conversion AME M2 to JAR B1
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, North Shore
conversion AME M2 to JAR B1
Anyone tried? I 've tried in Iceland no luck!Any ideas, how and where?
M2-B1
I looked into this and asked around with several expats for the easiest routes.
The conversion is basically a full rewrite of everything it took to get the M2. You will only be credited experience gained under the M2.
The UK has some thing like 18 modules you need to write and you have 5 years to complete the process. The British CAA have a good web site on this but I looked at doing it in England and decided it was too onerous.
I have looked at other UK schools (scotland) which have fast track methods which take 13-15 weeks if I remember correctly. You do a module a week and end up with a B1, you write an exam at the end of each week and they are UK CAA certified. It will cost you about 15k to do the course.
I have been told that if you try in Spain or Italy things are much easier.
Unfortunately the international hiring community ussually specifies which country they want you licensed out of so this could be only semi productive.
With EASA coming on the scene who knows where this will go. You could end up having to convert again.
As it stands the TC license is OK in many places and actually increasing in acceptability as the different authorities start to understand what Canada is doing and the JAR 66 people get more difficult to hire.
Don't expect to get into europe with any thing but a JAR license, Africa and the mideast are variable most common wealth countries accept ICAO II which is TC qualified. In my experience if they "want" you they can get your license authorized almost anywhere, it is the job search exercise that hurts. The best means of getting authorized is as always a reference from a major AMO.
Good luck and post a solution if you can find one, I am still looking.
The conversion is basically a full rewrite of everything it took to get the M2. You will only be credited experience gained under the M2.
The UK has some thing like 18 modules you need to write and you have 5 years to complete the process. The British CAA have a good web site on this but I looked at doing it in England and decided it was too onerous.
I have looked at other UK schools (scotland) which have fast track methods which take 13-15 weeks if I remember correctly. You do a module a week and end up with a B1, you write an exam at the end of each week and they are UK CAA certified. It will cost you about 15k to do the course.
I have been told that if you try in Spain or Italy things are much easier.
Unfortunately the international hiring community ussually specifies which country they want you licensed out of so this could be only semi productive.
With EASA coming on the scene who knows where this will go. You could end up having to convert again.
As it stands the TC license is OK in many places and actually increasing in acceptability as the different authorities start to understand what Canada is doing and the JAR 66 people get more difficult to hire.
Don't expect to get into europe with any thing but a JAR license, Africa and the mideast are variable most common wealth countries accept ICAO II which is TC qualified. In my experience if they "want" you they can get your license authorized almost anywhere, it is the job search exercise that hurts. The best means of getting authorized is as always a reference from a major AMO.
Good luck and post a solution if you can find one, I am still looking.
-
milendimitrovbg
- Rank 1
- Posts: 15
- Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 11:01 am
- Location: British Columbia
bla bla
After 01.Jan 2011 ICAO type II licenses will be history and the stupid lazy TC burocrats can't understand that trying to keep their places warm. But in the same moment the world is changing and soon Canada will be isolated and baned from the world aircraft industry because of the attempt to show how great and independent we are.
Guys,I allready have JAR license and my advice is: Do not waste your time and just go for your JAR66 license before is too late.
You need to sit 17 modules and 4 essays but it is worth the efforts.
Right now I am contractor in Holland making 7000 Euro (after all taxes )per month.I spend so long time looking for job in Canada.Every day was real mok.So finaly I give up and moved in Europe and now I am filling alive.
I left my AME M2 license in Vancouver and probably never gona use him again.
Guys,I allready have JAR license and my advice is: Do not waste your time and just go for your JAR66 license before is too late.
You need to sit 17 modules and 4 essays but it is worth the efforts.
Right now I am contractor in Holland making 7000 Euro (after all taxes )per month.I spend so long time looking for job in Canada.Every day was real mok.So finaly I give up and moved in Europe and now I am filling alive.
I left my AME M2 license in Vancouver and probably never gona use him again.
-
b767jetmec
- Rank 2
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 5:56 am
- Location: North of Nowhere
So does that mean all of us who hold AME`s come 2011 have to rewrite our licence to conform with JAR 66? That would be very interesting. If it`s true, TC better start today, cause with over 11000 AME`s in Canada, it might take a while to get everyone converted.
