Let's say someone finishes "M" basic training at a school that gives experience credit towards the 48 months required experience.
To get the M license, they have to complete the remaining required experience to get M1 or M2.
How to get E license as well? Is it required to go back to school to get another 2-year of basic training for avionics?
I met someone who said he has all M1, M2, E, and S. Unlikely he attended basic training for M, E, and S. Any thoughts?
E license after M training
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, North Shore
-
intoflying
- Rank 0
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2019 7:11 am
-
helicopterray
- Rank 4
- Posts: 258
- Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2010 7:59 pm
Re: E license after M training
I worked with an M licensed AME who went back to school for E license training.
I also know an E licensed guy who is working hangar maintenance towards his M license.
If a person gets both M1 and M2 licenses, you are automatically qualified to sign out S and E work as well. However, your AMO not recognize you as being qualified to do so, and may not give you signing authority in this regard.
I also know an E licensed guy who is working hangar maintenance towards his M license.
If a person gets both M1 and M2 licenses, you are automatically qualified to sign out S and E work as well. However, your AMO not recognize you as being qualified to do so, and may not give you signing authority in this regard.
-
tellyourkidstogetarealjob
- Rank 5
- Posts: 389
- Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 12:11 am
- Location: Cascadia
Re: E license after M training
The person who has M1, M2, S and E licenses was probably quite old, I would guess. The system has evolved over the years. Not for the better.
In theory, the system is simpler. In practice, it's contradictory and illogical.
For instance, an M2, M1 is, supposedly, also an E. Yet there are E tasks that can't be signed out. So you aren't really an E. Apparently this logic is something only Transport can follow. An E can take M2, or M1 by completing an online course and filling out a log book. An M, however, can't challenge an E license (even though they may sign out certain 'E' tasks). That would be far too practical.
Twenty years ago it was common to get both M1 and M2 at time of license. Now, they are considered so different you have to almost complete two licenses. It would seem Transport considers changing a light bulb on a Cessna fundamentally different than changing a light bulb on an Airbus. Oh wait...those are 'E' tasks....
Many years ago it was fairly easy for an M license holder to add various S license endorsements, which is probably when your co worker got his 'S'. There were, if I remember correctly, seven or so different S tickets.
In summary:
S license requires a separate course and cannot be added to M or E without that course and apprentice time.
E license requires a separate course and cannot be added to M or S without that course and apprentice time.
M requires a separate course and cannot be added to S without that core and apprentice time. M can be added to E with an online course and the completion of a log book/apprentice time. This is one way compatible only.
M1 and M2 share a common core course but require separate apprentice time to obtain. It is not unrealistic to spend six or more years - assuming you work for one of the few shops with enough of both types - to obtain both. Most new AME's are M1 OR M2, not both. As I stated above, twenty years ago (in some cased more recently if you were lucky enough to have a Transport inspector that was realistic) it was common to get both at the same time when you went for your license. This change was initiated at the insistence of a now retired director general of the Prairie & Northern region at Transport.
All this has aggravated the shortage of AMEs that has largely been created by an industry in a race to the bottom.
When you look at the overall pay, working conditions and lack of respect from being an AME, why would any reasonably bright kid get an AME license when they could become a pharmacist in the same time? They could become a machinist, millwright, plumber, power engineer, etc. etc. years sooner and be earning tradesman's wages much quicker.
In theory, the system is simpler. In practice, it's contradictory and illogical.
For instance, an M2, M1 is, supposedly, also an E. Yet there are E tasks that can't be signed out. So you aren't really an E. Apparently this logic is something only Transport can follow. An E can take M2, or M1 by completing an online course and filling out a log book. An M, however, can't challenge an E license (even though they may sign out certain 'E' tasks). That would be far too practical.
Twenty years ago it was common to get both M1 and M2 at time of license. Now, they are considered so different you have to almost complete two licenses. It would seem Transport considers changing a light bulb on a Cessna fundamentally different than changing a light bulb on an Airbus. Oh wait...those are 'E' tasks....
Many years ago it was fairly easy for an M license holder to add various S license endorsements, which is probably when your co worker got his 'S'. There were, if I remember correctly, seven or so different S tickets.
In summary:
S license requires a separate course and cannot be added to M or E without that course and apprentice time.
E license requires a separate course and cannot be added to M or S without that course and apprentice time.
M requires a separate course and cannot be added to S without that core and apprentice time. M can be added to E with an online course and the completion of a log book/apprentice time. This is one way compatible only.
M1 and M2 share a common core course but require separate apprentice time to obtain. It is not unrealistic to spend six or more years - assuming you work for one of the few shops with enough of both types - to obtain both. Most new AME's are M1 OR M2, not both. As I stated above, twenty years ago (in some cased more recently if you were lucky enough to have a Transport inspector that was realistic) it was common to get both at the same time when you went for your license. This change was initiated at the insistence of a now retired director general of the Prairie & Northern region at Transport.
All this has aggravated the shortage of AMEs that has largely been created by an industry in a race to the bottom.
When you look at the overall pay, working conditions and lack of respect from being an AME, why would any reasonably bright kid get an AME license when they could become a pharmacist in the same time? They could become a machinist, millwright, plumber, power engineer, etc. etc. years sooner and be earning tradesman's wages much quicker.
E license after M training
I think i know whats wrong.
The original license has expired but it was renewed. The problem is that Newsleecher doesnt know its been renewed.
How do i make it aware?
The original license has expired but it was renewed. The problem is that Newsleecher doesnt know its been renewed.
How do i make it aware?
-
Pratt Punk
- Rank 1
- Posts: 37
- Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 10:14 pm
- Location: In the Doghouse
Re: E license after M training
The AME licensing system is outdated and flawed! It's a large part why companies find it hard to find qualified people.
As an example, go explore MSI-18R6 issued March 15,2005. It is titled AME Licensing Procedures and if you read Section 5.6, 6.1(c), and 6.4 you will find that SFAR 41C Commuter aircraft listed in AN-C004 Edition 7 like the 1900, SA227, and 300 series aircraft meet the requirements for task experience towards an M2 license application. However you will be denied this experience if you attempt a licence application based on this document.
As an example, go explore MSI-18R6 issued March 15,2005. It is titled AME Licensing Procedures and if you read Section 5.6, 6.1(c), and 6.4 you will find that SFAR 41C Commuter aircraft listed in AN-C004 Edition 7 like the 1900, SA227, and 300 series aircraft meet the requirements for task experience towards an M2 license application. However you will be denied this experience if you attempt a licence application based on this document.
