Rumors of AME licensing change?

[kyle089]

I've been hearing from a lot of people that the Licensing system is going to be changed meaning there WONT be an M1 or M2 license any more but something completely different. I'm really concerned about this since from what I'm hearing its going to be changing in 2013 and im damn close to getting my M1 license.

My question is does anyone know when this is going to happen, what the changes are going to be, and what does this mean for GA?


Thanks,
Kyle

[Heliian]

has anything come up in the gazette? Check your sources and don't panic! 2013? really? a new system? sounds like a yarn to me.

[helicopterray]

One of the things I had heard a while back is that the AME license would be simply Category M, S, or E.
There wasn't going to be an M1 or M2 breakdown. As to when this comes about, I don't know.

[longjon]

What does your regional AME association say. You DO belong to your AME association, right?

[Schultzie]

A while back WAMEA had emailed everyone to ask what they thought of having a single ame M class license. Myself and most of the guys I work with replied and stated that we thought it was a horrible idea.

[CamAero]

A while back WAMEA had emailed everyone to ask what they thought of having a single ame M class license. Myself and most of the guys I work with replied and stated that we thought it was a horrible idea.

M1 guys feel that way because they envision M2 guys cherry-picking the <12,500# stuff on their days off. M2 guys don't care so much because the licence is nearly useless until a company makes the investment of an endorsement course into the person. There is very little "drop-in" M2 work / VS M1, airplanes where every man and his dog just needs a couple hours here and there, tweaking and annual inspections on their Ercoups, etc.

The whole M1/M2 scheme is really quite crazy when you look at what the requirements are to achieve the respective licences and then the Release Privileges you get, (and do not get), with each licence.

Quite conceivably, you could carry out 70% of the tasks required to maintain a J-3 Cub, work on them for 18 months to meet the requirement for an M1 Licence and the day after you are handed your licence, go release work on a privately-owned Cessna 421, having never seen one in your life.

Furthermore, the system penalizes a person who gets a little extra experience here and there and logs it in their Task Logbook. I.E., if the same person has completed 70% of the required tasks on the J-3 and then adds in the log book, "gear-swing on a Cessna 421", 70% of all of the tasks now applicable to a 421 are now a requirement to get the M1 licence.

For those of us who have worked on a real myriad of aircraft types, the process to qualify for a licence category is quite onerous, and perhaps needlessly unfair.

The system, it would seem is mostly designed for those who work cookie-cutter jobs at one facility on one or two aircraft types.

CA.

[CamAero]

.

[Heliian]

The problem is A/C that don't have type courses, those have to be put into a category somewhere and that's the divide. Otherwise, just having a rating on an M licence would be easier, leave the E and S seperate. They've changed the system a whole bunch o times now, I really don't care what they do, unless it directly effects my employment, which it never has. They have to change the CAR's as they change the system, so if it's ever in question, just go to the TC website for the most up to date version of the regs.

[azimuthaviation]

The licensing should change from its current format. It is an inspectors license, not a license to perform the work. But to get an avionics license you need to go to school and write the tech exams for the E category. But if you get an M1/M2 you have the priveleges of an E license,without having any of the requirements for an E license. Ok so an M1/M2 license doesnt give you the training or qualifications to perform E type work, so even though you have the certification authority over E type work you cant perform it. But if you have an M1/M2 you cant get an E license because it is redundant, even though in practicality it is not.

Some people will tell you that yes, an AME license is just an inspector license, like a meat inspector, not a butchers license, to prove you are a butcher you need a camc certification, or ccaa, whatever they call themselves these days. A better system would be that the qualifications to perform the work should be the requirement to certify the work.

[Bent wrench]

As long as my pay doesn't decrease who cares !

[CamAero]

As long as my pay doesn't decrease who cares !

If you're currently an M1-Only guy, you will be at risk of having potentially a heap of AMEs vying for the same piece of the pie that you are. The effect on wages if that happens is self evident.

