out of college just doesn't work. Within the last few years they have resurrected the apprenticeship scheme and are now slowly starting to reap the rewards.

[smudgethecat]

Tranwell your talking rubbish , dont confuse airframe /engine fitters with quick fit fitters, a airframe fitter is someone who is highly skilled and has compleated a formal apprenticeship either in civvie stret or in the forces, these guy coming out of college are in no way shape or form aircraft fitters

[Tranwell]

Rubbish?......... hmm. Four years spent taking aeroplanes apart (ie. wings off), Hand fitting skills - going from having never held a rivet gun to working to a 2 thou tolerance, running through DI's on Jetstream and 737's even GA stuff... sitting the CAA / EASA exams, refuelling, marshalling... these students are being put through the mill. What they lack is real world experience - that is the job of the employers.

Fitters are unlicenced engineers - Not time served. Time served fitters are time served.......

Apprenticeships are expensive and have all but dissolved. This is as good as it gets. What you can do is take these new guys under your wing and impart your glorious wisdom upon them.

The 10 week OJT is part of the degree and should not be confused with becoming an aircraft engineer. The OJT MUST be completed within a part 145 company on aircraft above 5700kg, so I'm not sure where you got your cessna ideas from....

As for me.... 15 years airframe / engine experience, RAF, Connie, licence modules.... I am a career fitter. I know what is required.

[simonchowder]

Sadly your wrong tranwell, a aircraft fitter is a skilled time served tradesman, your trying to diute the trade by suggesting you can call yourself a aircraft fitter when in fact your no such thing , i can assure you as someone who has been the recruiting game a long time if you apply for a aircraft fitters postion we require documented proof of formal apprentice training, i can also tell you chaps coming from the background your involved in are not regarded by the industry as aircraft fitters in fact i dont bother presenting CV,s from these people anymore as there nearly allways rejected as unsuitable.

Your also wrong regarding apprenticships, the industry has actually awoken to the fact that the supply of skilled fitters is dwindling and the only way to rectify this is not by some half baked college course but by a return to the old fashioned formal hands on apprenticeship, in fact i was talking to the CEO of a major UK MRO recently who was telling me the very same thing, they went down the route of employing people directly from colleges instead of training themselves and it was in his words a nightmare, these so called qualified people were useless in a hands on role, having none of the basic skills one would expect from even a second year apprentice , they have now reintroduced the four year hands on apprenticeship as have others, a very positive step id say, which gives me some reassurance the UK will in the future still be able to produce as they always did first class aircraft tradesmen

[Tranwell]

Mr Chowder, I sincerley hope that that was not a direct slur on MY status as a time-served and highly qualified fitter?

Ok, so its good news that apprenticeships are being re-introduced. What you will find is that the colleges and Academys are introducing much more practical into the courses. We have a major MRO who is only recruiting from us for the next 5 years. Several other MROs interview our guys first (this of course only applies to vacancies which require new blood). The advantage is that the MROs get an employee with good theoretical knowledge of the relevant subjects and they can then train those employees within their own 145/147 status to become B1 engineers at the 2 year mark. Very cheap and very effective.

I can see both sides to the arguement being an ex-RAF Heavy, but I still stand firm with the idea that employees who have done the 2 years college followed by 2 years EASA B1 modules are just as useful as a time served fitter. Just remember that these guys are not going to be competing with connies, but are looking for full time jobs with a major MRO with a view to becoming a B1.

Alot of these guys are ex-RAF and have found that their RAF apprenticeship is not good enough to progress to B1. They can be fitters forever, but these guys want more. I was in the same boat. If it wasn't for an Academy, I'd be well and truely out of the aviation industry.

If their skills are not up to your standards, then perhaps you should ask Flybe, BA, Lufthansa, KLM (who run their own year 0 courses), Emirates (who have their own B1 and college courses), Singapore Airlines (same) and a raft of others. These colleges and Academys are crying out for assistance from MROs in order to provide good standard engineers. Help us to help you!

Help these new mechanics (since we argue over the definition of fitter) become knowledgable about your specific aeroplanes, pass on this experience you have. The industry will die without new people.

Edit: There are no new apprenticeships! Monarch (?) have started their own scheme, but it not an old fasioned apprenticeship as we know it.

Edit 2: Fitter = mechanic. A mechanic is defined as a person who has left a training establishment with minimal practical experience, but is competent enough to perform servicing tasks with supervision.

A time-served mechanic is able to complete tasks to a high standard, but is still UNABLE to self-certify. A company/supervisor may allow the mechanic to complete the task without supervision, but it is the over signing B1 who ultimately bares the responsibility for that mechanic's work.

Edit 3: An interesting article concerning one of these academys - this one only concens itself with the college course as opposed to the EASA/FD follow on. One North East - News Article (http://onenortheast.gov.uk/page/news/article.cfm?articleId=3679) I draw your attention to the percentage of students who find their way into the industry - mainly as mechanics, but some progress to design, management, etc. Incidently, this academy has 100 students annually within the college and then reduces this to around 50 annually for the EASA B1 course. They have a purpose built hangar facility with two Jet Provost basic trainers (old and ropey, but utterly indestructable), a Piper Aztec, a BAC 1-11 (mainly used for cabin crew training), a Jetstream 200, a Jetstream 31 fuselage for airframe repairs, AND a 737-200. They are all dead airframes which allows the students to make mistakes now without endangering anyone's lives (see apprenticeships...). There are Two workshops to practice hand fitting skills, teaching students everything from what inches are right through to working to 2 thousandths of an inch tolerance on aircraft grade sheet metal. They learn electrics (something which is alien to me...) and even business practices! Human Factors is a key part these days, but I must add that these cources do not negate the need for the HF certificate as a requirement to work in the industry.

