What is an RAF Engineer?

[radar101]

Everyone up to and including the Prime Minister has been referring to the poor RAF Aircraft Technician as "an Engineer".


My first thought on hearing of the incident on the BBC was SEngO or JEngO?


Then reality kicked in and I accepted that they meant one of the Engineering Technicians.


Since the official press releases / spokespersons referred to him an Engineer does this mean that that is now the official term within the RAF - or are they just ignorant?


PS: Look North referred to him as an Air Engineer!!

[Exrigger]

From my records:

I started as an:
Aircraft Fitter Airframe - Trade Group 1 - Aircraft Engineering,

this then changed to:
Aircraft Technician Airframe - Trade Group 1 - Aircraft Engineering,

and was changed once again to Engineering Technician Airframe - Trade Group 1 - Aircraft Engineering

So engineer would fit as a generic term, I would assume, been out for a while so it might have changed again.

[The Oberon]

From my records:

I started as an:
Aircraft Fitter Airframe - Trade Group 1 - Aircraft Engineering,

this then changed to:
Aircraft Technician Airframe - Trade Group 1 - Aircraft Engineering,

and was changed once again to Engineering Technician Airframe - Trade Group 1 - Aircraft Engineering

So engineer would fit as a generic term, I would assume, been out for a while so it might have changed again.

Same here ER, substitute Electronic for Airframe, chuck in a handful of O levels, ONC and HNC and no I'm not because I don't have a degree.

[Exrigger]

I suppose if one has a Licentiateship in Aeronautical Engineering off the back of a service career one could also consider 'engineer' an appropriate moniker, also dictionary definition:

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/engineer

A person who designs, builds, or maintains engines, machines, or structures.
or

A person qualified in a branch of engineering, especially as a professional.
‘an aeronautical engineer’

[radar101]

Interesting - Wiki:


"In the US and Canada, engineering is a regulated profession whose practice and practitioners are licensed and governed by law. Licensed professional engineers in Canada and the USA are referred to as P.Eng (Canada) and PE (USA). A 2002 study by the Ontario Society of Professional Engineers revealed that engineers are the third most respected professionals behind doctors and pharmacists.


In Ontario, and all other Canadian provinces, the "title" Engineer is protected by law and any non-licensed individual or company using the title is committing a legal offense, and can get fined. Companies usually prefer not to use the title except for license holders because of liability reasons, for instance, if the company filed a lawsuit and the judge, investigators, or lawyers found that the company is using the word engineer for non licensed employees this could be used by opponents to hinder the company's efforts."

[Bigpants]

RAF Cosford is the home of RAF Engineering, there used to be two flying units on base but thanks to contractorisation neither was serviced by our own engineers.

RAF Engineers must be a small and fading tribe of box changers who exist at other bases.

[NutLoose]

On the other hand my CAA licences are printed with Aircraft Maintenance Engineer Licence on the front, my EASA one has just Aircraft Maintenance Licence on it or similar and I am referred to, well to my face at least :p, as a Licenced Aircraft Engineer.

In most of Europe a degree is the norm for my job.

The RAF simply used to shuffle the job titles around to try to equal it to the civilian counterpart hence Fitter went out and in came Technician...only only problem with that today is the skill set hasn't been maintained but dumbed down from what would be expected Civilian wise.

In a way it's like Cooks and Chefs, even working in the worst pizza joint or fried chicken establishment they will tend to call themselves Chefs these days. Well...unless there flipping burgers and then they are Navigators :E

[morton]

What is an Aircraft Engineer for that matter? Whether Service or Civilian, the word ‘Engineer’ has been the subject of much debate within Aviation. On the Civilian side we seemed to be OK holding an Aircraft Maintenance Engineers Licence under CAA legislation. Then JAA came along and muddied the water before EASA decreed that we had to be called Certifying Technicians for the Authorisations we held. Their rationale was that the position did not require a Degree and only someone holding a Degree could be called an Engineer.

If I remember correctly, some very experienced and capable people in the CAA who were on the JAA Board were denied similar positions on the EASA board because they did not have Degrees. It would be unfair to brand everybody on the EASA Board with the epithet of ‘has the knowledge to work out the cubic capacity of a tin of beans but lacks the ability to open it’. However, including someone who had got their hands dirty having done what others were theorising would have made a lot of sense and brought a more balanced discussion when introducing legislation.

