How to get into line maintenace
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Berks, UK
Age: 48
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tough one this...
The crux seems to be that airlines are now run by managers whose only focus is cost, and that means no-one does apprenticeships anymore because they cost money.
This has led to the ludicrous situation so aptly described by the above posts - to become an aircraft engineer you have to go to uni, but following that, the airlines don't want you because you have no hands on experience or history. Then the industry bleats on about a lack of qualified, experienced signatories..
As stated above, the most effective way in is to start at the bottom and work your way up, but that is of little comfort to someone who has just invested the last three years in a mountain of student debt and a shiny new degree certificate. It may simply be the case that you will have to start as a basic mechanic, greasing undercarriages and cleaning windows, and work through technician up to license holder.
I was lucky enough to be awarded a place on one of the last 'proper' apprenticeships run by BA in the early 90's, where one of the real advantages was that by the time I was allowed to actually do anything on an aircraft, I already had a three year long proven track record - my employer already knew me and my strengths and weaknesses. It is a bit of a risk for someone to take on an engineer with no proven experience, but that would appear to be a catch 22 situation entirely of the industries own making, and unfortunately, as a by product, you (and other new engineers) are suffering as a result.
With respect to my esteemed colleagues, I'm not sure why having a degree should preclude you from line work - it at least demonstrates that you have a brain and are willing to work towards a goal, but I will also back them wholeheartedly in the suggestion that that is only half the battle... an academic accreditation is not the same as doing real work, on a live aircraft at 3am, in the snow, without the proper equipment, with fingers so numb you can't feel what you are doing and an airline breathing down your back insisting that they want to fly the plane in 2 hours time.
However, that still doesn't mean that deep down you aren't capable of such self discipline, but in this business there is no substitute for experience and you DO have to prove yourself I'm afraid.
I think, as with most of the important jobs in aviation, (Pilot, Engineer, ATC etc...) the only route to success is sheer hard work and determination - after all, you don't get to Captain a Jumbo without slogging about in a Cessna first, degree or not.
I wish you the best of luck, I hope my post isn't too negative, and remember that if you really want to do it, with a bit of effort you probably can, assuming that on a basic level you actually have the ability...
The crux seems to be that airlines are now run by managers whose only focus is cost, and that means no-one does apprenticeships anymore because they cost money.
This has led to the ludicrous situation so aptly described by the above posts - to become an aircraft engineer you have to go to uni, but following that, the airlines don't want you because you have no hands on experience or history. Then the industry bleats on about a lack of qualified, experienced signatories..
As stated above, the most effective way in is to start at the bottom and work your way up, but that is of little comfort to someone who has just invested the last three years in a mountain of student debt and a shiny new degree certificate. It may simply be the case that you will have to start as a basic mechanic, greasing undercarriages and cleaning windows, and work through technician up to license holder.
I was lucky enough to be awarded a place on one of the last 'proper' apprenticeships run by BA in the early 90's, where one of the real advantages was that by the time I was allowed to actually do anything on an aircraft, I already had a three year long proven track record - my employer already knew me and my strengths and weaknesses. It is a bit of a risk for someone to take on an engineer with no proven experience, but that would appear to be a catch 22 situation entirely of the industries own making, and unfortunately, as a by product, you (and other new engineers) are suffering as a result.
With respect to my esteemed colleagues, I'm not sure why having a degree should preclude you from line work - it at least demonstrates that you have a brain and are willing to work towards a goal, but I will also back them wholeheartedly in the suggestion that that is only half the battle... an academic accreditation is not the same as doing real work, on a live aircraft at 3am, in the snow, without the proper equipment, with fingers so numb you can't feel what you are doing and an airline breathing down your back insisting that they want to fly the plane in 2 hours time.
However, that still doesn't mean that deep down you aren't capable of such self discipline, but in this business there is no substitute for experience and you DO have to prove yourself I'm afraid.
I think, as with most of the important jobs in aviation, (Pilot, Engineer, ATC etc...) the only route to success is sheer hard work and determination - after all, you don't get to Captain a Jumbo without slogging about in a Cessna first, degree or not.