As for a recognised paper trail.... I have it on good authority that this particular academy is a Part 147 training facility and as such has some very stringent guidelines to work to. A typical school leaver, after 4 years there, will have gained: NVQ (practical based), National Certificate, City & Guilds 2597, Foundation Degree, and the EASA B1.1 modules. I think that is somewhat more qualified than your average apprentice. The degree has the 10 week OJT which must be completed within an EASA pt 145 company on aircraft over 5700Kg (no cessnas). The student is then able to approach MROs for a minimum of 2 years experience on a wide variety of tasks (EASA/CAA supplied), and then submit their logbook and portfolio to the relevant CAA inspector. It is then up to him whether to grant the issue of the B1.1 licence. In total, 6 years training...

[lala21]

im currently studying a BTEC course at college and i can personally tell you i have learnt more about aircraft then i ever thought i would. the lessons include theory of flight, mathematics, practical work in a brand new facility with 5 small aircraft in the hangar to work on and a boeing 737 outside, and more... we learn all of the basics which is what we need to progress our education and to strive for the career that we want.

i disagree about the whole experience thing. just awnser me one question ok how are we supposed to get experience so that the industry will see us and that other "more experienced" engineers will respect us?
the awnser to that one is, we need a job to get experience to learn the trade from more experienced engineers and to become EXPERIENCED do you not get it at the end of the day we are going to need a job no matter what to gain the necassary experience required to become a licenced engineer simple as.

one other thing my whole opinion on this pettyness that is coming from 40 year old "experienced engineers" is pathetic, i dont understand how you think the industry will survive without the trade being passed on to younger, fitter, competent people! when you find the awnser to that question please tell me because i would love to know oh and one other thing i think you are all just scared that companies are going to opt for the younger, less expensive people because they sure will its all about money if we work for less and they can train us for less and we can adapt to new techniques and equipment better than you do and they save money on hiring less experienced engineers who will become very experienced and very good at their job in years to come i think they will go down that route.
so in my opinion please stop disrespecting young students who want a career in the aerospace industry because at the end of the day you rely on us to learn the trade to the best of ability, gain experience and to keep the industry afloat. without us it would be nothing and whats the good in that eh? :ok:

[RotaryWingB2]

What an absolute load of sh*te.

[LookingUpInHope]

It's all very well being younger and fitter, but experience is vital. An authorised training course only cuts the amount of experience required for a licence, it doesn't remove it completely. While I could go out and work on modules for the next year or two, I will not be able to work on aircraft unsupervised until I've done some proper spanner (or soldering iron) time served under the watchful eye of someone who can and will tell me I'm an idiot when I've done it wrong (and I will do it wrong sometimes, because I'll be learning while I'm working - the trick is not to make the same mistake twice). Personally I'm glad about this.

There may be lives hanging on every turn of the torque wrench and on every crimp of a wire, and getting it wrong due to inexperience is simply not an option.

I don't think there are any engineers in the industry who don't realise that there's a crunch point coming soon. There are a lot of people approaching retirement, and not enough youngsters to replace them. But harping on about how you should be given a free pass isn't going to persuade anyone that you're right - a licenced engineer is a highly skilled and highly qualified professional, with responsibilities measured in both millions of pounds (or dollars, or whatever else) and in lives.

The training courses, the degrees, the modules - they're a licence to start learning, nothing more, and even engineers who're in their sixties will (sometimes if in a good mood) admit that they've learnt something new. Engineers never stop learning, it's part of the job description, and those 'pathetic' older engineers have already had to cope with the changing nature of the workplace; when they were young, computers were in their infancy and if an office had even one it was a high-tech and forward-looking organisation where someone did a lot of maths. Few if any of them dreamed that one day there'd be a computer on every desk, all linked up so that people could communicate on an equal footing from all over the world, with gigabytes of data storage that didn't fill a hangar. I don't know what will change in the lifetime of a modern apprentice, but at just over 30 I've seen the engineering world revolutionised in ways that are both good and bad.

Getting good experience is always the most difficult part of the process, no-one denies that - but at least now apprenticeships are starting to come back into fashion, because enough people have woken up to the fact that we're losing our engineering capability having lost our manufacturing capability years ago. When I was the apprentice age there didn't seem to be any, they'd been killed off; it was the Forces or nothing, and I couldn't join the Forces. In a lot of ways I envy you; I'm too old for a modern apprenticeship, and I've got a partner and a mortgage, so I can't just head off to an academy for a few years without a lot of preparation. I will find my way into aviation engineering, be it with a CAD programme, a shiny CAA licence or a load of spreadsheets, but I will work for it every step of the way, and I will never question that a man who's been at the spanner end of the job for forty years will look down his nose at some green-as-grass wannabe who's studied a lot on paper but has never had to try and fix a problem at night in the middle of winter, with a gale blowing, snow falling and a lot of people waiting with various levels of patience for them to finish.

tl;dr : Respect goes both ways.

[Tranwell]

LookingUpinhope, some sence at last. You are absolutely correct when you say that these courses only reduce the time required to go from no-one to tech. Currently, if you were to get the modules via licence by post, you would need 5 years relevant experience to gain a B1, but by going on an EASA approved B1 course, that time is reduced to 2 years. The training of course lasts 2 years, so you save 12 months in effect.

No-one employs new people to this industry without some training, and without apprenticeships, this has been the only route in for alot of people. These kids KNOW that the connies and long term mechs have years of experience, and need to share that knowledge as best they can. Accept the change, its here to stay, and help the academy's provide the right training!

[Alber Ratman]

Lala21.. You have a hell of a lot to learn about aircraft maintenance before you can shout your mouth off. Your BTEC will be worth jack ****e as anybody else who has done one will testify once they got into the real world. It won't get you a well paid job in this industry. It propably will not get you a job at all in the present climate. There are many PART 147 B1 and B2 trained newbies who can't get taken on at the moment. Experience is everything, especially on a type as no book or course will give you the real knowledge.:ooh:

[Tranwell]

Agreed. The BTEC will not get you a job. It will however grant access to a B1/degree course, which might get you a job.... (if we ever get out of this recession)

[simonchowder]

Im afraid Lala your being sadly misled , im not a fitter or a engineer so i have no axe to grind, however i am in the business of recruiting engineers and have been so for some years and i can tell you what the industry wants, and thats time served experienced people who have compleated a proper aviation apprenticeship either with the forces or with a civilian MRO , they are very reluctant to consider people from a college background viewing them as a very poor substitute and not worth the trouble as they just dont have the skill levels that someone who has spent fours years learning his trade at the sharp end in the real world has.