That is the largest argument against amalgamating the licences, as far as I can see.

[c170b53]

Going forward a combo licence more likely will be the E and M2 .The requirement is being driven more by the machine. The dividing lines as in the past will likely be required as new aircraft enter the marketplace. Remember the m9. ?, just as sure as they change it, they'll change it again.

[qa guy]

Quite conceivably, you could carry out 70% of the tasks required to maintain a J-3 Cub, work on them for 18 months to meet the requirement for an M1 Licence and the day after you are handed your licence, go release work on a privately-owned Cessna 421, having never seen one in your life.



This is an incorrect statement. The requirement of the license is to have 70% of the tasks completed for the applicable license rating. Not 70% of the tasks relating to the aircraft you maintain. In some cases people may even have to switch employers to get their hands on different aircraft.

[qa guy]

Quite conceivably, you could carry out 70% of the tasks required to maintain a J-3 Cub, work on them for 18 months to meet the requirement for an M1 Licence and the day after you are handed your licence, go release work on a privately-owned Cessna 421, having never seen one in your life.



This is an incorrect statement. The requirement of the license is to have 70% of the tasks completed for the applicable license rating. Not 70% of the tasks relating to the aircraft you maintain. In some cases people may even have to switch employers to get their hands on different aircraft.

[CamAero]

This is an incorrect statement. The requirement of the license is to have 70% of the tasks completed for the applicable license rating. Not 70% of the tasks relating to the aircraft you maintain. In some cases people may even have to switch employers to get their hands on different aircraft.

No Sir. Your statement is incorrect.

CAR 566.03 (i) Applicants shall have performed a representative selection of eligible maintenance tasks, over the full range of applicable systems and structures; those tasks being comprised of not less than 70 percent of the items listed in Appendix B that are applicable to the rating sought and to the aircraft, systems or components for which the experience is claimed.

CA

[Heliian]

This is an incorrect statement. The requirement of the license is to have 70% of the tasks completed for the applicable license rating. Not 70% of the tasks relating to the aircraft you maintain. In some cases people may even have to switch employers to get their hands on different aircraft.

No Sir. Your statement is incorrect.

CAR 566.03 (i) Applicants shall have performed a representative selection of eligible maintenance tasks, over the full range of applicable systems and structures; those tasks being comprised of not less than 70 percent of the items listed in Appendix B that are applicable to the rating sought and to the aircraft, systems or components for which the experience is claimed.

CA

If you have enough tasks in the M1 category, from working on M1 aircraft and get an M1 licence, then you are eligible to sign a maintenance release on the a/c in that category.

From the cars:
(i) M1: Non-turbojet aircraft approved to Chapter CAR 522, 523, 523-VLA, 527, and 549 of the Airworthiness Manual and equivalent standards (includes all airframe, engines, propellers, components, structures, and systems of those aircraft), and the aircraft listed in paragraph 566.03(8)(b);
(amended 2009/12/01)

[helicopterray]

You DO belong to your AME association, right?

Yes, 10 year member. But I really can't remember the details of the question that was asked.
And apparently, you weren't able to contribute anything constructive to the thread either.

[longjon]

Ah, I see, newly licenced and a newer member.

[qa guy]

This is an incorrect statement. The requirement of the license is to have 70% of the tasks completed for the applicable license rating. Not 70% of the tasks relating to the aircraft you maintain. In some cases people may even have to switch employers to get their hands on different aircraft.

No Sir. Your statement is incorrect.

CAR 566.03 (i) Applicants shall have performed a representative selection of eligible maintenance tasks, over the full range of applicable systems and structures; those tasks being comprised of not less than 70 percent of the items listed in Appendix B that are applicable to the rating sought and to the aircraft, systems or components for which the experience is claimed.