Boeing just does it better!
I would not worry too much about it just yet. Anybody who thinks the government is going to act on something quickly that is supposedly going to happen in 2011 is not quite with it.
It seems unlikely that Canada will be banned from the world of Aviation, with 1500 CRJ's, 800 Dash 8's and 1000 Bombardier Business jets out there, there is enough reason to suspect this guys post may not be well grounded.
Every authority in the world thinks that they have the highest standards and everyone else is second rate. I looked into the JAR 66 and found that I had to be sponsored by a company, which meant I had to legally work in Europe, which meant a work visa. Very difficult to get on your own, without EU citizenship. This may have changed, but that is what the JAA told me in 2003. As KKboy says if they "want" you suddenly all the obstacles disappear. In the end I found this to be true and ended up getting along just fine with my Canadian AME. Not to say the JAA wouldn't be useful, but its not worth the money and time.
The only authority I have come across which actually recognizes your achievements under a foreign authority is the FAA. Thats is why AME's can go to the States for a weekend and come back with an A&P.
If you are content with working in Canada then you really shouldn't care about the JAA or ICAO. The A&P is not an ICAO licence, and is usually not recognized by most other authorities, yet I do not see the US being banned from the world.
Think before you believe the doom and gloom.
It seems unlikely that Canada will be banned from the world of Aviation, with 1500 CRJ's, 800 Dash 8's and 1000 Bombardier Business jets out there, there is enough reason to suspect this guys post may not be well grounded.
Every authority in the world thinks that they have the highest standards and everyone else is second rate. I looked into the JAR 66 and found that I had to be sponsored by a company, which meant I had to legally work in Europe, which meant a work visa. Very difficult to get on your own, without EU citizenship. This may have changed, but that is what the JAA told me in 2003. As KKboy says if they "want" you suddenly all the obstacles disappear. In the end I found this to be true and ended up getting along just fine with my Canadian AME. Not to say the JAA wouldn't be useful, but its not worth the money and time.
The only authority I have come across which actually recognizes your achievements under a foreign authority is the FAA. Thats is why AME's can go to the States for a weekend and come back with an A&P.
If you are content with working in Canada then you really shouldn't care about the JAA or ICAO. The A&P is not an ICAO licence, and is usually not recognized by most other authorities, yet I do not see the US being banned from the world.
Think before you believe the doom and gloom.
-
b767jetmec
- Rank 2
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 5:56 am
- Location: North of Nowhere
Who said anything about doom and gloom? I could care less about having a JAA. I don`t plan on working in Europe or anywhere else for that matter. I was merely asking a question. And if, in the end, TC comes to me and says that I need to convert my AME to JAA, no problem. As long as you, TC pay for my course.gli77 wrote: Think before you believe the doom and gloom.
Boeing just does it better!
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
I would like to comment on this.
Quote:
" In my experience if they "want" you they can get your license authorized almost anywhere, it is the job search exercise that hurts. "
That is exactly how it works.
As far as the changes coming into law under EASA no one over here has a clue what they are about to do, even with millions of words being printed in the move from JAA 145 to EASA Part 145.
By the way, just for intrest the deep thinkers over here have embraced that magic word " Safety" ( European Aviation Safety Agency ) with as much enthuisaism (sp?) as TC has. To a Government bureaucrat the word "Safety" has a nice ring to it and covers every conceivable problem that may reflect on their own lack of I.Q. and ineptness...hell if "Safety" was compromized you poor bastards are at fault, therefore it is a magic get out of jail free card for the regulator.
With all the lawyers looking for excuses to sue everyone the rules will only get more and more complex all over the world. CAR's was Canadas offering to the Gods of safety and a way to exempt the regulator from any liability or accountability. Anyone ever gotten the same answer about a CAR's rule from two different TC types?
Ya just have to love it troops, have fun cause I'm getting out of aviation before I get so depressed I lose the will to live.
Cat
Quote:
" In my experience if they "want" you they can get your license authorized almost anywhere, it is the job search exercise that hurts. "
That is exactly how it works.