Perfect example i had a request today for five fitters to assist with a b767 c check ,minimum requirement was at least five years experience in base maintenance, extensive skin repair knowledge and applicants MUST be time served with documentation to verify ,....... i dont make the rules we just try and supply what the MRO,s request

[Litebulbs]

Hi

I am a B2 and I exfoliate with Clinique face scrub for my skin repair after a hard day on the tin'ter'web!

On a serious note, cut him some slack. There is now't wrong with being keen. You experienced chaps can use your skills to coach, rather than slap down.

[Alber Ratman]

Litebulbs, if some 18 year old guy doing a half baked qualification that is not recognised comes in with ears closed and mouth wide open slating your hard earned wisdom, wouldn't you pass a choice comment back?

I would have him cleaning out the vacumn tank IMHO..:ok:

He would learn something about aviation maintenance that no college would ever teach him!

Word of wisdom for all you college boys. The old duffers were once like you. They listened and learned from the crusty's of their time to get where they are today. Most people will glady tell you "How to open the can" in the real world (colleges don't do that). If you gob off at them, they won't be so accomodating..:ooh:

Lala, an aircraft maintenance engineer has to have a good command of written English (unless he is a Polish or Phillipino connie). I think you need to brush up on yours.:=

[Tranwell]

Guy's, you're not listening. These students are at least 20 with B1 modules under their belt - are you telling me that an approved EASA part 147 training course (funded by the addition of the BTEC/FD, etc) is not a recognised qualification...? These kids are NEW recruits who have a slight upper hand from 100% raw recruits.

Recruiters, if my requirement was for a new recruit to mould over time to my required standards, I would choose the guy with the B1 Modules, and not just a set of GCSE's.

If my requirement was for a contractor, I'd choose the most experienced person I could afford.

[dieseldo]

The problems surrounding these "new starters" are varied.

One is management perception of their capabilities. One manager stated publicly that X had all modules completed and would be up and running as a full licensed engineer in no time. Most offended when all the licensed guys fell about laughing. A couple of years down the road now and no sign of "up and running".

The attitude of some people beggars belief, arrogant not to put too fine a point on it. I don't know what some of the training schools are telling them but some do think that because they've passed the exams all they have to do is sit back and wait for the cash to roll in.

Recently had one newbie carrying out a task without the aid of a maintenance manual. On being questioned his response was that he'd done the job before. You might take that from an experienced fitter but not from a "trainee". The concept that somebody else is signing for and is responsible for his work seems to escape him.

There is the opposite side to the coin we have one new guy who's had a few jobs before going down this road and has some idea what the work place is about. Keen to learn and never complains whatever gets thrown his way. He's getting loads of help from all the licensed guys, gets picked to assist in the more interesting complex jobs and is clearly a great prospect for the future. He doesn't have any B1 modules completed!!! Attitude is more important than paper qualifications.

We are all aware of the age demographic in respect to licensed engineers and we all know that these young engineers are important for the future.
They are to be encouraged but to stand and say I'm a licensed engineer takes a bit more than waving a few pieces of paper.

[nodrama]

Attitude is more important than paper qualifications.



I can't agree more...plus an ability to listen, watch, take advice and learn.

I've seen it so many times........"So you've passed all your modules and can tell me, for example, how a rotary actuator works?"....so what....you're a licensed maintenance engineer when you can trouble shoot to identify the faulty actuator, find the part number, confirm the mod state, identify any relevant AD's, replace it, set it up and rig it, test it and complete all the necessary paperwork, in a required operational time-frame, using what resources are available at hand....but at the same time adhering to the regs.

Get my point? There is so much more to this job than passing exams....and colleges/ acadamies don't teach you that.

I've been fixing aircraft for over 20 years and I'm still learning stuff all the time.....usually from the even older guys who have seen it, been there etc and still have alot to offer if you are willing to listen....experience, but even more so, attitude, is everything.

[lala21]

You still dont get what im trying to say to you. For one i am not male im female shows how much stereotypes exsist in this industry and two i am not saying that i will be a licenced engineer straight away.
i was merely trying to point out that i will need the necassary qualifications to get a job to get EXPERIENCE you wont get licenced engineers dropping out of the sky will you.
yes my BTEC will be worth nothing in the real world but excuse me for not explaining that i am going to university this year to do the foundation degree in aerospace engineering with Kingston university and guess who runs that course KLM so basically i think that will be enough qualification to get job dont you.
Im not expecting to be on a high wage whilst training but i want the experience to become a good experienced engineer. without the on the job training ill be worth nothing to anyone.
Im sorry that i didnt explain to you what i was trying to say but i was rather tired and angry when i wrote that comment. I respect these older more experienced engineers because these will be my mentors and allow me to expand my knowledge of aircraft and the industry. The one thing i dont understand is why these older more experienced engineers dont respect us for trying to learn the trade.
And the whole apprenticeship thing is not available to most young people because one there is not many about and two there is not enough resources to help us find and get into them thats why we went down the college and university route.
i was going to go into the RAF but i aquired an injury 2 years ago that automatically banned me from going in so this was my only choice so please dont knock my confidence it really doesnt help me at all.

[nodrama]

The one thing i dont understand is why these older more experienced engineers dont respect us for trying to learn the trade


My opinion is that it isn't a lack of respect......it's just that the system is now different, alot different from even 10 years ago.

The traditional way to get in this industry (generally speaking) was to either serve a company apprenticeship or come into it having done similar in the Forces. You did all the crap jobs first, found your feet, proved your worth as a mechanic and earnt the respect of your peers....then was helped by the company to get a BCAR licence. Or alternatively you self-studied for a licence whilst working. Remember, approval to certify for work isn't a right once you've obtained a licence, you have to be recommended by a referee (i.e. satisfy your boss and the QA manager) and satisfy the CAA that you have the necessary experience to do the job.

