How to become an AME/City of Bristol College

[tech_boy]

Howdy all, I've got a few noobish questions to ask so please go gentle on me!! :O:O

I'm due to (hopefully!) graduate from university this year, with an electrical and electronic engineering degree, and have previously done an apprenticeship in electronics so I'm not oblivious to which end of the soldering iron gets hot!!

I know this wont count for a great deal when applying to companies but I LOVE being on the tools and HATE being stuck behind a desk and am seriously considering a career as an AME.

What options are open to me to get into this area? I've found that City of Bristol College runs a Basic Training Certificate with a A320 type rating. Does anyone have an opinion of this course or of City of Bristol College?

Also is anyone aware of other opportunities? Working on aircraft seems to be a bit of an enigma without any clear information about routes into the field.

Unfortunately I do not pass the medical to join the forces so this option is not open to me.

[spannersatcx]

A type rating is of no use without a basic licence.
You need 3-5 years experience of working on a/c in a 145 organisation before you can hold a licence. The experience requirement is determined to by how you gain your licence.
The caa website has documents called ELGD which tells you the requirements for gaining a licence.
You've either wasted a number of years at uni or need to look at what options your qualifications will open up for you, you would have to start again if you now decide you want to become an a/c certifier.

[QA1]

If you're serious about a 'hands on' career, rather than an academic / design related position, BA are currently recruiting for Mechanic positions at LHR.


Google BA recruitment and check out - Engineering - Current Vacancies.


Ref: UKLHR1573


Closing Date: 13 March.

[Capot]

The City of Bristol College Basic Training B1/B2 course with the A320 tye rating counting as OJT is a scam, if it is still being offered.

The B1 type rating course used to be sold, at additional cost of £2,500 or so to what they paid for a Fully Approved Basic course (Cat B), to unwitting students who are not told that it's useless to them before they can even apply for a licence. They cannot do that until they have completed their minimum 2 years work experience, by which time the type rating course will not get them a rating because it's too old. The Practical element may well not be available, either, which makes any type course worthless.

They used to be told that they had to pay for and complete the type-rating course in order to complete the Basic Training OJT, because the type course would count as OJT. Yup, that's what they said. It was a complete stitch-up, and I heard that the CAA had finally woken out of its stupor, put down the teacup and done something about it. Perhaps they have not done that, after all.

The last I heard, CoB are still sending students off after completing the Modules and Practical training, telling them to get their own OJT, although they have been promised and paid for a fully-approved Basic Training course. Without the OJT arranged, integrated and managed by the Part 147 MTO, a Basic Training course is no longer a "Fully-Approved" course (integrated OJT is a required ingredient). In those circumstances the OJT is wasted time and money, since if a student completes a "non-Approved" course he/she must do 5 years work experience, and the OJT is not required.

The story was that sending students off to get their own OJT started when the CAA finally stopped the use of a type rating course as "OJT". Maybe the story was wrong.

There was, natch, a linkage between the type course provider and CoB, but it's best not to turn that stone over.

[tech_boy]

Hmmmm, so what you're telling me is that CoBC would be a waste of my time?

When I asked them these questions at a recent open day they led me to believe that 100% of their graduates were snapped up within 18 months of passing the course and that I couldn't get accreditation from my electrical engineering degree allowing me to miss some of the modules such as maths and elec. fundamentals, meaning I would have to go right back to basic Ohms Law etc. :ugh:

Although I suppose they would say these things as they are trying to sell a VERY expensive course.



I've seen that KLM do a 2 year course (which the student pays for) in conjunction with Kingston uni and their website says that:

"On successful completion of this course, KLM UK Engineering looks to recruit selected individuals to work within their aircraft maintenance hangars based at Norwich Airport."

So I take it that this is yet another gamble to get into the industry with the student taking all of the risk just for KLM to say "on your bike" at the end of the course, or are KLM just saying that to cover themselves as they cant promise they'll offer everyone jobs? Does anyone know how many of the course graduates get employed with KLM?

