Easa Licence , Same In All EU Countrys ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: South Africa
Age: 54
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Easa Licence , Same In All EU Countrys ?
Last year in one of mine short courses , i hear about how some countrys giving his National Licences under EASA approval , but with some really differents requirements ; the worst case is in Spain , they still keep the old way (yeah, in 2009 !) , but in his licences they put "EASA" ; some kids with 22 or 23 years maybe , doing a one year and a half course in some "Recognised by the Spanish CAA (DGAC i think) School " and then doing some "Practical examination" , that basically consist in say "yes sir!" to some militar Instructor , and give'em some presents from his friends in his job ; thats it , they have a full "EASA" B1.1 , B1.2 , B1.3 and B1.4 !!!! Is that fare for us ? All the AME in UK (nationals and foreigners , that is my case ) we all have this tough process to pass , even if we have olds licences , we has to pass this conversion schemes , and they pretend to keep this method untill 2011 !! , i mean , can we say something to EASA ? Should we be same payed as they are ? Is not EASA one Standard of Quality ? can someone check that for me , i want that this complain get to the EASA ears , and do something , is not fare for us .....
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: UK
Age: 57
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once you have done a bit of work around Europe and Scandanavia, you'll quickly realize just how "Fairly" various NAA's applied equal EASA part 66 criteria (and continue to do so) compaired with UKCAA. It's a bloody joke mate.
However, I think the UK is in the moral high ground wth the other countries in the moral low ground. Some of the abilities of some people certifying aircraft today is disgusting. Some of the paperwork procedures and safety control systems of some places is 3rd world at best in modern Europe.
It's p1ss poor
However, I think the UK is in the moral high ground wth the other countries in the moral low ground. Some of the abilities of some people certifying aircraft today is disgusting. Some of the paperwork procedures and safety control systems of some places is 3rd world at best in modern Europe.
It's p1ss poor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In the Hangar & on the Line
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UK.AME
EASA certainly does NOT represent one standard. It is however
supposed to but actually has NO legal powers to enforce any regulation.
The EC has the powers to enforce regulations but needs 'Technical Guidance' from EASA. This has in fact occurred recently - 'EASA being
externally forced into action' - from my insider.
Each NAA can therefore interpret any regulation they see fit to
suit their own requirements. Such as Cat A staff with B1/B2 equivalent
ATA104 Level III approvals in Line Mx AND in Base Mx, authorised yet non-licenced staff signing cards off. leaving the final release to the 'C' Certifier - yes, just one EASA Part 66 qualified individual releasing the aircraft from base mx. Now, think of all the Structural, Flying Controls/Surfaces, Engine, MLG/NLG, APU, Avionics, Cabin, Seats, Galleys, IFE, Cargo Bay, GVI/DVI
/NDT inspections/tasks/mods/adjustments (Dup's/RIIs/Closing insp??) undertaken during the average Base Mx visit, a fair number vital. All without B1/B2 support staff?? I would NOT want that 'C' Cert's job...
Vortechs
Unfortunately, the UKCAA do not escape the EASA standards row.
The BA/FAA Authorised Personnel saga continues with quite a few senior
UKCAA Staff now revealed as liars to the UK government TSC. All to cover up BA's commercial requirement for 20+ personnel to be converted to B1 WITHOUT ANY EXAMINATION. Pre-agreed definitions through Italy's ENAC for the 4 x Rome based BA personnel allowed for Cat A issue only, Not B1.1 issue - restricted or otherwise. EASA itself has findings raised against these particular UKCAA 20+ conversions for lack of required conversion reports but still remain without correction (Like so many EASA findings on other NAAs).
If you have not already, have a good read of this month's ALAE's Tech Log. Please support the AEI / ALAE (1981) in pressing for & enforcing higher standards upon all NAA's and respective Part 145 & 147, Part M organisations from EASA & the EC. The airworthiness of EC registered
aircraft and our futures depend on applying higher standards, not eroding them.