I think the answer is that we are aligning ourselves with mainland Europe and tyre-kicker trades are mechanics or technicians whilst Engineering Officers remain as Engineers. However, the general public see those that do Engineering ‘stuff’ as Engineers and that is where the confusion lies.

I wasn’t that fussed about what I was called. As long as pay accounts got it right I was happy.

Morton – RAF Aircraft Fitter that changed to Technician; Civilian Aircraft Engineer that changed to Technician.

[Shackeng]

What is an Aircraft Engineer for that matter? Whether Service or Civilian, the word ‘Engineer’ has been the subject of much debate within Aviation. On the Civilian side we seemed to be OK holding an Aircraft Maintenance Engineers Licence under CAA legislation. Then JAA came along and muddied the water before EASA decreed that we had to be called Certifying Technicians for the Authorisations we held. Their rationale was that the position did not require a Degree and only someone holding a Degree could be called an Engineer.

If I remember correctly, some very experienced and capable people in the CAA who were on the JAA Board were denied similar positions on the EASA board because they did not have Degrees. It would be unfair to brand everybody on the EASA Board with the epithet of ‘has the knowledge to work out the cubic capacity of a tin of beans but lacks the ability to open it’. However, including someone who had got their hands dirty having done what others were theorising would have made a lot of sense and brought a more balanced discussion when introducing legislation.

I think the answer is that we are aligning ourselves with mainland Europe and tyre-kicker trades are mechanics or technicians whilst Engineering Officers remain as Engineers. However, the general public see those that do Engineering ‘stuff’ as Engineers and that is where the confusion lies.

I wasn’t that fussed about what I was called. As long as pay accounts got it right I was happy.

Morton – RAF Aircraft Fitter that changed to Technician; Civilian Aircraft Engineer that changed to Technician.

Ah yes, I remember well when the RAF, in its wisdom, introduced graduate Engineering Officers in the '60's, replacing, in the main, vastly experienced ex RAF Apprentice Engineering Officers, most of whom had spent years at the coalface learning their trade. For us Flight Engineers, it was not altogether a happy experience.

[thing]

Just had a look through my 6859:

Nav Inst Mechanic
Flight Systems Mechanic
Flight Systems Technician
Engineering Technician Avionics

More or less the same job with four name changes. Makes me sound windswept and interesting I suppose. I'm guessing that putting 'Engineering' in front of 'Technician' was a bit of sales blather to flog it to new recruits. Sounds a bit more rarified than just plain old technician. I guess it's in line with 'upping' the spec of fairly banal jobs society wide. Refuse disposal officers and barista spring to mind. Not that I found being a techy banal by the way.

I've also found that I was awarded the X717 annotation of Instrument Maker and Horological Skills on 20 Feb '84. Bet that's a rare bird, can't even remember getting it.

[goudie]

If the title ’engineer’ is favoured over ‘technician’ then perhaps the rank of ‘chief technician’ should change to ‘chief engineer’.

[thing]

Do they still have Junior Technicians?

[Lima Juliet]

This is the Branch and Trade logo...

https://cdn.crackergroup.com/cache_test/imgs/logos-hires/500---w-400_h-200_zc-1_q-60.png

But you could say that he was Aircraft Ground Engineer (GE) on the day of the tragic accident - as I would have expected he would have turned the jet whilst the pilot was in the sim?

[Rigga]

The definition has also been somewhat watered down by the EU trying to muscle in to English language as it are written by EU Law-yers.

The EU seem to ignore the definition of engineer as someone who makes things work in preference to a literal translation from Ingeneur - German for some form of doctorate.

To prove the point - in EASA-land, Aircraft Maintenance Licences are given the Category/Title:
CAT A Mechanic (aka FLM)
CAT B Technician (aka Worker Ant)
CAT C Engineer (aka computer driver)

They are roles, not ranks, and can all be gained independently from each other. However, a stand-alone CAT C is not well respected...I believe!

[Rigga]

Do they still have Junior Technicians?

No. They have a far cheaper SAC Technician...who wears a Three-bladed "Cosford Wheel" (My terminology).

[thing]

No. They have a far cheaper SAC Technician...who wears a Three-bladed "Cosford Wheel".
But they still have Chief Techs? :confused:

[Rigga]

The C'T rank never quite fitted into NATO classifications as it slotted between Grunt Sgt and Staff Sgt. and the RAF has built such as strong role for them that it cant get rid of em in the aircraft trade (all the MTSF and GEF C/Ts have gone) - so C/Ts are now classed as a poor Flt Sgt and just about get the same pension rights

[gr4techie]

You could ask if Engo's are even Engineers?... They just sign the paperwork for Lim's and ADF's.