I wish you the best of luck, I hope my post isn't too negative, and remember that if you really want to do it, with a bit of effort you probably can, assuming that on a basic level you actually have the ability...
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its not just the airlines ANOTHER ton, the "cost-focus" management style is I believe a symptom of the whole aerospace industry. I was recently talking with a design engineer with a certain large manufacturer ( not Boeing there's a hint 
) about how many new graduates etc. they are taking. He was telling me that they are going nuts trying to find relatively young but experienced people at the moment. Because there is such a distinct lack of such people they have had to lower their requirements and have in the most case accepted that they aren't going to get anyone with experience and so have recruited a raft of graduates knowing that they'll have to get the senior engineers to hold their hands for a while before they are fully competent. Something which, he added, is starting to grate on the senior people who didn't sign up to train people day in day out. The manufacturing companies are really paying for it now on training costs because there are so few middle-level engineers with experience since they cut back on the training and recruitment for the last few years. Why can't these manager-types see that by cutting training and recruitment in the short term they are setting up a landmine for themselves further down the road? Isn't the obvious solution a relatively consistent level of training and recruitment year in year out or am i trying to be too sensible?
With regard to people going to do engineering degrees rather than apprenticeships in my experience part of the blame has to lie with school career services and the education system. Most school career services are fairly ignorant of the routes into engineering depending on the type of work you want to do and they are naturally motivated to pushing people towards the universities because of the league tables. When i was at school and said "I want to be an engineer!" the careers advsior never said "Right, lets see what different routes into that are on offer." No instead his automatic response was "Right lets look at what kind of engineering degrees you can apply for." I am sure most graduates would have similar experiences. I know several graduates who would never have started their degree if they had known that in order to get into line maintenance an apprenticeship was the way to go. I am glad to hear though from some posters that for graduates who do want to get into line maintenance the door isn't completely slammed shut but just a bit more awkward to open
) about how many new graduates etc. they are taking. He was telling me that they are going nuts trying to find relatively young but experienced people at the moment. Because there is such a distinct lack of such people they have had to lower their requirements and have in the most case accepted that they aren't going to get anyone with experience and so have recruited a raft of graduates knowing that they'll have to get the senior engineers to hold their hands for a while before they are fully competent. Something which, he added, is starting to grate on the senior people who didn't sign up to train people day in day out. The manufacturing companies are really paying for it now on training costs because there are so few middle-level engineers with experience since they cut back on the training and recruitment for the last few years. Why can't these manager-types see that by cutting training and recruitment in the short term they are setting up a landmine for themselves further down the road? Isn't the obvious solution a relatively consistent level of training and recruitment year in year out or am i trying to be too sensible? With regard to people going to do engineering degrees rather than apprenticeships in my experience part of the blame has to lie with school career services and the education system. Most school career services are fairly ignorant of the routes into engineering depending on the type of work you want to do and they are naturally motivated to pushing people towards the universities because of the league tables. When i was at school and said "I want to be an engineer!" the careers advsior never said "Right, lets see what different routes into that are on offer." No instead his automatic response was "Right lets look at what kind of engineering degrees you can apply for." I am sure most graduates would have similar experiences. I know several graduates who would never have started their degree if they had known that in order to get into line maintenance an apprenticeship was the way to go. I am glad to hear though from some posters that for graduates who do want to get into line maintenance the door isn't completely slammed shut but just a bit more awkward to open
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: farrrr east
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As one of the lucky ones to have been properly trained as an engineering apprentice with a very large British airline, from the time of leaving school, working my way up to the Certifying Licensed Engineer, I for one cannot understand the mentality that training costs money. Especially since leaving the large airline for many years I have had to work with staff of varying standards of education, basic training, knowledge and abilities. Which at some places leaves a great deal to the imagination…?
I have worked with staff who wouldn’t even know how to check the engine oil level correctly, and the bottom line is even the engine oil costs.
