A&P Licence
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
From: Here,There,Everywhere!!!
Nothing to do with failure of sense of Humour matey!!! but sometimes these stupid remarks and comments just doesnt help the guy who is genuinely asking for help or need some genuine info !!! Thats all!!!
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
From: Here,There,Everywhere!!!
Now dont pretend you were trying to be funny here!!! If u wanna be funny, go and join some circus somewhere!!! If you cant be useful to somebody atleast dont try and show how useless you are!!! Try and sleep over it!! Might grow up by tomm morning!!!
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 419
Likes: 0
From: oop north
Actually its not just the basic licence qualification thats dumbed down its the same with the type courses, i did FAA approved a300 course with fed ex it was a joke, three weeks and that covered everything, avionics engines airframe it was like something a first year apprentice would do, compare that to the twelve weeks plus you would spend doing a CAA approved course to cover the b1 and b2 subjects and to top it all the exam was open book !complete farce from start to finish. i think the whole thing goes back to the fact aircraft mechs are considered to be semi skilled in the states at best and the whole licence and training system reflects that standard
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
From: In the Hangar & on the Line
Hmm... It might well be worth looking at what the NAA's expect of
their own LAE's, AMT's or LAME's that work or qualify under regulations.
The FAA A&P has not really altered much in over 40 years. So much
technology including many materials & practices have evolved in that time.
Implementation of FAR 66 failed apparently due to the objection of US MRO's Workers Unions if I'm correct?
There is a relatively new NBAA initiative to enhance the training and qualification of all FAA AMTs. How much support they will gain from
the US MRO industry (or the FAA even) appears unknown.
http://www.nbaa.com/prodev/bootstrap/whitepaper.pdf
If it enhances the training, standards and prospects of the AMT,
I support it fully. But, it will need bigger FAA AMT staff inputs to succeed.
In my career so far, I've been in a good position to assess many FAA/EASA/CASA aircraft maintenance certifiers based on their true competences, maintenance standards, attention to the finer details and importantly, attitude. I won't go into how some of these amusing clowns percieve good team building and demonstrative leadership.
There have been equal numbers of FAR65 A&P AMTs and EASA Part66 LAEs whose standards have been far less than basics the NAA demands.
Many of these likely gained qualification merely on attendance or repeated use of Q&A 'Study Guides' , not effort or merit. It is far too evident when
working with such individuals to deny..
The FAA/SWA B737 AD business was compounded by a local (and
cozy) team of FAA inspectors that granted permission for AD extension...
Clearly unnacceptable, this has since been dealt with. I am also aware
of many more serious issues with the FAA, not least the laziness and
makeup of the FAA AFS-300 Mechanic Licensing Dept at Oklahoma.
Very little can be acheived communicating from the outside of a licensing Dept run largely by college graduates with limited comprehension of current AMT duties. Limited concept of international licensing initiatives & developments also a big factor in the unwillingness of the FAA to maintain
equivalence.
As for EASA/UKCAA? The 20+ British Airways Engineering line station FAA AMTs that were granted restricted EASA Part66 B1.1s by the UKCAA without additional examination on the basis of required EASA regulation conversion reports (THAT ACTUALLY DO NOT EXIST -UKCAA/EASA confirmed) continue to certify EASA registered aircraft to this day. As stated before, these EASA Part 66 Licences have no official conversion report - what would the fallout be if those licences were withdrawn???
Keep up the pressure ALAE 1981.
I think the EASA Part 66 AML is here to stay until events (holes in ground)
prove otherwise. The 'B' licences I think will merge ultimately, which is academically far larger than the A&P syllabus. The 'B' AML holders will then operate as 'A&C' or 'Avionics' under that AML. Existing B1/B2 combined AML holders work to this today at my company, mostly operating in 'A&C' or 'Avionics' capacities. Very very few are comfortable with the entire scope of both present B1/B2 AML's but will happily take the money.. Thats of course to be expected!
Solid training & practical skillsets amongst all NAA's certifying staff will need to improve as aircraft technology evolves, simple. With thorough training, attested practical experience & a decent Oral/Practical examination (This should return for EASA Part 66, make no mistake)
comes good standards.
BAE 146
Avionic Tech
FAA AMT
P.S. MrFixer, I'm certain Turin was having a laugh, I had a chuckle
their own LAE's, AMT's or LAME's that work or qualify under regulations.
The FAA A&P has not really altered much in over 40 years. So much
technology including many materials & practices have evolved in that time.
Implementation of FAR 66 failed apparently due to the objection of US MRO's Workers Unions if I'm correct?