BAe146
www.alae.org www.airengineers.org
EASA certainly does NOT represent one standard. It is however
supposed to but actually has NO legal powers to enforce any regulation.
The EC has the powers to enforce regulations but needs 'Technical Guidance' from EASA. This has in fact occurred recently - 'EASA being
externally forced into action' - from my insider.
Each NAA can therefore interpret any regulation they see fit to
suit their own requirements. Such as Cat A staff with B1/B2 equivalent
ATA104 Level III approvals in Line Mx AND in Base Mx, authorised yet non-licenced staff signing cards off. leaving the final release to the 'C' Certifier - yes, just one EASA Part 66 qualified individual releasing the aircraft from base mx. Now, think of all the Structural, Flying Controls/Surfaces, Engine, MLG/NLG, APU, Avionics, Cabin, Seats, Galleys, IFE, Cargo Bay, GVI/DVI
/NDT inspections/tasks/mods/adjustments (Dup's/RIIs/Closing insp??) undertaken during the average Base Mx visit, a fair number vital. All without B1/B2 support staff?? I would NOT want that 'C' Cert's job...
Vortechs
Unfortunately, the UKCAA do not escape the EASA standards row.
The BA/FAA Authorised Personnel saga continues with quite a few senior
UKCAA Staff now revealed as liars to the UK government TSC. All to cover up BA's commercial requirement for 20+ personnel to be converted to B1 WITHOUT ANY EXAMINATION. Pre-agreed definitions through Italy's ENAC for the 4 x Rome based BA personnel allowed for Cat A issue only, Not B1.1 issue - restricted or otherwise. EASA itself has findings raised against these particular UKCAA 20+ conversions for lack of required conversion reports but still remain without correction (Like so many EASA findings on other NAAs).
If you have not already, have a good read of this month's ALAE's Tech Log. Please support the AEI / ALAE (1981) in pressing for & enforcing higher standards upon all NAA's and respective Part 145 & 147, Part M organisations from EASA & the EC. The airworthiness of EC registered
aircraft and our futures depend on applying higher standards, not eroding them.
BAe146
www.alae.org www.airengineers.org
Last edited by BAe146s make me cry; 14th Mar 2009 at 15:30. Reason: Spelling
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,879
Received 2,823 Likes
on
1,203 Posts
Friend was doing his limitation removal course at Perth, next to him was someone who held a UK and a full Scandinavian Licence, ask why he was doing it when he had a full EASA licence, his reply was he was given it all when he applied in Scandinavia, but the UK would not recognise it..... so he was doing the course to remove his limitations here, even though he now held a full licence.....
Last edited by NutLoose; 14th Mar 2009 at 17:07.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: South Africa
Age: 54
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I See The Point
I see that sometimes there's a lot of exemptions for persons that has few years in aviation , the heavy of this fact is that some "brand new" mechanics , not with yet two years in A/C industry , can take is "own country rules examination" and held an EASA full Licence ; without any Part 66 basic training , and , even when they have options to reduce his experience , not untill 2 years , that would be with a full time part 147 training . So , the thing is , that we have a lot of "EASA LICENCED ENGINEERS" that even know wath is the Part 66 or a 147 centre , no Human factors knowledge ( and we have to paid for that every two years) , and now , with the close of some companies like Futura , Vueling ( maintenance goes to Iberia ) , and in the nexts days Spanair , we will have a lot of competition , in a non equal conditions ; the major of this guys have full B1.1 to .4 , and they never seen an helicopter ; i dont know , i mean , someone has to say something to EASA , now i found that they are "EASA" approved releasing his limitations , with a joke examination hanged on the Spanish CAA web site with the Questions and Answers in Bold ; and they release his restrictions !!! ; the pass mark for mod. 11.18 was about 100%, and for Mod 5 was like 98% , and they still are complaining .... I don't know , maybe we have to be happy that when there's any offer in middle East , they put "EASA Part 66 Licence Released by UKCAA " , that's all that we have by now. Cheers everybody and have a good shift.