In the new wonderful world of EASA, and with the regulators and industry finally waking up to the fact that there is a long term shortage of certifying personnel, we have pt66 based 'degree' courses and what is referred to by some as 'cornflake packet' training colleges.
It can seem to the older generation that licensed engineers are now churned out on the strength of the pieces of paper that they hold......not what they can do.

You (and others) are just going to have to harden up to the fact that this feeling is out there. Ignore it, study hard, get all the experience you can and good luck to you....just heed some of the advice in this thread.

You'll probably encounter alot of occasions where you feel you are not being used to your full potential, or not given the credit you think you deserve (I have everytime I've gone to a new company, or have been learning a new a/c type), it's the industry and human nature I'm afraid.....respect is earnt.

[Echo-Charlie]

YouTube - Dilbert Cartoon- Engineers (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOtoujYOWw0&feature=related)

Forget engineering become a priest... Work only on Sunday, one book no revisions.:ok:

[lala21]

I see your point i really do, im sure i will eventually become as experienced as all of you out there.
I understand now why all of this is happened and thats because of change they have university courses now which makes it slightly easier than trying to find an apprenticeship.
I understand where everyone is coming from i just dont understand why the older generation is slating the younger generation all because we dont do things their way its not right.
Anyway i would of joined the forces if i had the choice but unfortunatly i dont so this is my only option.
Thanks for the support i appreciate it :)
Oh one other thing its great how everyone automatically assumed i was male lol im not getting at anyone for it i find it funny, and on a lighter note i think its great how many females are now joining the idustry shows how much the world has moved foward. :ok:

[bh_ame]

hey to all,
well Its a very intresting point that tranwell and others have put. I passed fropm klm college alongwith a degree from kingston both on merit. I got the job with CX and since then I am learning about aircrafts in the true sense. what i have realisd after getting my basic B1 but not offered course is that there is no replacment to experince. But i have another point: to become a competent engineer you have to understand the aircraft as a machine and apply basic knowledge in logics that leads to effective trouble shooting. i work in line enviorment where engineer is not only responsible for aircraft but need to have a quick respone to various un known situations.I will do my BEng Hons as well , i think we all need to have an "option", when we think that we need a "change".
:ok:what you say guys about this???

[LookingUpInHope]

Lala, we automatically assumed you were male because the overwhelming majority of engineers in the aviation industry are - and because young men aren't known for level heads and balanced viewpoints. If you were tired and angry when you wrote the post, it explains why I immediately assumed you were a young bloke.

I do not recommend posting while tired and angry. It gives the rest of us girls a bad name. :ok:

It's a difficult industry for anyone to break into, and with the lack of women in engineering overall it's not surprising there are so few here. The number of female engineers is vanishingly small, and real engineering - understanding how it works at the deepest level, what can go wrong, how to faultfind and fix it - takes skills women rarely develop and a mindset we aren't encouraged to learn. I wish you much luck on your quest, but it isn't ever going to be easy. It's not easy for the guys either, but I hope you're used to male-dominated environments. Most engineers are more concerned with attitude and results than gender, though - prove yourself capable, logical, sensible and eager to learn and gender will make little difference even if you decide that pink overalls are perfect and the crew room needs flowers.

Do be aware that getting into the university course doesn't necessarily mean that you'll be able to get a trainee job for the hands-on experience at the end of it. Times are tough; by the time you finish, hopefully things will have picked up again, but even then this is a hugely competitive industry. With the university course you'll have found the ladder, but you still need to get your foot on the bottom rung - and everyone you graduate with knows where the ladder is too.

The older generation always slates the younger generation, particularly the ones that think a degree is anything other than a licence to learn. It's not personal. After having heard some of the gaffes made by people with degrees out in the wider engineering world, they're absolutely and entirely justified in looking sideways at people with clean hands and bits of paper. It's not because you're female, it's because to them you don't understand how the real world works (which, fresh out of hands-off training, you don't). However, if you can prove that you're good for something useful and not just good at passing exams, they'll let you know you're okay, and sooner or later you'll be invited to give your opinion about this pillock fresh out of school who thinks he (or she) knows it all while not having the sense to come in out of the rain.

Attitude is everything, and being able to get bits of paper does not make an engineer - a lot of engineers can't pass exams, but that doesn't make them any less knowledgeable or competent. Being an engineer takes a logical mind, a willingness to learn, the capacity to acknowledge mistakes and the ability to work with others at the very least; in aviation, it takes diligence and precision as well, whether you're on the line, in the hangar, in the overhaul shop or in the office.

bh_ame, a BEng can't hurt. It's proof of potential that the outside world understands.

[Tranwell]

ahh... tranquility at last :D

[DERG]

I would look into a career with JetBlue in the USA.

[Dr Illitout]

The older generation always look down on the younger generation. I did a four year appreticship and I was looked down on by guys who had done a FIVE year course!!!

Rgds Dr I

[eng123]

Ref LaLa....

So, that's the explanation for your first post..tired and angry. Funny, but that is what my wife is like at least once very 4 weeks!! Ooops, I probably shouldn't say that in these pc times! (although you may have to get used to that sort of humour if you want a career in aircraft maintenance). Sexist pig? Possibly, but only in the best of humour!!

Seriously though...oh to be 18 again!! I can certainly recognise some of that attitude! Good luck to you girl!

I wish you the best of luck in finding a decent position in the future.

The scary thing is that it seems like only yesterday that I was having similar thoughts about all these old codgers in their 40's who were moaning at me for doing something wrong through my lack of experience and thinking that I knew better. But guess what? I am now that old codger in my 40's moaning at the 20-somethings who are doing something silly! And yes, that includes some young females where I work who are still gaining their experience!