As far as the changes coming into law under EASA no one over here has a clue what they are about to do, even with millions of words being printed in the move from JAA 145 to EASA Part 145.
By the way, just for intrest the deep thinkers over here have embraced that magic word " Safety" ( European Aviation Safety Agency ) with as much enthuisaism (sp?) as TC has. To a Government bureaucrat the word "Safety" has a nice ring to it and covers every conceivable problem that may reflect on their own lack of I.Q. and ineptness...hell if "Safety" was compromized you poor bastards are at fault, therefore it is a magic get out of jail free card for the regulator.
With all the lawyers looking for excuses to sue everyone the rules will only get more and more complex all over the world. CAR's was Canadas offering to the Gods of safety and a way to exempt the regulator from any liability or accountability. Anyone ever gotten the same answer about a CAR's rule from two different TC types?
Ya just have to love it troops, have fun cause I'm getting out of aviation before I get so depressed I lose the will to live.
Cat
Last edited by Cat Driver on Tue Aug 09, 2005 11:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
Quote:
"Who said anything about doom and gloom? I could care less about having a JAA. I don`t plan on working in Europe or anywhere else for that matter. I was merely asking a question. And if, in the end, TC comes to me and says that I need to convert my AME to JAA, no problem. As long as you, TC pay for my course."
Perhaps I should explain further. The doom and gloom was referring to the comment about Canada being banned from the world. Perhaps I should have said do not put too much faith in everything you read.
You asked "So does that mean all of us who hold AME`s come 2011 have to rewrite our licence to conform with JAR 66?"
Just because one person is obtaining the JAR licence and writes that TC sucks and will be banned does not make it so. There is no reason why Canadians will have to conform to the JAA licence. Canada is an independant country and has been for quite some time. I could just as easily tell you that you will have to convert to an FAA licence,or a HKJAR or a Malaysian, Singapore, Australian, South African or Japanese. Would you believe me?
The post states that ICAO type II licences will be history. Well if you research how many countries belong to ICAO and how many licences conform to ICAO, you should..as I said... not worry about it just yet.
"Who said anything about doom and gloom? I could care less about having a JAA. I don`t plan on working in Europe or anywhere else for that matter. I was merely asking a question. And if, in the end, TC comes to me and says that I need to convert my AME to JAA, no problem. As long as you, TC pay for my course."
Perhaps I should explain further. The doom and gloom was referring to the comment about Canada being banned from the world. Perhaps I should have said do not put too much faith in everything you read.
You asked "So does that mean all of us who hold AME`s come 2011 have to rewrite our licence to conform with JAR 66?"
Just because one person is obtaining the JAR licence and writes that TC sucks and will be banned does not make it so. There is no reason why Canadians will have to conform to the JAA licence. Canada is an independant country and has been for quite some time. I could just as easily tell you that you will have to convert to an FAA licence,or a HKJAR or a Malaysian, Singapore, Australian, South African or Japanese. Would you believe me?
The post states that ICAO type II licences will be history. Well if you research how many countries belong to ICAO and how many licences conform to ICAO, you should..as I said... not worry about it just yet.
-
milendimitrovbg
- Rank 1
- Posts: 15
- Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 11:01 am
- Location: British Columbia
Guys! Do not take me wrong. After 2011 ICAO type II license will not be recognized anymore in the almost whole world. Canada accepts politic of biletteral recognition. That's mean that accept Joint Aviation Requirements (JAR) but will keep the licensing of the aviation staff under CARS .That's mean that all AME's will be able to work in Canada only, but AME license will be useless outside of Canada. For example just open some of the world leading recruitment websites like http://www.aviationjobsearch.com or http://www.flightinternational.com and see that almost all of the adds are for JAR B1 or B2 engineers. I am not talking about Europe. See what happened in Asia. Right now they slowly are going to convert all licenses to JAA standards. I have bunch of friends working for companies such Emirates and Quatar Airways. They went there with Canadian AME licenses but now all of them doing everything possible to get EASA 
licenses ,because if they don't in few years time will lose their jobs. This is the bitter true, Guys.