Sorry for the mass of questions again! :O

[Capot]

Tech Boy

They could have been right about the exemptions...there are very few allowed.

As for the rest, if you want to go with CoBC then I suggest you make very, very sure that you have the following statements from CoBC, in writing on headed paper signed by a responsible person;

1 The course on offer is a Fully-Approved Basic Training course, in Category XXX, and is in full compliance with all relevant regulations in force on the date of the staement, including but not limited to Parts 66 and 147 and the associated AMC/GM.

2. Subject to successful completion of required examinations and assessments, students will be issued with an EASA Practical Training Certificate on completion of the course, without any need whatsoever to undergo any other training of any kind.

3. The course includes, for completion within the stated duration of the course, all 3 of the following;


the minimum required hours of classroom teaching as per CoBC MTOE, and examinations for all required Modules, with up to (say) 2 resits of any examinations,and
the minimum number of required hours of Practical Training in accordance with EASA requirements, including assessments by fully-approved assessors, and
the minimum number of required hours of OJT arranged by CoBC at CoBC's entire expense and carried out in full accordance with relevant EASA legislation as to the planning, supervision and instruction of the OJT, and provison of assessors and assessments.

None of that is controversial IF CoBC really is providing a proper, fully-approved Basic Training course, and they would have no problem making that declaration.

Any prevarication, amendment and so on merely tells you to walk away, because they are up to their old tricks.

It would also be advisable to contact the CAA Part 147 Surveyors office to speak to the CoBC Surveyor to confirm that they are doing all that. However don't be surprised if they refuse to talk to you with some spurious excuse.

The KLM promise is an empty one, of course, as you have spotted. It means "If you complete the course well, if we like you, and if there just happens to be a vacancy at the time you become available, we will place you on the list of candidates to talk to. But we will take someone with more experience if we have a choice."

Be very wary of Kingston, Newcastle and other colleges, and LRTT when it comes to the vexed question of providing the required OJT within a Basic Training course as an integral element of it. They all have the same problem as CoBC. Ask for the same statements.

Flybe have a better offer, a "guaranteed job" at the end of their apprenticeship, which also delivers a Cat B licence becuase it includes the 2 years work experience. But you have to get to the end, and there are ways and means of thinning out the numbers during the 4 year course if there are too many to take on. But, that little caveat aside, it is a genuine offer, and the Flybe apprenticeship is a good one.

[3 Phase]

I would also be very careful when it comes to CoBC. I have previous experience with them and they are far from truthful. Capot is spot on with what is going on there. I left a few years back and I was amazed they were not under investigation at that time! Out of the 20 or so students in the class I attended, I would say around 3 or so managed to get employment, with no help at all from the college when it comes to the OJT. As for the numerous other classes, I am fairly sure they did not fair any better. The college argued that they never said that they would find OJT for you, they would just try and help. Well, they didn't even get that far. I remember the outrage when this type rating scandal started, just another method of gaining valuable college income from unsuspecting students. That valuable income does not pay for good training materials or practical equipment and once you do graduate, you will probably question the relevancy of anything you have been taught. But the old war stories are good for giggles. :ok:

Personally, I think you are much better off with the traditional apprenticeships with the major players. I can't help but think that CoBC will just fill you with false promises and empty your wallet at the same time, just the same as they did with hundreds of other former students.

And the college canteen sucks. :yuk:

[tech_boy]

Thank you all very much for your help and advice :)

[BluFin]

COBC - "Go Around", Much better place's out there

[Capot]

just another method of gaining valuable college income from unsuspecting students.

Yes well, the payments for the "Type Course OJT" didn't go to the College; AFAIK the dosh went to the course provider in what was by all accounts allegedly quite a cosy arrangement between the principals concerned.

