FAA A&P to EASA Part 66 B1
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
From: In the Hangar & on the Line
FAA A&P to EASA Part 66 B1
Attn: All concerned
Has anyone got more details on the UK CAA now being in a priveleged
position to convert BA Engineering overseas staff's FAA A&P licences
in combination with EASA type courses to restricted or unrestricted
Part 66 B1s???
To convert another ICAO state's AMEL seems initially far too sensible to be true but goes a little against the known UK CAA/EASA rules at present you see..
BAe146???
Has anyone got more details on the UK CAA now being in a priveleged
position to convert BA Engineering overseas staff's FAA A&P licences
in combination with EASA type courses to restricted or unrestricted
Part 66 B1s???
To convert another ICAO state's AMEL seems initially far too sensible to be true but goes a little against the known UK CAA/EASA rules at present you see..
BAe146???
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
From: Oz
I find that rather perplexing BAe, I was under the impression that the UK CAA didn't think the FAA A&P was worth the plastic it is printed on! One would also imagine that at the very least the holder would need to sit some ( more like all) the modules over in the UK. I didn't think you got any credit for the A&P?
What prompted the question? What have you heard?
What prompted the question? What have you heard?
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
From: In the Hangar & on the Line
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
From: In the Hangar & on the Line
It is true about the Guidance Document. Refer Paragraph A7:
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/177/8355%20Section%20A_06.pdf
I think that would apply to everyone not under EASA, not just the FAA.
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/177/8355%20Section%20A_06.pdf
I think that would apply to everyone not under EASA, not just the FAA.
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
From: Oz
Well to this bush lawyer, paragraph A7 offers no ambeguity whatsoever. Black and white IMHO. Having said that, never underestimate the lobbying power of the corperates and the leverage they weild upon government.
It would seem to set a precedent though for anyone who now deals with the UK CAA that should be afforded the courtesy.
It would seem to set a precedent though for anyone who now deals with the UK CAA that should be afforded the courtesy.
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
From: In the Hangar & on the Line
Well to this bush lawyer, paragraph A7 offers no ambeguity whatsoever. Black and white IMHO. Having said that, never underestimate the lobbying power of the corperates and the leverage they weild upon government.
It would seem to set a precedent though for anyone who now deals with the UK CAA that should be afforded the courtesy.
It would seem to set a precedent though for anyone who now deals with the UK CAA that should be afforded the courtesy.
I'm in agreement with the leverage they weild, but this industry is dying
over here, just like yours and this pan-european system is partly to blame.
Hardly anyone with the right skills, experience, loyalty or attitude.
No shortage of people with information
Joined: Dec 1998
Posts: 3,038
Likes: 52
From: .
Except if you work for BA it seems airmech
Looks like it is true afterall in that the CAA IS run by BA.
I think it is scandolous, and also against the rules as stated in the ELGD documents as set by EASA.
Really pisses me off having had to jump through numerous, continually moving hoops and still not having what I should.
Looks like it is true afterall in that the CAA IS run by BA.
I think it is scandolous, and also against the rules as stated in the ELGD documents as set by EASA.
Really pisses me off having had to jump through numerous, continually moving hoops and still not having what I should.
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
From: In the Hangar & on the Line
Spanners
I'm on the case.
I'm sorry UK CAA, if you do something, you do it properly.
Imagine if engineers on line/base duties did not do things properly?
Yes, consequences inbound.
BAe146?
I'm on the case.
I'm sorry UK CAA, if you do something, you do it properly.
Imagine if engineers on line/base duties did not do things properly?
Yes, consequences inbound.
BAe146?
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
From: EDDF
A&P or ICAO Type II to EASA part 66
Except if you work for BA it seems airmech
Looks like it is true afterall in that the CAA IS run by BA.
I think it is scandolous, and also against the rules as stated in the ELGD documents as set by EASA.
Really pisses me off having had to jump through numerous, continually moving hoops and still not having what I should.
Looks like it is true afterall in that the CAA IS run by BA.
I think it is scandolous, and also against the rules as stated in the ELGD documents as set by EASA.
Really pisses me off having had to jump through numerous, continually moving hoops and still not having what I should.
I want to see their claims when BA gets it for free!
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
From: EDDF
A&P to EASA part 66
When the JAR was in effect, we had to stop the contract. Several of us had to go to Oxford to get the new licence.
When you are sending only one man for 4 month to a training, the costs mount easily over Pounds 50,000.
A normal company may ask to CAA to pay one or two Million Pounds back!
[email protected]