If you want to be flexible and free to work outside of Canada and USA and make more money ... just move on!
The situation is very delicate. USA FAA and TC are heavy bureaucratic structures and the style “hiding my head in the sand until the storm is gone” is exactly what they are doing. Americans are different story because they have power and resources to show independency but they never will move their small finger for Canada and the Canadian AME’s will be in very bad position. Right now AME license is not recognized in the countries members of JAA and the situation is the same in Canada about JAA licenses.
Sad ,very sad!
licenses ,because if they don't in few years time will lose their jobs. This is the bitter true, Guys.If you want to be flexible and free to work outside of Canada and USA and make more money ... just move on!
The situation is very delicate. USA FAA and TC are heavy bureaucratic structures and the style “hiding my head in the sand until the storm is gone” is exactly what they are doing. Americans are different story because they have power and resources to show independency but they never will move their small finger for Canada and the Canadian AME’s will be in very bad position. Right now AME license is not recognized in the countries members of JAA and the situation is the same in Canada about JAA licenses.
Sad ,very sad!
milendimitrovbg there are some inaccuracies in your post. First of all if you went to http://www.flightinternational.com in 2002 you would see that most ads listed the JAR 66 licence, now if you go you will see a multitude of licences listed. Times have improved and techs are becoming more difficult to come by.
The reason that the JAR licence is always listed is that 99% of the contracting agencies are British. They created the contracting situation many years ago, and hence forth have always been the predominant player.
Secondly there is no Asian authority who is converting to the JAR system. There is only one authority who associates with the JAR and that is Hong Kong and the reason for that should be obvious. Japan, China, Singapore, Malaysia, Korea, Australia and New Zealand all have their
very thoroughly entrenched authorities that are just as hard lined as Transport Canada. I have been contracting in Asia for 3 years under my Canadian licence and am doing fine. Conversions to other licences became very easy once I had a company behind me.
There is no denying that a JAA licence is valuable, but as KKboy and others have stated it is not a limiting factor when there is a need. Outside of Europe the JAA is not as valuable as you think.
I have also spent two years contracting inside Europe in 2000 and 2002 and ended up leaving because the EU work permit situation was becoming too difficult. I quickly found that outside of Europe it is a whole different scenerio. Therefore I opted not to go after the JAR licence at that time since I do not have EU status anyways. At a later date if I have a company behind me I will get the JAR. I did the same when I did a contract in the US, I got my A&P. Your friends at Emirates are in a good situation to get their JAR, and so they should. It is not doomsday if they do not though. The FAA also has a lot of influence in the middle east and I have come across some American contractors working with their A&P.
If you look right now on flight international you will see the following ads:
"Our client is one of the best known rotary maintenance companies in the world, and they are currently looking to expand their team by taking on a number more licensed Bell 412 engineers.
They offer excellent working conditions based around a 6 week on, 6 week off shift pattern, with local transport and accomodation, bonus scheme, transport to and from the Middle East, health and life insurance and an additional married allowance. "
A fantastic opportunity to join a respected and stable company.
You must hold a JAA/FAA/Canadian AME or similar license with specific training on the Bell 412EP engine and airframe.
Recent experience is an advantage, but not essential.
LWTR engineers with Bell experience will also be considered. "
"Job Description
Boeing 747 classic engineers required for 3 month contract in South East Asia. Heavy maintenance project.
B777 and or A330 engineers will also be considered. Candidates must hold UK, Australian, or Canadian license. "
"Sigmar Aviation on behalf of our client airline based in India have an exclusive requirement for A320 Line Captains - TRIs and TREs. All candidates are required to hold a valid ATPL (JAA/FAA/ICAO) "
"Must be a certifying staff in possession of an unrestricted Part 66 B2 licence, or its equivalent
10 years experience in the industry, exposure on large modern aircraft is a definite advantage as is any experience on Sikorsky rotorcraft.
The majority of staff who work for this client started on an initial 2 year contract and have remained there for a number of further contracts thereafter. They decide to stay due to the excellent climate and location, crime free society, relaxed atmosphere, the stability of the country and the excellent quality of life.
