Aviation mechanic shortage
 

I just want to know how bad is the aircraft mechanic shortage. I work for a regional airline here in the US and we are so short of mechanic it is unbelievable. the bosses basically beg people to work overtime every day just to cover the shifts.
With all the airlines closing shop or downsizing you would think that finding mechanics would be easy but it is not. Just to give an example, a regional airline in atlanta just got a contract to fly about 25 CRJ900 for Delta and they need about 40 mechanics. So far they could only find very few.
Is Europe also going through the same shortage?

How much does the job pay where you are?

That may have a lot to do with whether you can find decent guys.
I don't work in the US, but have heard that wages are not the best in the industry.

I work for a large charter airline in the U.K. and of the 17 engineers at our base 13 of them are over 45. I think that is a worry for the future considering the rate at which the air travel is expanding. Flight International covered this with an editorial on the shortage of engineers and pilots this week. Industry, take note.

mechanics/ENGINEERS
 

dont forget in Europe/rest of the world(besides USA) mechanics are "unlicenced"....to certify you need to be an "engineer".:ok:

Don't know how 'well travelled' you are... but in the 27 states of EASA all "mechanics" are A-Licenced and Line Certifiers.
...unless you know different?

That's not entirely true. It is not a requirement within my company (UK145) to hold an 'A' licence to work as a mechanic. There are a handful of mechanics we have that are employed without a Cat A, the only difference being they cannot sign for anything so they are effectively just a 'pair of hands'.

It's not true at all. While several companies, especially non-UK ones, are beginning to want A licences on their line stations, there are fitters and mechanics working throughout the EU without any EASA AME Licence.

Mind you, it is becoming increasingly true that mechanics, especially contractors, will do themselves a lot of good by obtaining an A Licence (not necessarily a long or very difficult process for most), and then think about going on to a B while working with the A to obtain the documented work record needed.

Whatever you want to call it...mechanics in the US are the equivilent of "engineers" elsewhere. In the US an engineer requires a degree...in engineering, and most hold at least a masters or higher...and engineers don't perform work on airplanes. Semantics, and irrelevant.

There's no shortage of mechanics from what I see. We're in the process of letting some 500 go, along with a number of pilots and flight engineers, too.

While most engineers have degrees, there are many, like myself, that held engeering jobs without formal education. Hands on experience is sometimes worth more than book learing.

In the UK from my perspective (major airline) there is a shortage of skilled labour. This has resulted in recent years in a number of Far Eastern contractors being employed to fill the gap.

Compared to the USA we have a much smaller pool of experienced/skilled staff to draw from. This is partially due to the reduction to almost zero of an aircraft industry and the number of Forces leavers drying-up. In addition, most youngsters perceive any job which involves getting your hands dirty as "un-cool" If you factor in the number in the industry due to retire in the next 5 – 10 years there are serious problems ahead!

In some states, one cannot call oneself "engineer" without obtaining the PE credentials. Self taught need not apply

My apologies to those with, what I term as, "Fitters" working in 145 hangar environments. I do acknowledge your jobs and indeed expertise in what you do. I was of course refering mainly to Line operations where Part 66 LMCM's are Certifying Mechanics (in the EASA sense!)

Boeing Eng - All we need to do is to swap "UK" into your missive on the shortfalls of recruiting new blood the USA.

I'd say hands-on experience is always worth more than book learning, but one has to start somewhere.

In the US, you are right, we dont really get paid well for what we do. However, in this economy with everybody else cutting jobs and laying people off it is not a bad idea to consider aviation maintenance as a career.

Having worked in ten (10) different countries (states) and at least that many different States I never had anyone question my qualifications or see my credentials. I was there to tell them how to fix their aircraft and thats all they cared about.

In the USA all Aircraft Maintenance Staff are refered to as Mechanics or AMTs. Not just the A&Ps, even the IA's. Simply a terminology thing, nothing else.

Indeed the issues at hand absolutely are the drop in general standards & the shortage of 'decent guys' refered to by Unstable Load. Where I presently work, we have a few B1s with little comprehension of a 6
bladed VP propellor and a couple of B2s that cannot troubleshoot a
cabin lighting system let alone an A/P snag -so yes, the EASA system
is still no guarantee of a decently trained or experienced type rated LAE/Mechanic.

Note: Falsifying your PER (Maintenance Record) does not help, at all.

Not many people really want to undertake the basic training and depth of work experience (see Boeing Engs comments) for precisely the reasons stated - its a massive investment, and in comparision not as rewarding as other careers given the responsibility.

At present, in Europe there are at least 2 impending court cases, Helios(Greece) & Spanair(Spain) where certifying personnel have followed
procedures (As nearly all of us do) yet find themselves now indicted.

Just what example is that setting and what do the NAA's, EASA or ICAO do to actually enhance an SMS? SFA...