"edited out"
How can you rely on a few of your staff carrying the rest of those who just make up the numbers, passable on every day routine tyre kicking, checking the oil and changing the odd wheel or brake unit, passing the time of day with the hostess, hoping for a cup of something warming. But what when a PFR requires something more than that, an engine problem, a flight controls problem or some idiot has just hit the side of your aeroplane and they are screaming at you that there is nothing else to use for that service, who do you turn too, tech services, the man in the MCC, are you sure, your direct line manager.
The tech services, (degree holders, many who have not been near an aeroplane, except for that brief introduction during there induction into the company, the mail boy between you and the manufacturer, or the regulatory authority) What’s the point of taking on a degree holder who has been no where near an aircraft then having to retrain them, what an aeroplane is then when they have enough of that, or the opportunity comes along, leave and move onto another position in another company in a totally unrelated subject.
Or the MCC staff, (full of office staff), many of whom have not been out on the front line for how long???
Your Line manager, the man who has been promoted over you, him, who suckered up to the right people and joined the right social clubs, who didn’t tell the boss to his face what he didn’t want to here. The leopard who has changed his spots over night.
3 to 4 years of basic, good training straight from school, can repay over the 30-40 years you will be productive and move on up the ladder, head held high.
I have worked with staff who wouldn’t even know how to check the engine oil level correctly, and the bottom line is even the engine oil costs.
"edited out"
How can you rely on a few of your staff carrying the rest of those who just make up the numbers, passable on every day routine tyre kicking, checking the oil and changing the odd wheel or brake unit, passing the time of day with the hostess, hoping for a cup of something warming. But what when a PFR requires something more than that, an engine problem, a flight controls problem or some idiot has just hit the side of your aeroplane and they are screaming at you that there is nothing else to use for that service, who do you turn too, tech services, the man in the MCC, are you sure, your direct line manager.
The tech services, (degree holders, many who have not been near an aeroplane, except for that brief introduction during there induction into the company, the mail boy between you and the manufacturer, or the regulatory authority) What’s the point of taking on a degree holder who has been no where near an aircraft then having to retrain them, what an aeroplane is then when they have enough of that, or the opportunity comes along, leave and move onto another position in another company in a totally unrelated subject.
Or the MCC staff, (full of office staff), many of whom have not been out on the front line for how long???
Your Line manager, the man who has been promoted over you, him, who suckered up to the right people and joined the right social clubs, who didn’t tell the boss to his face what he didn’t want to here. The leopard who has changed his spots over night.
3 to 4 years of basic, good training straight from school, can repay over the 30-40 years you will be productive and move on up the ladder, head held high.
Last edited by allthatglitters; 17th Mar 2006 at 12:54.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Berks, UK
Age: 48
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree totally. I think a major problem is that too many managers are just managers, not airline people. The days of people like Juan Trippe (Pan Am / 747) who could be considered 'airline' people, people who saw through simple cost and went boldly ahead with true aviation vision are sadly over. Never again will we see a development programme like Concorde, something that was fraught with financial risk and was never really a commercial success, but, by god, what a machine!
The people making the critical decisions these days are unfortunate products of the issues at the core of this whole thread - they (by and large) have not worked their way up form the shop floor, and have no understanding of the fundamental issues involved in aircraft engineering. They have no concept of the skills sets required to make a good aircraft engineers / designers, and I have a suspicion that, in many cases, they only occupy a management position for as short a time as possible as they progress up the ladder. From their point of view, long term intiatives are not a good game plan, as they are sometimes a bitter pill to swallow in terms of short term expenditure. Far better from their seat to save a few more quid now and hope that they have moved on by the time this sort of thing happens. 'Sorry, not my problem anymore!'...very new labour...
In terms of money spent, on training, apprenticeships and quality staff, less is most definitely less.
This is not only a problem in engineering, but rife throughout the whole scope of the industry. Many functions and jobs these days are farmed out to the lowest bidder, and surprise surprise, the levels of quality decrease. For example, aircraft cleanliness in my company these days is shocking, most departures I have to go around and pick up the rubbish left between seats and in galleys, frequently emptying toilet bins that have been forgotten. The people who clean the aircraft now are from a cleaning company that, by definition, has the contract because they put in the lowest bid. The thing that might surprise managers in ivory towers is that they were able to put in the lowest bid because they pay the lowest wages, and the poor sods who do the actual work have, understandably, very little interest in going the extra mile. Now, if these same people were employed by the parent company, had staff travel and some semblance of a pension scheme, they would have a vested interest in doing a good job and might show some willing and initiative, and, dare I say it, they may even care!