You can expect an excellent work / life balance and job security along with a number of other benefits which include:-
- tax free salary
- 42 days holiday per annum
- accommodation provided (2 / 3 bedroom house)
- medical cover
- school fees assistance
- pay increment at each contract renewal
- bonus equivalent to 6 month’s salary at the end of each 2 year contract "
"Licensed engineers (A+C or Avionics) required for short &/or long-term contracts (or perm') in desirable Far Eastern location. Approvals/coverage sought: B747/777, A330 (all engines).
Accepted licences: UK, Australia/NZ, Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei. Unfortunately, no other licences will be considered by this client due to local licensing regulations. "
"Licensed B737 Classic Avionics Engineers required for 2 year contract in the Far East. Their are positions both on the line and in the base. The package includes accommodation (your own apartment not shared).
Candidates must have the following qualifications:
A licence from either UK, Australia, Hong Kong, Brunei or Singapore
Type rating and currency on B737 Classic "
"Lic'd A+C engineer req'd for line maint. of S-76 &/or Bell-2/412 in W.Africa. Rotation: 7 on / 5 off (weeks).
Must have lic' (most major national issuers accepted) and S-76, Bell 212 or 412 approval/s. "
7 examples of current job ads outside of Europe that list a number of licences. There are some that do list only the JAA, but quite often they will take any licence available, especially for Africa. These ads are only taken from flightinternational, which is a European publication. If you were to look at the American job boards, or at the Canadian agencies, or a http://www.rishworth.co.nz from New Zealand you will see many different licences carry many different weights.
Experience and endorsements are just as important as a licence.
[/b]
The reason that the JAR licence is always listed is that 99% of the contracting agencies are British. They created the contracting situation many years ago, and hence forth have always been the predominant player.
Secondly there is no Asian authority who is converting to the JAR system. There is only one authority who associates with the JAR and that is Hong Kong and the reason for that should be obvious. Japan, China, Singapore, Malaysia, Korea, Australia and New Zealand all have their
very thoroughly entrenched authorities that are just as hard lined as Transport Canada. I have been contracting in Asia for 3 years under my Canadian licence and am doing fine. Conversions to other licences became very easy once I had a company behind me.
There is no denying that a JAA licence is valuable, but as KKboy and others have stated it is not a limiting factor when there is a need. Outside of Europe the JAA is not as valuable as you think.
I have also spent two years contracting inside Europe in 2000 and 2002 and ended up leaving because the EU work permit situation was becoming too difficult. I quickly found that outside of Europe it is a whole different scenerio. Therefore I opted not to go after the JAR licence at that time since I do not have EU status anyways. At a later date if I have a company behind me I will get the JAR. I did the same when I did a contract in the US, I got my A&P. Your friends at Emirates are in a good situation to get their JAR, and so they should. It is not doomsday if they do not though. The FAA also has a lot of influence in the middle east and I have come across some American contractors working with their A&P.
If you look right now on flight international you will see the following ads:
"Our client is one of the best known rotary maintenance companies in the world, and they are currently looking to expand their team by taking on a number more licensed Bell 412 engineers.
They offer excellent working conditions based around a 6 week on, 6 week off shift pattern, with local transport and accomodation, bonus scheme, transport to and from the Middle East, health and life insurance and an additional married allowance. "
A fantastic opportunity to join a respected and stable company.
You must hold a JAA/FAA/Canadian AME or similar license with specific training on the Bell 412EP engine and airframe.
Recent experience is an advantage, but not essential.
LWTR engineers with Bell experience will also be considered. "
"Job Description
Boeing 747 classic engineers required for 3 month contract in South East Asia. Heavy maintenance project.
B777 and or A330 engineers will also be considered. Candidates must hold UK, Australian, or Canadian license. "
"Sigmar Aviation on behalf of our client airline based in India have an exclusive requirement for A320 Line Captains - TRIs and TREs. All candidates are required to hold a valid ATPL (JAA/FAA/ICAO) "
"Must be a certifying staff in possession of an unrestricted Part 66 B2 licence, or its equivalent
10 years experience in the industry, exposure on large modern aircraft is a definite advantage as is any experience on Sikorsky rotorcraft.