BAe146??? :{:{:{
www.alae.org & www.airengineers.org

A&p "mechanic"
 

I have seen the standard of workmanship in mro`s in the USA and around the world as a tech rep...........
I wouldnt let 99% of usa "A&P MECHANICS" repair my bike....
common sense seemed to be missing!!
Perhaps thats why the money in USA is ****e...?:ok:

Wellung

Many non-FAA LAE's readily sign up to that perception of the average FAA A&P Mechanic. Its true there are some real rednecks (As EASA Part 66 can increasingly confirm) BUT there are also a great number of highly experienced, knowledgeable, diligent & competent qualified FAA AMTs.

BAe146???:{:{:{

BAe, and others. Don't waste your time with Wellung; he's a prize prat. This was his today's comment on the Lufthansa Constellation restoration thread in Aviation History and Nostalgia.

Just the sort of guy you need in the hangar. :mad:

PS. Wellung and Wizen Weltravelled are one and the same. :hmm:

Who cares what they are called...mechanics, engineers....we all know what we are talking about here.

In the UK, I see the shortage of engineers being due to relatively low wages when compared to other industries (considering the shift hours being put in and responsibility held) and the length of time and expense it takes to obtain an EASA pt66 licence.

forget?...appropriate name!
 

"Forget said...
PS. Wellung and Wizen Weltravelled are one and the same. http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/yeees.gif

WRONG!...Guess its time we forgot forget:}:ok::D

I thought we became technicians when we became part of EASA.
Just looked at my licence & it just says Aircraft Maintenance Licence.
WTF so long as the beer chits go in!;)

In the US we have ten of thousand of commercial flights everyday and thousand of privately own aircrafts, more than anywhere in world, and yet enjoy one of the safest aviation system, in the world. Guess what, all these aircrafts are maintained by dedicated mechanics like me, and we do it with pride and dedication beside the low pay, long hour and lack of respect. So please, the topic here is mechanic shortage not who is better between A/P and B1/B2.
Btw I also worked for a British MRO in the past in Essex.....

asacrj, Relax, the Mods also took a dim view of WellDung's 'contributions'. He's gone, along with his alter ego Wisenwel Shrivelled. :hmm:

There is definately a shortage of engineers, technicians and mechanics coming up. It has been on the cards and talked about for years. The airlines know this. This is why they have pressured the CAA/JAR/EASA into the A and B licenses. Work that was previously carried out by mechs/tech and signed for by A,C ad X licensed engineers, which added another level of safety as an "independant" inspection was carried out before certifying, is now completed by A, B1 or B2 people mostly working alone (on the line at least). This reduces the numbers of staff considerably but also in some ways removes another level of safety.

As mentioned earlier the average age of maintenance staff in the UK is relatively higher than say 10/20 years ago with most airlines not running apprenticeships so the youngsters don't get a chance to join the industry even if they really want to.

As for the argument of A&P versus B1/B2, i hold both A&P and part 66 B1/B2. There are pros and cons to both. The practical exam for the A and P is an excellent idea and not as easy as most people think. The part 66 theory exams on the other hand go completely over the top (in fact my module 5 digital techniques was more in depth on fibre optics than what BT engineers go through!) and could do with being updated to real world aircraft and maintenance techniques. The A and P theory exams on the other hand are relatively easier compared with part66 modules (helped by the answers being published) and not going into anywhere near the depth of part 66, but then a lot of what's in part66 which is irrelevant to day to day maintenance... when was the last time someone opened up a VHF transceiver to check the superhet IF on the line??

The problem with the A and P is that you are a "jack of all trades and master of none" as there's no differentiation between electrics/avionics/engines and structures There are very few people who feel comfortable with all these disciplines, myself included, as there's always a natural tendency to drift towards either the mechanical or electrical trades. Unfortuately the FAA don't address this problem and it seems EASA are drifting towards this way of certifying, again under the pressure of airlines to help fire fight the lack of trained mechs/techs/engineers.

Having worked with many A and P engineers over the years in the US they could seemlessly certify to EASA part66 standards but obviously but that is only my experience!

The days of 100's of apprentices being trained are long gone.

boeingchap

What exactly is your point here???

I was told by a senior BA Engineering rep, that the average age of engineering staff at LGW is 45 and at LHR, it is 55. Not a good state to be in, but moving 50 more engineers from LGW to LHR may bring the average down to 54.5!

I think the difference is the FAA go public with maintenance transgressions.
In the UK the CAA has commercial interests in mind,so it does not go public.

BOEINGCHAP It would help if your views were written in understandable English, rather than code. :hmm:

I've been looking seriously at becoming a licenced engineer, but the length of time needed and the things to complete training are so complicated and time consuming that I've elected to join the RAF as an engineer, with the chance to go into avionics aswell. Seems a good choice, with excellent training and good career prospects, the civilian world seems very bizarre in a way with EASA stamping its authority wherever it can and causing people problems!

Many an EASA engineer/technician/mechanic/fitter/whatever else it can be called started in the RAF.Good choice.