There's always plenty to make your blood boil on this subject!!
For instance, a UK B1 holder had a limitation he needed removing but had not passed the relevant exam here in the UK. Fortunately, his employer was not UK based but located not far away in Euro land. His license was submitted to his employer and magically came back limitation free courtesy of the friendly local NAA!
Spain has always been a joke!.....A couple of years ago in Madrid I came across a Guy that had only just started shaving with a full B1/B2 and every airliner type on his License that flies!
Dont expect miracles The shocking variation in applying Licensing standards across EASA needs to be recognized and dealt with (but it wont be!)
Bear in mind too that the whole Part 66 Licensing process (even in the UK) is continually being diluted in standard with the proliferation of on-line question banks and studying guides!! Many are simply now learning questions to pass the Modules and would struggle to pass an Oral if it was re-introduced!!
For instance, a UK B1 holder had a limitation he needed removing but had not passed the relevant exam here in the UK. Fortunately, his employer was not UK based but located not far away in Euro land. His license was submitted to his employer and magically came back limitation free courtesy of the friendly local NAA!
Spain has always been a joke!.....A couple of years ago in Madrid I came across a Guy that had only just started shaving with a full B1/B2 and every airliner type on his License that flies!
Dont expect miracles The shocking variation in applying Licensing standards across EASA needs to be recognized and dealt with (but it wont be!)
Bear in mind too that the whole Part 66 Licensing process (even in the UK) is continually being diluted in standard with the proliferation of on-line question banks and studying guides!! Many are simply now learning questions to pass the Modules and would struggle to pass an Oral if it was re-introduced!!
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: UK
Age: 57
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
146's make you cry (they bloody do, me too & swear)
Vortechs
Unfortunately, the UKCAA do not escape the EASA standards row.
The BA/FAA Authorised Personnel saga continues with quite a few senior
UKCAA Staff now revealed as liars to the UK government TSC. All to cover up BA's commercial requirement for 20+ personnel to be converted to B1 WITHOUTANY EXAMINATION. Pre-agreed definitions through Italy's ENAC for the 4 x Rome based BA personnel allowed for Cat A issue only, Not B1.1 issue - restricted or otherwise. EASA itself has findings raised against these particular UKCAA 20+ conversions for lack of required conversion reports but still remain without correction (Like so many EASA findings on other NAAs).
I'm well aware of this case that you speak of and it is, of course, a disgrace BUT at least the UKCAA "generally" insist on providing the required experience records over the required time period for initial license issue for a newbie. That is not the sae for all NAA.
I'm in the ALAE also mate. I frett about where the standards will end up.
Vortechs
Unfortunately, the UKCAA do not escape the EASA standards row.
The BA/FAA Authorised Personnel saga continues with quite a few senior
UKCAA Staff now revealed as liars to the UK government TSC. All to cover up BA's commercial requirement for 20+ personnel to be converted to B1 WITHOUTANY EXAMINATION. Pre-agreed definitions through Italy's ENAC for the 4 x Rome based BA personnel allowed for Cat A issue only, Not B1.1 issue - restricted or otherwise. EASA itself has findings raised against these particular UKCAA 20+ conversions for lack of required conversion reports but still remain without correction (Like so many EASA findings on other NAAs).
I'm well aware of this case that you speak of and it is, of course, a disgrace BUT at least the UKCAA "generally" insist on providing the required experience records over the required time period for initial license issue for a newbie. That is not the sae for all NAA.
I'm in the ALAE also mate. I frett about where the standards will end up.
I fully agree with 146-m-m-c, Nutloose and VG about the variety of qualifications required for EASA Licences - as if to prove the point of the moral high ground - some companies will now only accept UK licences for licenced positions.
I'm also in the ALAE - but won't be able to make the Glasgow AGM. (And I still have restrictions as a Form 4 holder!)
I'm also in the ALAE - but won't be able to make the Glasgow AGM. (And I still have restrictions as a Form 4 holder!)