The majority of staff who work for this client started on an initial 2 year contract and have remained there for a number of further contracts thereafter. They decide to stay due to the excellent climate and location, crime free society, relaxed atmosphere, the stability of the country and the excellent quality of life.
You can expect an excellent work / life balance and job security along with a number of other benefits which include:-
- tax free salary
- 42 days holiday per annum
- accommodation provided (2 / 3 bedroom house)
- medical cover
- school fees assistance
- pay increment at each contract renewal
- bonus equivalent to 6 month’s salary at the end of each 2 year contract "
"Licensed engineers (A+C or Avionics) required for short &/or long-term contracts (or perm') in desirable Far Eastern location. Approvals/coverage sought: B747/777, A330 (all engines).
Accepted licences: UK, Australia/NZ, Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei. Unfortunately, no other licences will be considered by this client due to local licensing regulations. "
"Licensed B737 Classic Avionics Engineers required for 2 year contract in the Far East. Their are positions both on the line and in the base. The package includes accommodation (your own apartment not shared).
Candidates must have the following qualifications:
A licence from either UK, Australia, Hong Kong, Brunei or Singapore
Type rating and currency on B737 Classic "
"Lic'd A+C engineer req'd for line maint. of S-76 &/or Bell-2/412 in W.Africa. Rotation: 7 on / 5 off (weeks).
Must have lic' (most major national issuers accepted) and S-76, Bell 212 or 412 approval/s. "
7 examples of current job ads outside of Europe that list a number of licences. There are some that do list only the JAA, but quite often they will take any licence available, especially for Africa. These ads are only taken from flightinternational, which is a European publication. If you were to look at the American job boards, or at the Canadian agencies, or a http://www.rishworth.co.nz from New Zealand you will see many different licences carry many different weights.
Experience and endorsements are just as important as a licence.
[/b]
ICAO Type II
I think there is a basic misunderstanding of what this type II is.
It is not a licence!
It is a specification, listing the basic requirements for education and training.
Simply put ICAO is no longer going to publish the specification.
This has no impact on the Canadian licence acceptability world wide. In fact it will likely enhance the Canadian licence due to the popular belief world wide that Canadians are generally well educated. The JAR lic. will do ok but the FAA lic. may not do so well. Licences from India Bangladesh Nigeria etc will likely be useless.
It is messy but rest assured 90% of ex-common wealth countries will look seriously at a Canadian licence. Except for australia who are a bit wierd.
It will likely mean more examinations in the future as you travel and less rubber stamping and automatic authorities. If this is your fear then it is warranted.
The basic problem is what can an airworthiness authority do if they automatically give you signing authourity for an initail period based on your ICAO II compliant Canadian Licence (which was the whole idea of the type designation program) and then require you to sit the licence so you can extend your tour to say three years and you fail the exam. They cannot continue to let you release aircraft and there is a basic problem with the aircraft you did release.
Therefore it is easier for everyone to simply licence you in country on arrival.
If you are immigrating this is good, if you are contracting it means endless examinations and a need to understand several different airworthiness systems other than the Canadian way.
The standard for many years was the BCAR's, or British oversea rules, this is now being replaced in many countries by the JAR's but remember the majority of countries who hire expats have not changed their Air Regs in the past 30 years so don't hold your breath.
It is not a licence!
It is a specification, listing the basic requirements for education and training.
Simply put ICAO is no longer going to publish the specification.
This has no impact on the Canadian licence acceptability world wide. In fact it will likely enhance the Canadian licence due to the popular belief world wide that Canadians are generally well educated. The JAR lic. will do ok but the FAA lic. may not do so well. Licences from India Bangladesh Nigeria etc will likely be useless.
It is messy but rest assured 90% of ex-common wealth countries will look seriously at a Canadian licence. Except for australia who are a bit wierd.
It will likely mean more examinations in the future as you travel and less rubber stamping and automatic authorities. If this is your fear then it is warranted.