There is a relatively new NBAA initiative to enhance the training and qualification of all FAA AMTs. How much support they will gain from
the US MRO industry (or the FAA even) appears unknown.
http://www.nbaa.com/prodev/bootstrap/whitepaper.pdf
If it enhances the training, standards and prospects of the AMT,
I support it fully. But, it will need bigger FAA AMT staff inputs to succeed.
In my career so far, I've been in a good position to assess many FAA/EASA/CASA aircraft maintenance certifiers based on their true competences, maintenance standards, attention to the finer details and importantly, attitude. I won't go into how some of these amusing clowns percieve good team building and demonstrative leadership.
There have been equal numbers of FAR65 A&P AMTs and EASA Part66 LAEs whose standards have been far less than basics the NAA demands.
Many of these likely gained qualification merely on attendance or repeated use of Q&A 'Study Guides' , not effort or merit. It is far too evident when
working with such individuals to deny..
The FAA/SWA B737 AD business was compounded by a local (and
cozy) team of FAA inspectors that granted permission for AD extension...
Clearly unnacceptable, this has since been dealt with. I am also aware
of many more serious issues with the FAA, not least the laziness and
makeup of the FAA AFS-300 Mechanic Licensing Dept at Oklahoma.
Very little can be acheived communicating from the outside of a licensing Dept run largely by college graduates with limited comprehension of current AMT duties. Limited concept of international licensing initiatives & developments also a big factor in the unwillingness of the FAA to maintain
equivalence.
As for EASA/UKCAA? The 20+ British Airways Engineering line station FAA AMTs that were granted restricted EASA Part66 B1.1s by the UKCAA without additional examination on the basis of required EASA regulation conversion reports (THAT ACTUALLY DO NOT EXIST -UKCAA/EASA confirmed) continue to certify EASA registered aircraft to this day. As stated before, these EASA Part 66 Licences have no official conversion report - what would the fallout be if those licences were withdrawn???
Keep up the pressure ALAE 1981.
I think the EASA Part 66 AML is here to stay until events (holes in ground)
prove otherwise. The 'B' licences I think will merge ultimately, which is academically far larger than the A&P syllabus. The 'B' AML holders will then operate as 'A&C' or 'Avionics' under that AML. Existing B1/B2 combined AML holders work to this today at my company, mostly operating in 'A&C' or 'Avionics' capacities. Very very few are comfortable with the entire scope of both present B1/B2 AML's but will happily take the money.. Thats of course to be expected!
Solid training & practical skillsets amongst all NAA's certifying staff will need to improve as aircraft technology evolves, simple. With thorough training, attested practical experience & a decent Oral/Practical examination (This should return for EASA Part 66, make no mistake)
comes good standards.
BAE 146
Avionic Tech
FAA AMT
P.S. MrFixer, I'm certain Turin was having a laugh, I had a chuckle
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
From: europe
in newzeland caa website you can see that all licences can be convert to caa licence by giving few papers but its clearly mention that faa a+p is not accepted to convert. and can a single person hold B1/B2 ?its not with icao licence u can have either A&C or avionics licence.
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
From: london
We have people with B1/B2 and we used to have guys with A&C and multi x under the BCAR system .
(bit off subject it and it may be a sign of the times but more and more people are requesting if possible that applicants hold a EASA licence issued by the UK CAA.)
(bit off subject it and it may be a sign of the times but more and more people are requesting if possible that applicants hold a EASA licence issued by the UK CAA.)
Last edited by simonchowder; 21st April 2009 at 16:31.
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
From: In the Hangar & on the Line
ASKFAP
You possibly might have a different take on the FAA A&P when
it's the first AML in your career (As it was mine). I went to the USA
studied up (nearly 2 years), practically experienced, prepared and well read within the required syllabus as per the FAR system.
I've already detailed a few major flaws with the FAA A&P, hopefully this
will change for the better because it needs to. It is worth remembering
many FAA AMTs (IA's and otherwise) work tirelessly in the US and around the world in equivalent positions to your own with similar if not identical certification responsibilities.
Better LAE/AMT/LAME Basic & Type Training, Standards & Prospects are needed now more than ever, regardless of NAA. As a former BCAR holder, you know that.
BAe146
FAA AMT
www.alae.org
You possibly might have a different take on the FAA A&P when
it's the first AML in your career (As it was mine). I went to the USA
studied up (nearly 2 years), practically experienced, prepared and well read within the required syllabus as per the FAR system.