[3 Phase]

Why don't I have a hard time believing that?! Can't wait to see what the next big idea they have will be. :rolleyes:

[Capot]

The heart of this issue, ie how the OJT is dealt with by these places, is the definition of an "Approved" course, the fact that the requirement for work experience following an approved course is 2 years instead of 5, and the reasons for that difference.

An Approved Basic course has 3 essential ingredients. The Module exams, the Practical Training and the On-the-Job Training (OJT). The whole course, including the OJT, must be provided by a Part 147 Approved Maintenance Training Orgnaisation. However, the OJT must be carried out in a Part 145-approved Maintenance & Repair Organisation (MRO). Therefore a Part 147 MTO should have a contract with such an MRO as a necessary condition of its Part 147 Approval. Clearly in the UK some do not, and EASA should take an interest in why not.

The OJT must be supervised and directed by the Part 147-approved MTO, and the contract with the Part 145 MRO must facilitate that. A typical charge by a Part 145 MRO for facilitating OJT, which takes place within its own Part 145 procedures and Quality Management, would be £500 - £1,000 per day for a group of up to 6 students, plus an amount per student. There is a lot of additional administration involved.

When a student is sold a "Fully-Approved Basic Training Course" that must include the OJT, by definition, so that no students should be told to go and arrange their own OJT.

If it does not, it ceases to be a Fully-Approved course, and this is where the work experience issue comes in. The alternative route to a licence is to pass the Module exams in any way you can, normally with a mixture of home study, short intensive courses for some Modules, "Zero-to-Hero courses, whatever. There is NO "non-approved" substitute for either the Practical element or the OJT.

Instead of the Practical Training and OJT, a student must complete an extra 3 years of work experience as a minimum, making 5 years in all. He or she then presents a completed logbook with all this experience duly logged and signed up, together with the Module exam certificates, which must be completed within the previous 5 years (I think).

The upshot is that one choice is to carry out a Fully approved course including Practical and OJT, with a Basic Training Certificate as an outcome, followed by 2 years work experience. This will probably take 4 years in all, and cost £15,000 - £20,000 before any Government funding, plus living costs for 2 years.

The other choice is to take the Module exams (£50 or so per exam plus travel) and obtain 5 years work experience working unlicensed, but paid, in a Part 145 MRO. You study and take the exams when off-duty, at little or no cost. This can be accomplished in 5 years in all. The main difficulty is getting the job in the first place, and to do that you have to be realistic about your value to the MRO. Contracting is a possible route for those with at least some training and experience.

(There are some differences for people with Service experience etc.)

All this means that a 2-year College course that does not include the OJT is a total waste of time and money if the rules are enforced; not being an Approved course the student will have to complete 5 years work experience in any case, while the Practical element of the course, while it might have taught some useful basic handskills, counts for nothing so far as EASA is concerned. You can get the same training much less expensively; evening classes is one way.

However, that's not the whole story. It may be that with the consent of the CAA Colleges are being allowed to make some arrangement for OJT that allows them to issue a Basic Training Certificate, while not fulfilling EASA requirements. Such an arrangement might be that the student goes off and obtains OJT somewhere, as instructed, and the College signs a retroactive contract with the provider, so that the OJT appears to have been provided by the College as part of the course. But it will not have been, and the OJT will not have been planned, supervised and monitored by the Part 147 MTO as it should have been. The arrangement is an obvious sham, in fact, but the evidence suggests that it exists.

If when you question the College about the course and particularly the OJT it appears that such an arrangement is used, you should walk away. You are not getting a proper fully-approved Basic course. But if you decide to continue, you should contact the CAA and obtain a statement, in writing, that although the OJT is not an integral part of the course the CAA will accept it as such, and that they consider the course to satisfy all the requirements for a Full-Approved course.

When considering the full cost of the course, remember to add in all the costs of the OJT if they are not included in the course price. That would be the charges by the MRO, any additional charges by the College, 10 weeks accommodation, 10 weeks loss of income, travel etc etc. And that is in the very unlikely event that you can walk into OJT immediately you finish at the College.

Good luck!