The basic problem is what can an airworthiness authority do if they automatically give you signing authourity for an initail period based on your ICAO II compliant Canadian Licence (which was the whole idea of the type designation program) and then require you to sit the licence so you can extend your tour to say three years and you fail the exam. They cannot continue to let you release aircraft and there is a basic problem with the aircraft you did release.
Therefore it is easier for everyone to simply licence you in country on arrival.
If you are immigrating this is good, if you are contracting it means endless examinations and a need to understand several different airworthiness systems other than the Canadian way.
The standard for many years was the BCAR's, or British oversea rules, this is now being replaced in many countries by the JAR's but remember the majority of countries who hire expats have not changed their Air Regs in the past 30 years so don't hold your breath.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
There is another way to skin this cat, if you earn a reputation for being a top notch mechanic and problem solver you do not need any license period.
To make good pay and work most anywhere is not difficult once you get the contacts, remember all that is needed is for someone with the license in the country involved to sign out your work.
Then you just take your pay in cash, preferably Pound Sterling, Euro's or USD in that order.
Buy a money belt and never enter Canada with more than $10,000.00 Canadian on you so you do not to have to declare it to at customs, immigration.
It's really quite simple.
Cat
To make good pay and work most anywhere is not difficult once you get the contacts, remember all that is needed is for someone with the license in the country involved to sign out your work.
Then you just take your pay in cash, preferably Pound Sterling, Euro's or USD in that order.
Buy a money belt and never enter Canada with more than $10,000.00 Canadian on you so you do not to have to declare it to at customs, immigration.
It's really quite simple.
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
-
milendimitrovbg
- Rank 1
- Posts: 15
- Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 11:01 am
- Location: British Columbia
I have no idea how to tell you that the mainn problem is that TC doesn't want to accept the JAR standards like most of the world (including UK CAA.You know how indepentent and sensitive to changes they are) and there is no way for direct conversion from canadian AME to EASA Part 66 license without sitting all 21 exams.
Here is a question of STANDARDS and nothing else.
Here is a question of STANDARDS and nothing else.
CARS + EASA
milendimitrovbg: Obviously there is a conversion.
But only in JAR authorities.
The point was ICAO type II elimination and the impact on transportability.
You will find more problems with work permits than licencing.
But only in JAR authorities.
The point was ICAO type II elimination and the impact on transportability.
You will find more problems with work permits than licencing.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
" Cat Driver; You let me know who will pay for signing out your work.
It does not happen. "
First off I did not say that anyone pays for signing off our work, I stated that we perform the work and it is then inspected by a licensed engineer and signed off. The client pays, its really quite simple.
Are you suggesting that no one signs out work performed by non licensed mechanics in aviation?
Maybe you need some more exposure to the real world.
There are many people working in aviation that do excellent work and do not have an engineers license, those of us who have a reputation for quality work have no problem with getting it inspected and signed for.
Cat
It does not happen. "
First off I did not say that anyone pays for signing off our work, I stated that we perform the work and it is then inspected by a licensed engineer and signed off. The client pays, its really quite simple.
Are you suggesting that no one signs out work performed by non licensed mechanics in aviation?
Maybe you need some more exposure to the real world.
There are many people working in aviation that do excellent work and do not have an engineers license, those of us who have a reputation for quality work have no problem with getting it inspected and signed for.
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
?
I am sorry I thought I was coresponding with a lincesed individual.
Obviously unlicenced people need others to release their work.
When was the last time you contracted directly with an overseas operator without holding a licence CAT?
Top notch means very little in the world I am used to if you cannot prove it with documentation.
Obviously unlicenced people need others to release their work.
When was the last time you contracted directly with an overseas operator without holding a licence CAT?
Top notch means very little in the world I am used to if you cannot prove it with documentation.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
KK boy :
I have been working overseas for around ten years with my two partners from England, we rebuild, restore, repair warbirds.
As well we ferry them world wide and I give type rating training on them.
I also fly in airshows displaying the aircraft ( naturally I hold the licenses to fly said aircraft as well as a airdisplay authorization to allow me to fly in said airshows. )
The last time I flew in an airdisplay here in Europe was two days ago, the last time I put a wrench to an airplane for my present employer was yesterday.