CA

I still read that as.......70% of tasks applicable to the rating sought. the rest of the mumbo jumbo still refers to all items applicable to the license rating "the full range of applicable systems and structures...." Transport runs the book through a computer system and if there are not enough tasks filled regardless of specific a/c type/model, they should not issue the license.
However, like all regs there are many shades of grey, and different PMI's do interpret things differently.

[Heliian]

you're right QA guy, the 70% of tasks is done in the section of M1 or M2, as long as you are working on a civil registered a/c that falls into that rating. Doesn't matter if it's a cub or more of a "complex" a/c. Non-turbojet a/c under 12,566 lbs and nine or less seats and even commuter a/c with 19 or less seats and under 19,000 lbs would fall into that category. So you could theoretically sign off a j-3 cub or a twin otter (privately registered of course) with the same licence.

[CamAero]

I still read that as.......70% of tasks applicable to the rating sought. the rest of the mumbo jumbo still refers to all items applicable to the license rating "the full range of applicable systems and structures...." Transport runs the book through a computer system and if there are not enough tasks filled regardless of specific a/c type/model, they should not issue the license.
However, like all regs there are many shades of grey, and different PMI's do interpret things differently.

No qa guy. Read it carefully. These are the subtleties of legaleeze; "items listed that are applicable to the rating sought and to the aircraft, systems or components...."

Items that are applicable to the rating sought and applicable to the aircraft type for which the experience is claimed.

Everything else in the Task Log is "N/A" and does not count against your total.

I have been through this process twice in recent memory. Trust me.

Heliian, you've lost the plot. I am the one that is right.

CA.

[helicopterray]

Ah, I see, newly licenced and a newer member.

Licenced 25+ years. Attended many seminars, didn't become a member until 10 years ago.

Anything else?

[Heliian]

I have an M1 licence, most of the tasks in my original ame logbook from when I was an apprentice are related to helicopters in the M1 category. Now that I have an M1 licence I can and do sign out any a/c in the M1 category, simple as that. The CAR's are pretty clear defining it all, Cam, you are seeing things that aren't there.

[CamAero]

Heliian, of course that is the case. Below is from my first post in this thread.

Quite conceivably, you could carry out 70% of the tasks required to maintain a J-3 Cub, work on them for 18 months to meet the requirement for an M1 Licence and the day after you are handed your licence, go release work on a privately-owned Cessna 421, having never seen one in your life.

If you go back to the beginning, qa guy is misunderstanding the requirements for licence application and I have been trying to bring clarity to the issue.

This is an incorrect statement. The requirement of the license is to have 70% of the tasks completed for the applicable license rating. Not 70% of the tasks relating to the aircraft you maintain. In some cases people may even have to switch employers to get their hands on different aircraft.

I am not wrong about anything, this time.

That is all.

C.A.

[qa guy]

I still read that as.......70% of tasks applicable to the rating sought. the rest of the mumbo jumbo still refers to all items applicable to the license rating "the full range of applicable systems and structures...." Transport runs the book through a computer system and if there are not enough tasks filled regardless of specific a/c type/model, they should not issue the license.
However, like all regs there are many shades of grey, and different PMI's do interpret things differently.

No qa guy. Read it carefully. These are the subtleties of legaleeze; "items listed that are applicable to the rating sought and to the aircraft, systems or components...."

Items that are applicable to the rating sought and applicable to the aircraft type for which the experience is claimed.

Everything else in the Task Log is "N/A" and does not count against your total.

I have been through this process twice in recent memory. Trust me.

Heliian, you've lost the plot. I am the one that is right.

CA.

"items listed that are applicable to the rating sought and to the aircraft, systems or components...." To me the "and" part, would be in addition to the previous statement. If it has read ..Items that are applicable to the rating sought. "OR" applicable to the aircraft type for which the experience is claimed, I could see it that way. But they want BOTH
My PMI many years ago, (and whata keaner he was) said he has had people leave flight schools to go work on larger aircraft because they could not complete their logbooks working on 172's
And Im sure many other pmi's read it as you do.