I've already detailed a few major flaws with the FAA A&P, hopefully this
will change for the better because it needs to. It is worth remembering
many FAA AMTs (IA's and otherwise) work tirelessly in the US and around the world in equivalent positions to your own with similar if not identical certification responsibilities.
Better LAE/AMT/LAME Basic & Type Training, Standards & Prospects are needed now more than ever, regardless of NAA. As a former BCAR holder, you know that.
BAe146
FAA AMT
www.alae.org
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 982
Likes: 51
From: EGSS
I thought this thread was about how to obtain an A&P??
It can be like comparing apples with apples. There are some A&P mechanics who have a huge amount of experience and are great on the tools, then you get B1/B2 guys who are very academic but struggle to do anything at all practically.
There's no doubt the A&P was easier (although you can be undone by the practical) than the A&C, but theres no need to bash the guys who have one.
It can be like comparing apples with apples. There are some A&P mechanics who have a huge amount of experience and are great on the tools, then you get B1/B2 guys who are very academic but struggle to do anything at all practically.
There's no doubt the A&P was easier (although you can be undone by the practical) than the A&C, but theres no need to bash the guys who have one.
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
From: Singapore
I would have to say that the FAA licence was the easiest set of exams that I have ever done. I have licences in a few countries UK, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore and the good old USA.
When I did the A&P licence I flew from Singapore to LA read some books on the flight went to the hotel walked down to the exam centre sat 2 exams and passed. I then went back in the morning for the 3rd, passed that one and had a practical the next morning, flying back to Singapore with the temp certificate in hand in the early evening after the practical.
I will admit that I had wooden/fabric aircraft experience as well as composite, avionics, piston and turbine engine coupled with large and small airframe experience. I had also been instructing on some large aircraft types over the few years before doing my A&P, so I may have been more current on theory than some, and I did find it very straight forward both in the exams and the practical areas.
So don't let anyone try to put you off or make you think that it is difficult just prepare yourself fully and most importantly during the exams RTFQ.................. READ THE F*#KING QUESTIONS and you will have very few issues with the exams.
Oh, BTW I work within the FAA system and have done for the last 7 years, I find it less restrictive and on the whole the people I work with are pretty good at wrenching, so no one should run people down based on the qualifications they have.
When I did the A&P licence I flew from Singapore to LA read some books on the flight went to the hotel walked down to the exam centre sat 2 exams and passed. I then went back in the morning for the 3rd, passed that one and had a practical the next morning, flying back to Singapore with the temp certificate in hand in the early evening after the practical.
I will admit that I had wooden/fabric aircraft experience as well as composite, avionics, piston and turbine engine coupled with large and small airframe experience. I had also been instructing on some large aircraft types over the few years before doing my A&P, so I may have been more current on theory than some, and I did find it very straight forward both in the exams and the practical areas.
So don't let anyone try to put you off or make you think that it is difficult just prepare yourself fully and most importantly during the exams RTFQ.................. READ THE F*#KING QUESTIONS and you will have very few issues with the exams.
Oh, BTW I work within the FAA system and have done for the last 7 years, I find it less restrictive and on the whole the people I work with are pretty good at wrenching, so no one should run people down based on the qualifications they have.
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 3
From: Arizona USA
I managed to do that easily but in truth I wouldn't trust myself to work in his world.
For many years.
PS:
On the other hand, perhaps it was just ASFKAP that had this particular problem.
One will never know for sure.
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
From: France
...it's a memory test, read the questions and answers, then go take the test. 10 days including the practical is not to much of a problem. Although saying that, I had a friend who's practical was 3 days..the FAA examiner guy was just getting free work out of him !!!
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
From: Houston Texas
An A&P doesnt gauge your intelligence, your aptitude ,who you are, or what you are. Its simply a license to get hired at a airline or whatever and learn how to be a mechanic. Its a flipping license to learn.
Some of you need to get off your flipping high horses!
Some of you need to get off your flipping high horses!
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
From: Kent
Can Anybody recommend A school?
Hi I have been looking for a school in the states to carry out the 7 day (ish) training, can anybody recommend one? I also have a friend living in chicago who could put me up so if anybody knows of one in that general area that would be helpful but not essential.
Thanks in advance
Thanks in advance
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
From: 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.
Boyze,
try and find a school that will accept you first. Thats not being rude but your profile says Kent, and unless you can satisfy the entry requirements you wont be going, as the rules have changed in the last year...or so.
try and find a school that will accept you first. Thats not being rude but your profile says Kent, and unless you can satisfy the entry requirements you wont be going, as the rules have changed in the last year...or so.