Quote:

---

I've been looking seriously at becoming a licenced engineer, but the length of time needed and the things to complete training are so complicated and time consuming that I've elected to join the RAF as an engineer, with the chance to go into avionics aswell. Seems a good choice, with excellent training and good career prospects, the civilian world seems very bizarre in a way with EASA stamping its authority wherever it can and causing people problems!

---

The length of time, training and examinations required are there for a reason - to ensure only the very best become Licensed Aircraft Engineers. Well that's how it used to be but with the advent of EASA and the inconsistencies in the various National Aviation Authorities ability to interpret and implement rules and regulations, it seems anybody can get a licence nowadays.

I wish you a long and successful career in the RAF but do not fool yourself into thinking the training and career progression is good. To put things into perspective, I work alongside a civilian apprentice trained LAE who has enough type ratings on his licence to see him through to retirement. He is pulling in over £50k basic for his troubles and is just 25 years of age. I'm ex RAF and I can tell you that you have to stay in for an entire career and reach the dizzy heights of FS or WO to get anywhere near the level of responsibility/authority he holds or the pay he commands. If you are switched on and have a strong desire to succeed, you will be forever held back in the forces.

Agree with EGT you will waste your time on fast jets and when you leave you will still need to qualify for the EASA requirement with one year in a civil aircraft environment :uhoh:

EGT redline.

The bad thing about the 25 year old that you know, who is earning (well, being paid!) £50K is that he has reached his salary cap, unless he makes Senior Manager level. OK, contracting gives more potential to have ready cash, but then full time has the other benefits too. Sideways moves into tech services etc, get rid of shift work, but the pay does not go up. Where I am, two promotions equate to £4K and then it is behind a desk and that £2K is definitely not worth it! Market rate has removed incremental scales, as you have to treat everybody the same, to be able to attract people with the right qualifications. No other qualifications count towards pay because you do not need them to do your job.

There are big problems within our industry because it is hard work to pass the exams but you will never be a millionaire fixing aeroplanes. I am not halfway through my career yet, but I will be probably working Christmas Day nights for most of the rest of it!

Ok I'm getting really lost here. I thought the subject was mechanic shortage.
Well since you are much more knowledgeable than me, would please explain to me what the alaska and american airlines story has to do with this topic.
Please, do say your views. However, It will be nice to know what your views are about this thread.

Given the time and effort needed to acquire the licence, endorsed with enough significant type ratings to command the £50k that one poster has mentioned, any basic Cost-Benefit Analysis would reject aircraft maintenance as a career.

In my own case, had I invested exactly the same amount of time and effort in another career I would by now be a doctor, dentist, chartered accountant or a partner in a law firm and would consider a salary of £50k to be laughable.

The problem in getting enough people with the right ability and dedication is that the job doesn't pay enough to justify the investment. As long as mechanics, technicians or licensed engineers - whatever we choose to call ourselves - are regarded in the same light as the man who fixes our boiler or rips us off after tinkering with our car, we'll remain at the bottom of the chain.

Perhaps we should travel to work in suits, wear white dustcoats instead of overalls at work, then call ourselves Independent Technical Advisors?

The industry has been predicting a shortage of Engineers for the past 12 years, but for a variety of reasons it just has not happened - yet. The reasons for this are numurous but one of the main factors is the maintenance programmes for new aircraft i.e. A&C Checks need less manhours (MSG3 Maintenance Programmes and aircraft built with maintenance in mind = less manhours), plus the frequency/periodicity of the Checks are required less often compared to "Classic" types. This has masked the impending cliff edge and has probably lulled the industry into thinking "what shortage" (Crying Wolf too often). But it is heading our way very fast now.:}

Bizdev

:uhoh:

BOEINGCHAP, Stop wasting people's time with your pointless drivel. You've got nothing to contribute here.

(Could it be that WellDung, Wisenwel Shrivelled and BOEINGCHAP are all one.:bored:)

PS. I checked with 'missus' of 40 years as she was having breakfast. 'No complaints'. ;)

Biz, Totally agree.

It's ok for the airlines that can afford to replace their fleets every few years but for users of 20+ year old A320's there's a lot of work involved.

We always used to say that the 'A320 will be the Tristar of the future' and the from what i've seen that's coming true. (and we all remember them don't we??)

I remember the 747's coming out of London Airways hangar TBJ in nearly new condition after Major checks. I now see A330's coming out after C checks with next to nothing being done to them and normally in far worse condition than before they went in.

Not sure what the A330 and 777 will be like in 20+ years after half a dozen C checks but at least it should hopefully keep us all employed....

Look at it this way, you are almost a qualified gynecologist,
only the holes you have to try to work in are often smaller and further away from the task in hand, and 99% of the time it probably smells better. :ok::O

On a serious note, yes there is a shortage and one thing driving it is the reduction in the size of the RAF etc..... when I left the RAF and did my licences in the early 80's it still had engineering capabilities of a decent size, with that getting smaller and smaller there is a lack of suitable engineers coming onto the market from those sources and the Civil sector has never done anything to redress the problem, far from it they have gone the opposite direction... and it will only get worse.