One thing to remember though, when you do get your opportunity make sure your attitude is spot on. If you show you are prepared to work hard, listen and learn you will not go far wrong. Be willing and gain the respect of your peers then you will not go far wrong. If you show a bolshey attitude then you will probably be shown the door quicker than you can say 'Licenced Engineer'!

Good Luck!

[TURIN]

It's not all doom and gloom re job prospects. Where I work the youngest is approaching 40!!:eek:

[eng123]

Sounds just like the job for me TURIN. Where do I apply?!

[Dr Illitout]

From which direction TURIN?:O

Rgds Dr I

[ericferret]

Most of the guys where I work are between 6 and 12 that is because they continue to act their shoe size not their age!!!!

Taking yourself seriously is not an option. End result a great place to work.

Should the job end I probably would not miss it, but the crewroom banter would be a great loss.

If you get the right job with the right people this job can be an absolute joy. Where else can you go for hours of free entertainment and get paid as well.

[scarebus03]

The real problem as I see it is EASA and integration of standards across the countries involved that were never compatible. In some countries within the EU we are not considered engineers thus deskilling the trade in general. Also in some countries within the EU apprenticeships didn't exist as the norm and you had to put yourself through some form of aeronautical course. Regrettably this is now becoming the norm in countries that before had the standard apprenticeship. Also people are no longer joining the forces as apprentices like bygone days. The opportunity to integrate into part of a team and learning directly from your peers is now disappearing meaning that the gap between the academic and practical realities of the job are being lost and it will take longer to gain the necessary experience to further your career. All of this will have knock on effects on salaries going forward meaning that it will take longer to gain a decent package, by the time you have the experience and the corresponding qualifications the goalposts will have changed yet again. Not to mention the influx of cheap work apparently qualified (on paper at least) who are further diluting the profession.
I have been listening to the shortage of engineers story for the last 20 years and it has never materialised, the only thing that has, has been the constant erosion of pay & conditions. Also take into account you will probably be made redundant more than once in your career.
For all of the above bear in mind that we still work shift, study constantly and sign out machines that carry hundreds of people daily. A doctor who makes a mistake can kill one person, one of us could be responsible for hundreds.
As aircraft designs improve going into the future the necessity for high numbers of skilled people will also diminish.

The conclusion of this rant is, think long and hard before commiting to this industry. It has been good to me (and my father before me) but I will not be recommending it to my son for the above comments. There are easier ways to make a living. It also seems that maintenance is going the way of flying, you now have to pay to become an engineer............:ugh:

Apologies for the negativity, it's just how I see it and obviously the current recession is not helping.

Brgds
SB03

[allthatglitters]

Well done EASA, sadly not the vocation I joined some 39 years ago, when I made my first certifcations in 1980 I had already been touching and working on aircraft for many years, had a very good working knowledge of what was required, dad was stood by my side, now fresh techs with no one by there side when it matters.
Sadly in recent contracts the college graduate with no experiance are getting the positions as the companies love a YES MAN (CAN CAN) with no idea, just sign there name for anything because it saves the company money and the staff hassle. There exeperienced staff all left and the new kids are left in charge, when a guy with years of experience arrives of a different religion or nationallity they feel insecure and go out of there way to high lite these trouble makers (in there eyes).:oh:

[bh_ame]

I am still young in aviation with just three years of exp and working for CX India. With B1 under my belt i would love to work in uk in coming years. I have lived there for 3 years and learned a lot. I had a great exp and would love to return. But one thing bothers me most will i be employable considering my NON-EU status. Will my job prospects be real good if i manage to have a permit to work. Any sugesstions or advice?

[smudgethecat]

Yeah, stay in India mate ,we have quite enough well qualified UK engineers looking for work thanks

[allosaurus]

Most vacancies filled by company's own staff (if they have base maint)other than that you,ll have to be "known" to engineers already at that base.In this industry your reputation always precedes you!

[grababadger]

It really is as simple as this,

You can gain your modules either by going to an 'approved' 147 school or you can self study and pass the modules that way.

How you gain the experience is upto you, connie first, go permy try an apprentice. I can guarantee that either one will churn out bad/good/exceptional engineers/fitters/technicians.

Having an ability to learn a new trade is down to the individual and his approach to the aircraft, if a new college kid is bad mannered then surely he wont go far and his superiors will note and act on this. On the other hand there might be a college leaver who learns quickly and advances equally as fast as someone who has worked on aircraft all there lives. A spectrum of individual qualities and abilities allows airlines to choose who they recruit, not the other way around.

Prove your worth and perhaps, maybe youll be chosen. I dont like all this negative attitude it really does prove that this industry contains THICK, small minded people who are clearly uneducated and lack any real substance or credible argument.

Experience, education go hand in hand, choose your route, ajust your tolerance levels and have a willingness to respect those that deserve it.

It maybe worth remembering experience in any professional job is not enough. Lawyers, doctors, pilots etc all goto college/uni first.

Good luck to everyone, except the small minded.

[pyracantha]

26 years in the industry, at the frontline keeping the pilooks happy, to dig the crap out of toilets again. Today the industry is run by the accountants, cutting the maintenance budgets, cutting the training budgets and slashing wages and manpower. Used to have good wages in the business, now on the waste-heap after being a victim of the recession. Business used this as an excuse to get rid of the work force.... but still plenty of pilot jobs and new planes being bought.....WHO'S FIXING THEM??? The cheapest bidder of course.:*

[TURIN]

It maybe worth remembering experience in any professional job is not enough. Lawyers, doctors, pilots etc all goto college/uni first.

Fair comment, except many pilots do not, and have no professional need to, have a degree. (Can one get a degree in airmanship/piloting?)
Something I was told when at college was that often the Flt Engineer was the most qualified and educated member of the crew. (Didn't do 'em much good though).

As for lawyers and doctors, agreed they do the degree in law/medicine first but they still have to have their hand held for a few years before they are let loose on their own. Quite right too, I wouldn't want to go under the knife of a surgeon who had only 'done the degree'. :eek:

[grababadger]

At what point did I say the kid with a degree goes straight to B1 status? like the doctor, lawyer they do the minimum time- post education. In our case the minimum is 2 years! I have failed to meet anyone that has done it in 2 years, the average is 3-4 years thats after doing 2 years at a 147.