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: moving around
Age: 47
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the spanish(iberia) system is a disgrace. iberia employees can get a licence issued by the company. they can get a type rating after a level III course lasting two weeks.
now EASA finally got the non iberia engineers to do two exams to get a part 66. iberia éngineers´didnt even have to do it.... and guess what. the unions were complaining that now they wouldnt get helicopter on the licence. they have some cheek.
in short iberia engineers are not properley qualified and are dangerous. all the serious maintenace accidents are covered up.
in short if flying to /from spain stay far far away from iberia
now EASA finally got the non iberia engineers to do two exams to get a part 66. iberia éngineers´didnt even have to do it.... and guess what. the unions were complaining that now they wouldnt get helicopter on the licence. they have some cheek.
in short iberia engineers are not properley qualified and are dangerous. all the serious maintenace accidents are covered up.
in short if flying to /from spain stay far far away from iberia
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In the Hangar & on the Line
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is there a common theme somewhere with BA/Iberia? See post #54
LHR Redundancies,TBA/TBJ - Page 6 - Aircraft Engineers Bulletin Board
Vortechs
I can appreciate the UKCAA treat most 'newbies' strictly but
application of standards has got to be absolutely consistent.
The UKCAA also did a conversion for 1 x Virgin Atlantic employee.
He held an FAA AML and an IAA issued Part 66 Cat A AML. Again,
Bumped to B1.1 restricted without examination.
The BA/VAA cases are just the conversions (in the UK) we know of. They
are common knowledge to other Maintenance Personnel only through company personnel whistleblowing, usually the same personnel that have had to correctly (and legally) study and then complete examinations.
How many more convenient conversions have the UKCAA completed?
There is rumour (just that at present) of a couple of conversions in
paraffin budgie land - any feedback guys and girls?
BAe146
LHR Redundancies,TBA/TBJ - Page 6 - Aircraft Engineers Bulletin Board
Vortechs
I can appreciate the UKCAA treat most 'newbies' strictly but
application of standards has got to be absolutely consistent.
The UKCAA also did a conversion for 1 x Virgin Atlantic employee.
He held an FAA AML and an IAA issued Part 66 Cat A AML. Again,
Bumped to B1.1 restricted without examination.
The BA/VAA cases are just the conversions (in the UK) we know of. They
are common knowledge to other Maintenance Personnel only through company personnel whistleblowing, usually the same personnel that have had to correctly (and legally) study and then complete examinations.
How many more convenient conversions have the UKCAA completed?
There is rumour (just that at present) of a couple of conversions in
paraffin budgie land - any feedback guys and girls?
BAe146
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: canada
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have held a Canadian License for 15 years, UAE license for over 4 years, and various other local African licences. I am currently doing an FAA A&P and am looking at trying to get an EASA license. I have worked in various 145 organizations in several Continents including Europe. I have been in Aviation for over 20years, and am looking for a better job, as I dislike the direction my current employer is going in these uncertain economic times, and I want to be as marketable as possible.
Can one get an EASA license from outside of an EASA state? If not, where is the best place to do so? Where is it the fastest, and or least expensive to do so?
Much of the information I have read has been on converting local preEASA licenses to the new EASA compliant licenses.
Can one get an EASA license from outside of an EASA state? If not, where is the best place to do so? Where is it the fastest, and or least expensive to do so?
Much of the information I have read has been on converting local preEASA licenses to the new EASA compliant licenses.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Over The Hills And Far Away
Posts: 676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If there is one constant in this world it's the whinging Brit.
I have worked with Brits on every continent, bar the Antarctic, and it's the same story you hear from all of them. We have the best system, we are the only ones applying the regulations, and so on and on and on....
I have yet to meet a British licence holder who stood out against anybody else. On the ground or in the air. You need to get over yourself.
That some are worse does not make you better. Being bureaucratic and reactionary is not a quality.
I have worked with Brits on every continent, bar the Antarctic, and it's the same story you hear from all of them. We have the best system, we are the only ones applying the regulations, and so on and on and on....
