EASA part 66 oral examinations inclusion?

[flame_bringer]

I'v been running into rumors making the rounds lately regarding the inclusion of an oral examination to the EASA system as of april 2012 at basic license application or type rate endorsment, A generic oral examination about the whole of the EASA 66 syllabus and logbook contents if it's for a basic AML issuance or type specific oral examination if it's for a type rate endorsment.
I have looked up google regarding this matter but was unable to get any confirmation out of it.
Can anyone confirm if it's true or not?
Thanks in advance.

[Capot]

8th April 2012 sees the entry into force of EASA OPS, and with that, notably, of Part ORO.GEN.200, which includes a requirement for some additional safety management procedures to be included in Operators' management systems, which the CAA is busily expanding into an industry called Introduction of SMS, largely for job creation in the CAA as well as in CAA International, a company financed by the industry via CAA's charges which delivers over-priced training and consultancy on, among other things, SMS.

Training and consultancy firms set up by and for former CAA staff will also benefit when their future employees, presently working for CAA as, for example, Regional Managers, direct traffic to their - also - grossly over-priced courses.

That event is unlikely to have any direct bearing on changes to Part 66, although substantial changes to that are going to be implemented in 2012. I have not seen any reference, apart from day-dreaming in Aviation House, to a firm intention to introduce an oral examination. Such a move would require agreement by 27 States, once they are all satisfied that the standard of oral examination will be consistent among all 27 States. In short, then, never.

Let's not forget that EASA cannot even attain a common standard for the present examinations and their marking. The variation between States is huge.

However, I could very easily have missed something.

[flame_bringer]

All I could find in respect to the 2012 implementation was the SMS system I'm still unable to find a blatant reference to either debunk the rumor or confirm it as true.
I hope the rumor is true though being as the quality of training in 147 organizations has been disgusting and this will certainly up the quality of training a big time.

[Capot]

An oral won't improve the training offered in Part 147 schools, but it could improve the quality of licensed engineers, if done properly.

In the UK, the difficulty is that an oral is only as good as the examiner, and the days when you got a job with CAA because you were the best have disappeared. Now the majority are unemployable anywhere else, especially in PLD.

Judging by recent history, the chance of attaining consistent standards, let alone adequate, experienced expertise among CAA oral examiners is zero.

And how about the other 26 States? Would their orals be exactly the same standard as everyone else's?

[collbar]

Commission Regulation (EU) No. 1149/2011 has been published which invalidates some of the information in the ELGD. The regulation seems to have taken national authorities out of the loop dictating examination requirements and experience requirements as of late summer. It is now 10 years for all exams and a minimum of 2 years experience regardless of prior experience.

Anybody heard any rumours on what the CAA response will be!!

[Capot]

and a minimum of 2 years experience regardless of prior experience.

Yes, strictly that's true, but in fact there's no change to experience reqirements, as far as I can see; this is an extract from 1149/2011

(a) An applicant for an aircraft maintenance licence shall have acquired:

1. for category A, subcategories B1.2 and B1.4 and category B3:

(i) 3 years of practical maintenance experience on operating aircraft, if the applicant has no previous relevant technical training; or

(ii) 2 years of practical maintenance experience on operating aircraft and completion of training considered relevant by the competent authority as a skilled worker, in a technical trade; or

(iii) 1 year of practical maintenance experience on operating aircraft and completion of a basic training course approved in accordance with Annex IV (Part-147);

2. for category B2 and subcategories B1.1 and B1.3:

(i) 5 years of practical maintenance experience on operating aircraft if the applicant has no previous relevant technical training; or

(ii) 3 years of practical maintenance experience on operating aircraft and completion of training considered relevant by the competent authority as a skilled worker, in a technical trade; or

(iii) 2 years of practical maintenance experience on operating aircraft and completion of a basic training course approved in accordance with Annex IV (Part-147);

I have not yet compared that with the previous words, but at first sight it looks the same. The point I have been hammering on this and other threads is the the approved course mentioned in 1(iii) and 2(iii) above MUST include the OJT element. If students are told to go off and get their own the course ceases to be approved, IF the NAA is doing its job properly.

[flame_bringer]

Whether the examiner on orals is good or not atleast the fact someone is attending an oral examination is intimidating enough that it would compel them to study properly and fully know thier stuff before sitting for the exam unlike now when most people simply sniff around question banks, by heart the questions, literally the same questions come in the exam and they pass it with distinction when they know bugger all.
Then do 2 years of fitter work with minimal knowledge, get licensed and subject the aircraft to havocs.
I can't even stand it when I work with someone thats licensed and knows next to nothing and they've been prolific in my place of work but thanks god in where I work you can't be approved unless you attend an oral board examination with the quality manager and the training manager who really know thier stuff and would easily find out if someone is inadequate.

[collbar]

Thanks Capot, the initial extract was taken from the CAA ELGD link. The ELGD has been removed as the CAA states that 1149 invalidates their current rulings. Having just Mod 13 to complete i am wondering whether to hold out till the new module has been implemented. How quickly can we expect the CAA to respond!!