Never seen one get their hands dirty doing an engine change (unless they're ex-rankers)

[snippy]

Sorry to throw a spanner in the works (excuse the pun).....but at my current MOD place of work they tend to be called Maintainers.....

[Pontius Navigator]

Ah yes, I remember well when the RAF, in its wisdom, introduced graduate Engineering Officers in the '60's, replacing, in the main, vastly experienced ex RAF Apprentice Engineering Officers, most of whom had spent years at the coalface learning their trade. For us Flight Engineers, it was not altogether a happy experience.

In the pre-Binbrook stations there were three wings, Flying Wing, Admin Wing and Technical Wing. The boss of the later was the Senior Technical Officer.

[goudie]

Aren’t Chief Techs the equivalent of a Brigadier?

[NutLoose]

The definition has also been somewhat watered down by the EU trying to muscle in to English language as it are written by EU Law-yers.

The EU seem to ignore the definition of engineer as someone who makes things work in preference to a literal translation from Ingeneur - German for some form of doctorate.

To prove the point - in EASA-land, Aircraft Maintenance Licences are given the Category/Title:
CAT A Mechanic (aka FLM)
CAT B Technician (aka Worker Ant)
CAT C Engineer (aka computer driver)

They are roles, not ranks, and can all be gained independently from each other. However, a stand-alone CAT C is not well respected...I believe!



Hence I am all three, however a C certer still has to inspect an aircraft and scope the amount of work he deems required to reissue an ARC thus " renewing the Certificate of Airworthiness for another year" so not all PC driver :E

And my CAA "title" was a Nominated Engineer

[NutLoose]

SAC Tech wasn't that simply a way to get around paying a JT more while dumbing down the rank.

Mind you I'm still a believer an apprenticeship should be a full 5 years, not a couple of months training followed by a couple of years out in the real world learning a narrow field then a further few months training.

[Rigga]

Sorry to throw a spanner in the works (excuse the pun).....but at my current MOD place of work they tend to be called Maintainers.....

Maintainers is a fish-head term.

[Rigga]

Hence I am all three, however a C certer still has to inspect an aircraft and scope the amount of work he deems required to reissue an ARC thus " renewing the Certificate of Airworthiness for another year" so not all PC driver :E

And my CAA "title" was a Nominated Engineer

So you have BCAR Section L too! And I was also a Form 458 holder for four organisations.

I don't have a C but I authorise C signatories, and mostly they are computer drivers - for Base Maintenance CRS.

[Rigga]

SAC Tech wasn't that simply a way to get around paying a JT more while dumbing down the rank.

Mind you I'm still a believer an apprenticeship should be a full 5 years, not a couple of months training followed by a couple of years out in the real world learning a narrow field then a further few months training.


I did the other form of OJT - through the Mech/Fitter/Techie route and I don't think it did me any harm...I am paid the level of a junior Groupie. But I didn't get a HND or Degree as some now do from Cosford.

The JT was another victim of the NATO Rank system...not a Lance Jack nor Full Cpl - so again, it had to go to 'fit in'. But the RAF again, needed a low Techie rank and had to invent the SAC Tech. This caused other problems with discrimination of ranks within SAC's!! To the point that the Rocks now have a Lance Jack to fit in with NATO Ranks...they used to have a "Senior" SAC as a second to their Cpl.

[NutLoose]

The simplest route would have been to gone back to the old JT rank badge that was an inverted Lance Jack stripe, I too went your route. Nominated Engineer went when we changed over, but I still retain my Section L licences, the way things are going we may need them again lol.

[k3k3]

The NATO rank equivalence poster was a joke with all the RAF OR ranks undervalued, with an RAF J/T shown as an OR2, the same as a conscript with six months service in most of the air forces. I know the Italian and Greek technicians passed out of technical training at least OR5.

The RAF had nine OR ranks, so why not just number them OR1 to OR9, on the chart an RAF CPL is the same as a USAF Senior Airman at OR4.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranks_and_insignia_of_NATO_air_forces_enlisted

[gr4techie]

Aren’t Chief Techs the equivalent of a Brigadier?

Im sure Ive met some WO's who (in practice) ran the Sqn
and could make junior Officers cry.