Remembering that this is for the raw B1 without any types. Add on another 6months to a year gaining type experience plus being approved by your company quality. Roughly 5-6 years in total, thats on par with a doctor is it not? Also a 147 training school doesnt qualify a degree? the 'foundation' degree is done alongside the modules, however both elements are completely different and seperate exams are carried out.

In my opinion both the apprentice and the 147 school are equally as demanding. Anyone willing should take there concerns up with the CAA/EASA-ranting on here wont win your argument.

Remember this too, the modules are not a direct replacement for experience. What they do offer is proof that an individual can read, write, interpret information and use their brain. Something required to start you off as a potential aircraft engineer.

[grababadger]

On the subject of pilots, you are correct they do not have to do a degree, although they're are such courses similar to the 147 that allows pilots to gain a degree alongside doing their modules (london city) do a course.

It is worth remembering the degree is a completely separate course and that the the brunnel students have to sit CAA exams seperately like anybody does.

I think it is a wonderful thing that universities/government recognises that the aircraft industry is worth degree status. It allows already B1/B2 holders to take a short cut to gaining a degree by only 1 years full time or 2 years part time, NOT 3 years full time. This is a reflection of the knowledge already gained by anyone that has a B1/B2-regardless of educational background, age etc.

The degree element is good in that it allows anyone with the b1/b2 to transfer into any other engineering industry, no many other companies recognise the B1/B2 but they do know what a degree is.

As time passes the 147 schools will improve, aircraft engineers will be recognised on a national level and the industry lets hope will pick up.

I think it is important we all work hard to help others regardless of experience, there will always be someone with more experience thats just how it works.

[Bodjit]

Hi all, read this one with interest and feel I have to put in my bit.......

There seems to be an underlying feeling by the more experienced among us that the sacred license has been cheapened by our european overlords to such a degree that nowadays anyone can get one......

I've been in this game for 20 odd years now B1 and B2 (10 years for the Queen)..... Been a conny for a couple of years and traded through the recession on reputation thankfully.

When I was a permy last we got numerous 'students' from Newcastle on OJT..... it was my humble opinion that excepting a couple and they know who they were the majority simply did not know one end of a screwdriver from the other..... The fact that you can pass a degree does not make you suitable to be a B1/B2... theres a bit more to it than that

I must also say that yes, I think it is far too easy to pass a few multichoice and get your ticket, and the europeans will soon wake up when there are more crashes through maint errors in the future, only they will be to blame!!!

One more point regarding OJT, I dont feel it is my job as a line eng to teach these students basic stuff on OJT, that surely is what lecturers working short days in nice warm classrooms are paid hansomely to do.....

Yes I am aggrieved and yes this industry is finished, the quicker I'm out and into something else the better... now shoot me down if you want :ok::ok:

Bodjit

[TURIN]

At what point did I say the kid with a degree goes straight to B1 status?

Er, you didn't.
I have no argument with you. We are on the same page as they say.


I didn't think my comments were a rant either, however yours are looking that way. Settle down I meant no offence. :ok:

[Tranwell]

The trainees currently in the industry from Newcastle have a distinct disadvantage. The previous six years have seen the creation of the Academy from nothing, in order to fill the skills gap identified by the CAA. This was created by Kingston University, Bristol College and Newcastle College.

Until the last two years, this course was designed around the CAA modules and as a result was almost 95% theory. Although they had a Boeing 737 in the car park, limited use was made of it due to the demands of the licence modules.

Two years ago saw the expansion of Newcastle College's aerospace department - they built a new hangar and stocked it with aircraft of varying complexity. These courses are designed for two purposes only:

1: An access course for Newcastle Aviation Academy
2: Provide hands-on training for potential aircraft mechanics.

The students who have benefitted most from this facility are the current first years. They are studying BTEC level 3 (the same qual as the RAF provide for mechanics), C&G level 3 (the same qual as the RAF provided for fitters), and NVQ level 2.... now I KNOW the NVQ's are usually utter tripe, BUT this one has been written by licenced engineers and is 100% practical on aircraft. It teaches the basics from health and safety in a workshop environment to DI's on large and small aircraft, jacking, wire locking, how to read the AMM's... and so on. I know because I developed it. Ignore the bit of paper at the end and suddenly you have kids who know the basics of what a speed brace does....

The foundation degree is offered to provide funding for the teaching of the licence modules.

The new breed are on there way and will be hitting the shop floor in 3.5 years. Just in time for the long awaited boom.


Oh and Bodjit... I took a huge pay drop from being an unlicenced conny to hide from the recession in this job.... our lead lecturer is Licenced and if he wanted to re-adopt his certifying position, the pay increase would be somewhere in the region of 10000..... Short hours?.... I think not. think 3 hours of prep to teach one hour... we have more red tape than a red-tape factory.. :ugh:

[simonchowder]

"The new breed are on there way", dream on friend ,no one wants them least of all the industry ,what they want is the savvy time served guy who can walk the walk and can actually get his windy and rivet gun out do that skin repair.

[nodrama]

Oh, the industry will want them...a big gap will need filling. Good luck to them and I just hope the advice offered in this thread finds its way into the academy/ college classroom.

Until the last two years, this course was designed around the CAA modules and as a result was almost 95% theory. Although they had a Boeing 737 in the car park, limited use was made of it due to the demands of the licence modules.


Only one example, I know, but the above is one of the reasons why students from acadamies have a bad rep in the industry. Not their fault, but the academy's......who took their money and churned them out.

The foundation degree is offered to provide funding for the teaching of the licence modules.


I think it is becoming clearer.....the course is a glorified BTECH but called a FD to attract funding?


Here's something to think about.....in the future (say 10 years) will it only be possible to be a B1/ B2 licence holder if you have a degree in a related subject? Who know's.....

[TURIN]

Just re-read this thread and found this edit from Tranwell...