I have yet to meet a British licence holder who stood out against anybody else. On the ground or in the air. You need to get over yourself.
That some are worse does not make you better. Being bureaucratic and reactionary is not a quality.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In the Hangar & on the Line
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Techman
I'm thinking you are an Aussie..?
Maybe this EASA business appears to be UK personnel (or myself) 'whinging?' but I can assure you it isn't.
Its about a real drop in European/International and UK Standards.
Yet again, non-technical bureaucrats far removed from LAE/LAME/AMT responsibilities that have introduced new systems of regulation & training
(with limited enforcement) that are simply not up to the job.
This has had an effect on heavy work leaving the UK for cheaper EASA MROs. A factor in this is that its much easier for certain EASA member states and their MRO's to get their staff qualified & type rated, shall we say quickly?
There are increasingly more B1/B2 AML holders about, more jobs are
advertised as 'both B1/B2 LAE' required. It seems EASA is unaware of
the actual skillsets needed for both AMLs as even the UKCAA can't tell
the difference between a real or a falsified Schedule of Experience.
There is good chance there will be just a 'B' Licence eventually.
('Jack of all trades, master of none'..Hmm..Which AML has that title?)
In closing Techman, it's about LAMEs/LAEs/AMTs demanding higher standards in training, general good practices & oversight from our NAAs.
CASA and the 2 x FLAME instances are appalling but I don't think any
EASA NAAs are immune from that. In fact, it happened here in
the UK only a few years ago.
Certifying Commercial aircraft mx -he was licenced though, a PPL holder
BAe146
I'm thinking you are an Aussie..?
Maybe this EASA business appears to be UK personnel (or myself) 'whinging?' but I can assure you it isn't.
Its about a real drop in European/International and UK Standards.
Yet again, non-technical bureaucrats far removed from LAE/LAME/AMT responsibilities that have introduced new systems of regulation & training
(with limited enforcement) that are simply not up to the job.
This has had an effect on heavy work leaving the UK for cheaper EASA MROs. A factor in this is that its much easier for certain EASA member states and their MRO's to get their staff qualified & type rated, shall we say quickly?
There are increasingly more B1/B2 AML holders about, more jobs are
advertised as 'both B1/B2 LAE' required. It seems EASA is unaware of
the actual skillsets needed for both AMLs as even the UKCAA can't tell
the difference between a real or a falsified Schedule of Experience.
There is good chance there will be just a 'B' Licence eventually.
('Jack of all trades, master of none'..Hmm..Which AML has that title?)
In closing Techman, it's about LAMEs/LAEs/AMTs demanding higher standards in training, general good practices & oversight from our NAAs.
CASA and the 2 x FLAME instances are appalling but I don't think any
EASA NAAs are immune from that. In fact, it happened here in
the UK only a few years ago.
Certifying Commercial aircraft mx -he was licenced though, a PPL holder
BAe146
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Behind a dusty desk, and in some really hot, dusty, wet and cold places subject to who is paying the bill. But mostly Gods own land.
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BAe146, Vortechs Jenerator,
nice reply's boys! But for Techman to be that bitter and twisted he has to be a Yank and he must be a flight engineer!
But he does make some good and succinct comments:
"Nobody here cares what you think, well maybe some do, it might even be most, but their opinion is of as little interest as yours."
'O' and I like this one:
"Some people enjoy the sound of their own voice."
Meant to explain guys, these are snotty comments Techgrumpy left on other threads, but I think they kind of work well as a reply to his own comment above.
nice reply's boys! But for Techman to be that bitter and twisted he has to be a Yank and he must be a flight engineer!
But he does make some good and succinct comments:
"Nobody here cares what you think, well maybe some do, it might even be most, but their opinion is of as little interest as yours."
'O' and I like this one:
"Some people enjoy the sound of their own voice."
Meant to explain guys, these are snotty comments Techgrumpy left on other threads, but I think they kind of work well as a reply to his own comment above.