[glad rag]

What is an RAF Engineer?

Became extinct 'cira 1993..

[Avtur]

Radar101

As an ex RAF Air Engineer, we are (there are a handful left) a class of our own for many, some dubious, reasons. As a UK Chartered Engineer, I would suggest that this position was mis-named. I guess in modern parlance, I would have been an "Aircraft Systems Manager". The unfortunate Blue was a Technician, not an Engineer.

In N America, as already pointed out, an Engineer must hold a suitable engineering degree from a recognized body, and must be licenced. Sadly, in the UK, an "engineer" can be honest Dave (with no GCSEs), the dodgy bloke who fixes your washing machine.

[ivor toolbox]

Same here ER, substitute Electronic for Airframe, chuck in a handful of O levels, ONC and HNC and no I'm not because I don't have a degree.
Well, according to Raes, if you want to go that way, a HNC gets you IEng, as does B1 plus C rating on AMEL.

IEng is an engineer grade is it not?

Ttfn

[The Oberon]

Radar101
Sadly, in the UK, an "engineer" can be honest Dave (with no GCSEs), the dodgy bloke who fixes your washing machine.

As opposed to repairs.

[tucumseh]

ADRP, most of which I think is now in the MAA, tried to address the problem of formal qualifications Vs competence Vs experience a few years ago and wrote this:


‘The normal understanding of a competent person is one who has practical know-how, theoretical knowledge, and actual experience of the subject matter. Academic qualification by itself is not a measure of competence, but an indication of the holder’s ability to satisfy an examining body at some point in the past, although it may be an indication of theoretical knowledge’.


The author was well-known for his condemnation of the policy whereby a non-technical direct entrant (never mind one with an engineering degree) could self-delegate airworthiness and technical approvals. This was his attempt to prevent it happening with our industry appointees under the DAOS scheme; as there was no way he’d win the argument in MoD. This policy is the problem, not some JEngO learning the ropes under slightly less qualified but very experienced and competent WOs/NCOs.

[glad rag]

Well, according to Raes, if you want to go that way, a HNC gets you IEng, as does B1 plus C rating on AMEL.

IEng is an engineer grade is it not?

Ttfn


What HNC though :}

[Tankertrashnav]

Bit of thread drift if I may. When doing my family history I discovered that my great great grandfather's profession was given as "engineer", and yet he had signed his birth certificate with a cross, as he was illiterate. Further research revealed that he actually operated a stationary steam engine used to pump out a tin mine. In the same period (mid 19th century) the term was also used to describe railway engine drivers. I believe this is still the case in the US, who often retain the original meaning of English words which have subsequently altered on this side of the pond.

[NutLoose]

great great grandfather's profession was given as "engineer", and yet he had signed his birth certificate with a cross, as he was illiterate.

That would be your great grandfathers certificate? he would be a bit young to be signing his own.

[The Oberon]

Bit of thread drift if I may. When doing my family history I discovered that my great great grandfather's profession was given as "engineer"

As I posted earlier, I think you need a degree to be a true engineer and I don't think, could be shot down here, that the universities offered engineering degrees until the early 20th. century. Maths, physics and chemistry were offered in the mid 19th. but not engineering. So what defined an engineer in the 1850s is debatable. As an aside, it does make you wonder about Brunel, Watt, Stevenson and the like?

[dragartist]

Several years ago there was a big push for people to be come registered with The Engineering Council through the appropriate institutions. I chose the RAeS route. Quite proud of my achievements as without a degree I was subject to greater scrutiny. I had to spend a great deal of effort writing a paper and being mentored. The rules changed somewhere in between the start and end of the process but I made the grade.
In my dying days in the MoD I thought they had made it compulsory for those in some posts to become registered. I don’t see much evidence of this. Has the requirement been relaxed or does it not matter any more?

[Olympia 463]

The missing link in all this is the fact that in the UK a 'professional engineer' is one who has 'Chartered' status which is closely guarded by the senior engineering institutions and these days requires not only an honours degree, but one from a very limited list of universities.

I write C.Eng M I Mech E after my BSc(Hons) on my business card. I can sign passport applications and various other legal documents (I don't think I can marry people though).

The problem in the UK has always been that unlike some countries the word 'engineer' is not protected. Repeated attempts to get legislation to ban the use of the title by non-chartered people have failed. So a plumber can call himself a sanitary engineer if he likes. No wonder the public are confused. In Germany and other European states the title is protected and use of it by those not entitled is breaking the law.