A typical school leaver, after 4 years there, will have gained: NVQ (practical based), National Certificate, City & Guilds 2597, Foundation Degree, and the EASA B1.1 modules. I think that is somewhat more qualified than your average apprentice.

Academically qualified yes. But something has to give if one is going to squeeze in that much study and classroom work.

What I am trying to say is that in 4 years a C & G, plus a Btec (HNC) is plenty enough time in the classroom and training school, time is needed on the job as it were. Let the student (apprentice) learn to apply his/her studies and pick up the experience from the old lags that cannot be taught in a classroom environment. Studying for a B1/B2, FD is too much too soon. :ok:

[Tranwell]

Which is where the 2 years as a mechanic comes in... its up to the industry to help these raw recruits become decent mechanics. All we do is give them a start... There is no other way into the industry at the moment - apprenticeships? Will the industry survive with only a handful of apprentices - most of whom with stay as career fitters....

On this note, I issue a challenge - All of the colleges and academys who run the above mentioned courses are in desperate need of talking to the MRO's. We all need up to date information on what is required of new recruits. Help us help you. We are here to stay, so we might as well work together! (MRO's, not agencies.....)

[TURIN]

So, what you are saying is that we need a return to the 6 yr apprentice scheme. :ok:

[nodrama]

All of the colleges and academys who run the above mentioned courses are in desperate need of talking to the MRO's. We all need up to date information on what is required of new recruits. Help us help you. We are here to stay, so we might as well work together!


Tranwell, if a major MRO is using you for the next 5 years and another interviews your students first, then surely you must be talking to the industry and know what is required of the new 'recruits'.

The students really need to be on a scheme where they, say, do a term at college/ academy, and then work on the hangar floor for a month at a MRO, and so on....in effect an apprenticeship scheme...partly sponsored by an MRO and partly funded by the government. That way they finish college with pieces of paper, 'real' practical experience and alot more of an idea of what is expected of them in the big wide world of civil aviation.....they could nearly, but not quite, hit the ground running.

The company I work for started taking on apprentices again nearly 3 years ago, who follow a similar scheme as to what I have described. It hasn't been a total success...some of the issues have been down to apprentice personalities and attitude, but it has been also noticeable that there has been a fundamental lack of communication between the company and college in coordinating and harmonising the apprentice's education and training. In my opinion, both parties have been at fault. I think that that is the key to turning out a well rounded potential maintenance engineer.....not giving them years of theory and tinkering on a 'dead' aircraft (not after year 1, anyway) and then letting them loose to the industry armed with a degree and lots of talk of how well prepared they are......'cos they're not.

[Tranwell]

No, I know they're not. I wasn't and thats after 7 years in the RAF on top of the degree and modules.

The MRO's we deal with generally don't give us feedback except to say that the guys we send them are doing ok. I get more info talking to the friends I have out in the big wide world (the majority are now B1's) and working towards type ratings and becoming decent engineers. Plus, I'm talking for ALL of the colleges and 147 schools, not just ours...

I agree that much more experience of the real world is required, but at the moment I can't see how it could realisticly be achieved. Even by the time they reach year 4 (2nd year degree), there are still many who won't make it. The drop-out rate is quite high due to poor module results. Its a strange position to be in here... the changes that we make won't start being seen on the shop floor for years yet..

That said, I know my boss is viewing this thread too, so perhaps some good may come from your suggestions. I certainly hope so!

[pyracantha]

Please don't drag any of the Military based training into this discussion.... as any ex-Forces guys know, you could trust any and all of your colleagues with your life. The new younger generation engineers straight out of college, well thats why they invented velcro to replace their shoe-laces.

No offence meant to any of them, some are good, some bad. Its' all down to the individual personality. True, the level is training and exams now are lower than when I went through the grill, what was wrong with the one-to-one interrogation? If you can deal with that kinda pressure situation, real world enginering is a piece if cake.

[aveng]

To Lala21
Firstly congratulations to you for actually trying to attain a qualification. But a word of advice from a crusty old "hasbeen" with over thirty years experience and lots of licences - if you were to bring your attitude to my crew, us sillly old farts would soon smack it out of you. Remember WE are the ones who sign your experience books for your licence!!!!

School is great for theory but the real world sorts out the fakers from the real engineers. Word of mouth goes very far in aviation, further than you might expect.:ok:

[ericferret]

Thinking back the army apprenticeship ran for about 2.5 years and you did not get to touch a flying aircraft before going on to a unit as a UT (under training). So the theory and experience side is not that different to what the colleges are doing now. However this was just to mechanic stage. Further training was required to enable a army engineer to certify (upgraders). Slightly different but again not too disimilar to what is happening now with the experience requirement before the licence can be used..

Where the difference seems to lie is in attitude and application. The military were able to cut people who were not making the grade, not so easy for a civillian organisation. Secondly the military training also weeded out some of the weaker characters. Square bashing and assault courses for civilian trainees? Probably not, but oh what fun could be had.

It seems to me that initial selection of candidates for the course is the key. Interesting that the flying side has similar issues with people able to throw money at the training until they pass. This leads to professional co pilots. If we are not carefull the same will occur in engineering with licence holders being refused certifying approvals.

Could a properly structured A licence not be the answer. With trainees comming out of college with the A licence (further OJT required to validate it). This would lead on to the B1/B2 when sufficient experience had been gained and more exams taken.

At least one major UK company is already doing this. I was initially sceptical but having seen it in action and read the criticisms and suggestions above I now believe this is not a bad compromise.

The benefits of this would be shorter initial training and a chance for the trainees to gain real world experience. If they don't make ther grade or decide it is not for them not a huge amount of time and effort has been wasted by either party.

The industry needs these young people and we don't want them to fail as these years are important for their futures whatever they choose to do.

[Tranwell]

Students sitting the B1 modules have the A licence also, but you can apply for the A after 12 months relevant experience, and the B 12 months after that, and again, the key word is RELEVANT experience.