The people making the critical decisions these days are unfortunate products of the issues at the core of this whole thread - they (by and large) have not worked their way up form the shop floor, and have no understanding of the fundamental issues involved in aircraft engineering. They have no concept of the skills sets required to make a good aircraft engineers / designers, and I have a suspicion that, in many cases, they only occupy a management position for as short a time as possible as they progress up the ladder. From their point of view, long term intiatives are not a good game plan, as they are sometimes a bitter pill to swallow in terms of short term expenditure. Far better from their seat to save a few more quid now and hope that they have moved on by the time this sort of thing happens. 'Sorry, not my problem anymore!'...very new labour...
In terms of money spent, on training, apprenticeships and quality staff, less is most definitely less.
This is not only a problem in engineering, but rife throughout the whole scope of the industry. Many functions and jobs these days are farmed out to the lowest bidder, and surprise surprise, the levels of quality decrease. For example, aircraft cleanliness in my company these days is shocking, most departures I have to go around and pick up the rubbish left between seats and in galleys, frequently emptying toilet bins that have been forgotten. The people who clean the aircraft now are from a cleaning company that, by definition, has the contract because they put in the lowest bid. The thing that might surprise managers in ivory towers is that they were able to put in the lowest bid because they pay the lowest wages, and the poor sods who do the actual work have, understandably, very little interest in going the extra mile. Now, if these same people were employed by the parent company, had staff travel and some semblance of a pension scheme, they would have a vested interest in doing a good job and might show some willing and initiative, and, dare I say it, they may even care!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: London
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The botom line is this - an ad goes out for technicians and Licensed guys from a reputable company. What they want is a period of formal recognised training (usually equates as forces training or aircraft apprenticeship) and for a tech say 2 years relevant experience on the types of aircraft they have. For a certifier probably 7 years + experience and at least 2-3 years certifying the company's particular type of aircraft along with supervisory experience. What do you think they get? Guys who have paid for their modules and self studied, done a bit of hands on as part of their modules (usually KLM Norwich), no supervisory experience. Or a grad fresh from Uni who wants to be a tech or engineer. I went through 150 C.Vs recently and there were about 15 from possibles out of that you may get 4 guys you need.
Facts are there are still more guys out there with experience than there are decent jobs, thats why the grads and those with little to no experience will not get a look into an airline on commercial aircraft. The difficulty for companies comes in matching their type ratings to applicants without breaking the bank on training.
So if you are in that position what do you do. First thing is get a job anywhere (and I mean anywhere) to pay for a type course, offer your services FOR FREE for the work experience and be prepared to work hard, learn and put yourself out. Thats what a guy did where I work and guess what - he is now a tech lined up for a few type courses. There is quite simply NO substitute for experience.
Facts are there are still more guys out there with experience than there are decent jobs, thats why the grads and those with little to no experience will not get a look into an airline on commercial aircraft. The difficulty for companies comes in matching their type ratings to applicants without breaking the bank on training.
So if you are in that position what do you do. First thing is get a job anywhere (and I mean anywhere) to pay for a type course, offer your services FOR FREE for the work experience and be prepared to work hard, learn and put yourself out. Thats what a guy did where I work and guess what - he is now a tech lined up for a few type courses. There is quite simply NO substitute for experience.
Cunning Artificer
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The spiritual home of DeHavilland
Age: 76
Posts: 3,127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember one of our best LAEs who did that that hangar-rat. He did all his basic training at own expense, paid
was
...B737 Captain. Quite a loss to Line Maintenance that was, but he's happy in his work.
Dunno why though. Flyings not all its cracked up to be...
...for a type course,
... prepared to work hard, learn and put yourself out. Thats what a guy did where I work and guess what - he is now a
Dunno why though. Flyings not all its cracked up to be...