When bidding for US DoD contracts in the defence companies I was in, the number of professional engineers (ie Chartered - PE to them) allocated to the job was a matter of great importance. If you didn't have enough you would not win the contract.

When I worked in Germany I was always introduced as Herr Diploma Engineer ... so as to make the distinction clear - the Germans were very fussy about rank and titles.

[Blacksheep]

I trained as an Electrical Fitter (Air) and was subsequently changed into an Aircraft Fitter (Elect) then left the RAF and became a UK CAA Licensed Aircraft Maintenance Engineer. The latter designation being equivalent to my former status as an RAF Senior NCO. Since then I advanced to Incorporated Engineer through the RAeS by a review of experience followed by examination and interview. So now I'm BSc; I.Eng; MRAeS. But I'm still not considered an Engineer throughout the EU.

As for the European Doctorate, I once worked with a German Doctor of Engineering (Ingenuier) who knew less about airworthiness than the average UK CAA LAE. He was an academic engineer who was as much use in Technical Support Services as teats on a bull.

Corporal Bayliss was an Engineering Technician, a very honourable and respectable occupation and would no doubt have risen further up the ladder had he not died in such unfortunate circumstances. Let's remember that many a pilot had placed their lives in his hands, whether they realized it or not: lets not disrespect him.

[seer557]

Olympia is not entirely correct. Whilst an exemplifying qualification for CEng will be a recognised (by the relevant "institution") 4 year degree, it is possible to achieve Chartered status via a Career Learning Assessment undertaken by the relevant "institution".

As a retired CEO of one of these "institutions", I would not use the term "closely guarded", rather suitably protected and transparently regulated!

[Olympia 463]

Olympia is not entirely correct. Whilst an exemplifying qualification for CEng will be a recognised (by the relevant "institution") 4 year degree, it is possible to achieve Chartered status via a Career Learning Assessment undertaken by the relevant "institution".



Well that route may well exist. I've never met anyone who used it, have you?

In the good old days (fifty years ago) one could get chartered status with an HNC with endorsements but that was closed off in the 60's I think. I totally disagreed with that at the time, knowing as I do now that there are too many rather poor 'officers' and not nearly enough good SNCO's in industry these days. As a retired Chief Engineer I saw too many people during my career with degrees who did not meet my idea of what a professional engineer should be capable of. The engineering profession is seriously unbalanced now, and too many 'graduates' are finding it hard to get jobs befitting their nominal educational qualifications.

[dragartist]

Well that route may well exist. I've never met anyone who used it, have you?
.

Yes I did. See my#39

[NutLoose]

Appendix A GUIDE TO ASSESSING LICENSED AIRCRAFT ENGINEERS

1. REQUIREMENTS FOR REGISTRATION

1.1 The following information will be used by members to guide them with the assessm
ent of applications for registration (see Section 2 of the Registration Handbook).

2. ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN (EngTech)

2.1 Applicants must hold:

•A valid EASA Part-66 Cat A licence plus current company authorisation on two aircraft types (held for a minimum of 2 years), OR

•A valid EASA Part-66 Category B3 licence plus two type ratings or a group type rating (held for a
minimum of two years

Note: The Cat A licence is not type rated. Major maintenance does not require a Cat A licence so it
would not be proper to set the authorisation on one type as a comparable standard. Some companies
use the Cat A licence to underpin the authorisation in Base (major) maintenance but this is not in the
EASA requirements. The key issue is that a Cat A, even when authorised for Certificate of Release to
Service (CRS), can only certify for work that applicants carry out themselves, no supervisory role. The
B3 licence covers simple light aircraft of limited complexity).


3. INCORPORATED ENGINEER (IEng)

3.1 Applicants must hold:•A valid EASA Part-66 Cat C licence with type rating and at least 1 current aircraft authorisation for base maintenance release, OR

•A valid EASA Part-66 Cat B1/B2 licence with type ratings and 2 aircraft authorisations for line maintenance or one aircraft authorisation for major maintenance and demonstrate a supervisory function in their current role (including proof of management training, Health and Safety, Diversity etc).

3.2 A valid licence from Australia, New Zealand and Hong Kong may qualify the applicant on an Individual assessment basis–see para 4.3.
(Note: Applicants with the licences listed in para 3.1, issued by the Competent Authority of an EU Member State
are deemed to be equivalent to those with the exemplifying qualifications for IEng registration, for example an accredited Bachelors or Honours degree in engineering or technology).