With a combined college and university course...(well affiliated...), we can take a group of 100 students....

intake - 100
End of year 1 - 95 remain. NVQ L2 awarded (this way we meet our achievement quota)
Start of year 2 - 85 remain. There are always students who can't even get this far and don't get invited back.
End of year 2 - hopefully still 85, but again can drop due to job prospects. (RAF, etc). Award of BTEC National Certificate and C+G Level 3.

Start of Uni (year1) - 56 places available, but the preference is given to the high achievers from the colleges and adult learners with an engineering background.
End of year 1 - usually around the 40 mark. Some can't get to grips with the degree, and part of the learning agreement is to complete a certain number of degree exams (taken at the same time as the EASA modules)
By the end of year 2, the 40 will hopefully remain.

Last year, I believe there were only a handful (15?) who attained all of the EASA modules. (The majority managed the degree). 5 of those went on to attempt the top up year for BSc, and the remainder tried to get a job in industry. In total, 12 students were selected by BA as trainees. By all accounts, they are doing well. Some will get the B1 bit of paper within three years, and the others will stay as mechanics or move on to new things.

As you can see, even with estimated numbers, we are not flooding the industry by any stretch of the imagination. There are 4 other similar schools across the country.

By the way, have BA scrapped their apprenticeship entry for this year? One of my students applied for it, was conditionally accepted, and received a letter last week claiming not enough people had applied.....

[nodrama]

Just as an example that there are still apprenticeship schemes out there, an extract from a UK company's aircraft maintenance division web page........


And when, in 2001, its managers identified a looming skills shortage in the local job market, (the company) established the Advanced Apprenticeship scheme. Accredited to deliver National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) up to Level 4 standard across a range of engineering and management areas, the initiative secured government approval and funding from the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) and its first intake of students - all recruited from the local community - entered training in 2002.
Typically, around 10 applications are received for each place on the three-year course. Of the 11 students who passed the course in July 2006, nine remain in full-time employment with (the company), one has become an Air Engineering Technician in the Royal Navy and one is studying for an Aerospace Engineering degree, funded by (the company) and with the guarantee of full-time employment for at least a year after graduation.
A further eight apprentices have completed the course in the last two years. Six are now working at the site, one works for an aerospace company in Northern Ireland and one has been sponsored by (the company) to read a Masters Degree in Aerospace Engineering with Management. Thirteen more apprentices are currently undergoing training and such has been the success of the programme - at 92%, its retention rate is almost double the national average for such schemes - that the Contract Support and Training Manager is now involved in a working group that is investigating the feasibility of establishing similar schemes for other company operations around the UK.
"This has been a flag waver for apprenticeships and a great asset. We want these people to become tomorrow's engineers, supervisors and managers."




This particular scheme is not B1/ B2 licence orientated, but an alternative avenue to becoming an aircraft technician/ engineer for school leavers and, I hope, something the government and industry will commit more interest and investment to. By the way, the company has just advertised for next years apprentice placements.

[simonchowder]

I find it incredible that BA have scrapped their scheme due to lack of applicants, every other company i know who still offer proper apprenticeships have been swamped with applicants ,i was talking to the head of training at airbus in north wales he was telling me they have had a thousand plus applications for eighty places .

[nodrama]

BA's website states that their Professional Engineer Programme and their Graduate Programme are closed/ not available.

Not surprising from a company that has been mis-managed and lacked successful commercial imagination for several years now, and is looking to cut costs anywhere it can.

[Tranwell]

HERE'S ANOTHER PROBLEM....

In our quest for increased practical tasks and a level of realism, the best reconstruction of the real world possible would be the use of a complete and functional 'modern' aircraft (A320, 737-400). It would have to be kept indoors, and maintained with spares support. This would have to be a non-flying aircraft. Just purely as a vision, it should be possible to extend the EASA/FD course by 6 months or a year to include pure practical sessions on this aircraft including C-checks, role change, engine changes, etc.

Here's the problem - there is not a training facility in the world who could afford this level of realism...... so in your opinion, how can we achieve this? Is there the possibility (or interest) of a couple of MRO's sponsoring the development & running costs?... (current financial situation excused - it will get better sometime soon....)

[hashman]

Closest you get to that in the real world is where some companies have an agreement to take on trainees from college as slave labour for a few months. Give them the usual greasing jobs and tell them its' OJT and stamp their books.

[TURIN]

BA are supposed to be announcing a new apprentice scheme this spring according to internal chatter.
Perhaps the old one closing is to avoid any confusion.

[Krystal n chips]

" This would have to be a non-flying aircraft. Just purely as a vision, it should be possible to extend the EASA/FD course by 6 months or a year to include pure practical sessions on this aircraft including C-checks, role change, engine changes, etc.

Here's the problem - there is not a training facility in the world who could afford this level of realism......"

I beg to differ. The RAF does so on a daily basis last time I looked..which was Friday. True, the syllabus does not reflect the criteria for a licence, but that is not the objective here. The objective is to train the equivalent of mechs and then techs. The licence route for many comes, or came for many of us in the past, later therefore.

What is taught however, are the core basics applicable to all engineers. Hand skills, how to use tools, how to follow an AP..and thus an AMM later for procedures, flight safety etc, etc. Component removal and installation..followed by testing....all the frames have fully functioning systems in the main....3000 psi is the same anywhere with all the potential hazards involved is it not?....likewise drop / refit an engine...albeit one that will not be ground run.... as well as jacking ( fully) and dejacking....hence all the practical basic aspects are covered. Switch / power on checks....again, basic engineering for potential mechs.

Is the course "dumbed down" ? No, not in my opinion as it provides the basic training relevant to progress further in the maintenance disciplines.....if people choose to that is. The licence is a qualification that requires personal study and commitment to achieve, as does a Degree, ATPL, and so on irrespective of the vocation involved. I am far from being a dinosaur, but I do not feel that a course leading to a licence is really the best way foward given that every engineer has to spend as much time as possible gaining a very broad range of experience in the practical skills required to safely maintain an aircraft...be it Mil, GA, or in the airline world.