4. CHARTERED ENGINEER (CEng)

4.1 Applicants should hold a valid EASA Part-66 Cat C licence where it has been granted on the basis of a degree that is acceptable to the Society. A valid license from Australia, New Zealand and Hong Kong may also qualify the applicant–see para 4.3. In addition, all applicants should be working in a management position.

4.2 Applicants with a valid EASA Part-66 Cat B1/B2 licence who have qualified for an EASA Part-66 Cat C licence without a degree can still be considered for CEng-see para 4.3.

4.3 All applicants without the exemplifying (i.e. accredited) qualifications for registration will need their
formal and informal education assessed by the Society’s Individual Assessment Panel (see Section 3 of the Registration Handbook)



https://www.aerosociety.com/Assets/Docs/Membership/RegistrationHandbookAppendices.pdf

[Rigga]

The simplest route would have been to gone back to the old JT rank badge that was an inverted Lance Jack stripe, I too went your route. Nominated Engineer went when we changed over, but I still retain my Section L licences, the way things are going we may need them again lol.

I was using Form 458 about 3 years ago....PAOC use BCARs and CAP 360 still!

[Tankertrashnav]

That would be your great grandfathers certificate? he would be a bit young to be signing his own.

Oops! That should have been marriage certificate :O

[chevvron]

In the pre-Binbrook stations there were three wings, Flying Wing, Admin Wing and Technical Wing. The boss of the later was the Senior Technical Officer.
And OC Supply 'controlled' all of them!

[ian16th]

Corporal Bayliss was an Engineering Technician, a very honourable and respectable occupation and would no doubt have risen further up the ladder had he not died in such unfortunate circumstances. Let's remember that many a pilot had placed their lives in his hands, whether they realized it or not: lets not disrespect him.

Wot 'e sez!:ok:
ian16th Former Cpl/Tech.

[NutLoose]

No one has disrespected him. As far as I am concerned he was an engineer, the debate just moved on to what the rest of the world considers as an engineer.

After all the RAF describe the role he was carrying out as an engineer

https://www.raf.mod.uk/recruitment/roles/roles-finder/technical-and-engineering/aircraft-technician-mechanical/

There are also opportunities to undertake instructional duties or expand your skills in the role of an Aircraft Ground Engineer who provide aircraft engineering support when the aircraft is deployed.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I've got a certificate somewhere that calls me a Chartered Engineer, and two degrees in it. I'm probably an engineer.

I have occasionally been known to put on overalls and maintain aeroplanes, and I have another bit of paper somewhat that calls me an "inspector" - I tend to think of that as acting as a technician.

But, I've frequently worked with current or ex service technicians / engineers, or people with CAA Engineering licences who have an incredible knowledge of aircraft systems, diagnostics, and problem solving that leaves me with my degrees standing.

If it suits them, or anybody else, to call those people Engineers - I have absolutely no problem with it.

But I remain deeply sarcastic about the word being used to describe somebody who has done a 3 week course on how to service photocopiers.

G

[Rigga]

Oh I wouldn't say that about Photocopier engineers! - they do actually earn their title and many ARE electronics degree engineers!

I would debate whether washing machine fixers are engineers.

However, the start of this discussion was not really about qualification, but how the BBC described the Cpl. The public at large (and the RAF and BBC) are the people that call all technical things 'engineering' and that's where this debate should be targeted: At perceptions which the RAF and BBC seem to publicise more than anyone else.

[Smeagol]

I've got a certificate somewhere that calls me a Chartered Engineer, and two degrees in it. I'm probably an engineer.

I have occasionally been known to put on overalls and maintain aeroplanes, and I have another bit of paper somewhat that calls me an "inspector" - I tend to think of that as acting as a technician.

But, I've frequently worked with current or ex service technicians / engineers, or people with CAA Engineering licences who have an incredible knowledge of aircraft systems, diagnostics, and problem solving that leaves me with my degrees standing.

If it suits them, or anybody else, to call those people Engineers - I have absolutely no problem with it.

But I remain deeply sarcastic about the word being used to describe somebody who has done a 3 week course on how to service photocopiers.

G

Genghis' view gets my vote :ok::ok::ok:

(and yes I also think I may be an engineer: BSc, CEng, FIMechE)

[Alvechurch]

I have to admit I've read this thread with a degree of amusement and even a little nostalgia . Way back in the mid 1950's, yes way back then, we were called Mechanics.
As a brand new National Serviceman after just three months training at RAF Melksham training school I was classed as qualified Electrical Mechanic (Air).
I was then let loose on every aircraft flying from South Cerney and later, Little Rissington flying schools.
Everything from Meteors, Vampires and Provosts to Canberra's passed through my grubby little hands and I progressed from AC1 through LAC to SAC.
It was around that time we had a red-faced Junior Technician appear with his upside down stripe.
So that's it, not engineers, mechanics. ;)

[SlopJockey]

You could ask if Engo's are even Engineers?... They just sign the paperwork for Lim's and ADF's.

Never seen one get their hands dirty doing an engine change (unless they're ex-rankers)

Aren't they tech admin?:rolleyes:

[NutLoose]

The criteria above for the IEng and CEng says if I was ever bothered, which I am not, that I am qualified as one, I will sleep at night now knowing, did a rough tally of the individual aircraft types on my Part 66 B1 and Cat C licence and gave up at 1100 plus LOL

I even actually managed to fix the works Photocopier as well when it stopped copying :)

[ian16th]

I have to admit I've read this thread with a degree of amusement and even a little nostalgia . Way back in the mid 1950's, yes way back then, we were called Mechanics.
As a brand new National Serviceman after just three months training at RAF Melksham training school I was classed as qualified Electrical Mechanic (Air).
I was then let loose on every aircraft flying from South Cerney and later, Little Rissington flying schools.
Everything from Meteors, Vampires and Provosts to Canberra's passed through my grubby little hands and I progressed from AC1 through LAC to SAC.
It was around that time we had a red-faced Junior Technician appear with his upside down stripe.
So that's it, not engineers, mechanics. ;)

As a 'mechanic' you could only carry out an 'inspection' unsupervised.

If you carried out any repair work (cleared a snag), an NCO* had to check/supervise your work and oversign the F700.

* The red faced J/T, with an authorising chit from the Station EO could oversign. This was a way to save paying him Cpl's money!
I had such a chit. It was punted as being a probationary period. One dared not reject it, as it would jeopardise getting the eventual promotion to Cpl.

[GeeRam]

The missing link in all this is the fact that in the UK a 'professional engineer' is one who has 'Chartered' status which is closely guarded by the senior engineering institutions and these days requires not only an honours degree, but one from a very limited list of universities.


Not anymore, you need a Masters degree on top of that Honors degree as well now for C.Eng

[Genghis the Engineer]

The term "Professional Engineer" in the USA is equivalent to Chartered Engineer in the UK.

In more common British English useage, "professional" means "qualified to be paid to do the job", wich is most of us.

But yes, to gain CEng now, you need a masters degree (either BEng + MSc, or MEng) , 2 years further training, and 2 years in a position of responsibility.

I snuck in with just a BEng +2 +2 in 1995, but they obviously decided that underqualified people like me were a potential liability and tightened standards up a bit.

G

[NutLoose]

You do not need a degree anymore.

CHARTERED ENGINEER (CEng)



4.2 Applicants with a valid EASA Part-66 Cat B1/B2 licence who have qualified for an EASA Part-66 Cat C licence without a degree can still be considered for CEng-see para 4.3.

4.3 All applicants without the exemplifying (i.e. accredited) qualifications for registration will need their
formal and informal education assessed by the Society’s Individual Assessment Panel (see Section 3 of the Registration Handbook)

[Teamchief]

During my 28 years of service most EngO's were only 'meeting engineers' who if handed a screwdriver would probably hold the wrong end. They would spend more time in an office staring at a computer screen (or in a meeting) than on the hangar floor, and were only sought if a red or green needed signing. Chiefs generally ran the enginering effort with the Warrant Officers' eye on them......and Flight Sergeants organised the guard duties. I often wondered what EngO's did pre computers.......attend metings and when in the office stare into space!

[Rigga]

I like Teamchief's statement.
At one point in my career I was the Chief Engineer of a military flying club. I was given the job by the CAA Surveyor who'd heard someone had an A&C Licence...I had LWTR A&C Turbine Rotorcraft - quite useful for two and four seat wooden airframes. When I asked him Why me? He replied that I had something the CAA could take away - officers didn't have anything of use to aviation laws.

I disliked meetings so managed to persuade a Bengo to do those for me. I kept an eye on the budget and bills. He had the instruction not to make promises I would not keep!