Your quote:
" Top notch means very little in the world I am used to if you cannot prove it with documentation. "
Conversely I know a few with documentation that I wouldn't let fix my lawn mower.
In the world I work in reputation means everything and documentation plays a very dim place in employment. In otherwords we have been doing this long enough that we have zero problem with getting our work inspected and signed off under JAR 145 and the new EUSA Part 145.
So I guess nothing is written in stone in this business and there are opportunities avaliable to those who know how to do it.
I hope that clears this up to your satisfaction.
Cat
I have been working overseas for around ten years with my two partners from England, we rebuild, restore, repair warbirds.
As well we ferry them world wide and I give type rating training on them.
I also fly in airshows displaying the aircraft ( naturally I hold the licenses to fly said aircraft as well as a airdisplay authorization to allow me to fly in said airshows. )
The last time I flew in an airdisplay here in Europe was two days ago, the last time I put a wrench to an airplane for my present employer was yesterday.
Your quote:
" Top notch means very little in the world I am used to if you cannot prove it with documentation. "
Conversely I know a few with documentation that I wouldn't let fix my lawn mower.
In the world I work in reputation means everything and documentation plays a very dim place in employment. In otherwords we have been doing this long enough that we have zero problem with getting our work inspected and signed off under JAR 145 and the new EUSA Part 145.
So I guess nothing is written in stone in this business and there are opportunities avaliable to those who know how to do it.
I hope that clears this up to your satisfaction.
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
My,my, my KKboy you just don't get it.
It is not a hobby, it's a way to make good money.
As to the license try looking at it from this angle, why jump through all the hoops to write a license that only proves you can memorize stuff when you can earn a good living without having to struggle through the paper work.
Where you and I differ is that while you are busy wasting time trying to keep TC happy with paper work we are turning wrenches being productive and making money.
What is wrong with that?
Anyhow it's been fun chatting with you, take care and don't make any mistakes with your pen.
As to this thread being about converting a license I was only pointing out that you do not have to convert nor hold a license to work outside of Canada...what in hell is wrong with pointing out the obvious?
Cat
It is not a hobby, it's a way to make good money.
As to the license try looking at it from this angle, why jump through all the hoops to write a license that only proves you can memorize stuff when you can earn a good living without having to struggle through the paper work.
Where you and I differ is that while you are busy wasting time trying to keep TC happy with paper work we are turning wrenches being productive and making money.
What is wrong with that?
Anyhow it's been fun chatting with you, take care and don't make any mistakes with your pen.
As to this thread being about converting a license I was only pointing out that you do not have to convert nor hold a license to work outside of Canada...what in hell is wrong with pointing out the obvious?
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
It sounds to me like Cat Driver is working in a very small protion of the industry. Very small. That being warbirds. If it works for you great, it sounds like you are doing well.
I think that KKboy was talking more along the lines of Airbus and Boeing style work, most likely heavy maintenance or line maintenance. I would be extremely impressed if you can get into Singapore Airlines, Emirates, Cathay Pacific, Gulf Helicopters or any of the heavy maintenance centers around the world based on your reputation, and lack of a licence. Extremely impressed!! It would require some unbelievable contacts to crack into the high end contracts based on your reputation alone.
A licence does not mean you are a good technician. Likewise, lack of a licence does not mean you are a good technician. All a licence really is, is a measuring stick. A qualification set to streamline the hiring process. Other qualifications include type ratings, ACA's and experience.
Before you two start bickering we should make sure we are talking about the same league.
I think that KKboy was talking more along the lines of Airbus and Boeing style work, most likely heavy maintenance or line maintenance. I would be extremely impressed if you can get into Singapore Airlines, Emirates, Cathay Pacific, Gulf Helicopters or any of the heavy maintenance centers around the world based on your reputation, and lack of a licence. Extremely impressed!! It would require some unbelievable contacts to crack into the high end contracts based on your reputation alone.
A licence does not mean you are a good technician. Likewise, lack of a licence does not mean you are a good technician. All a licence really is, is a measuring stick. A qualification set to streamline the hiring process. Other qualifications include type ratings, ACA's and experience.
Before you two start bickering we should make sure we are talking about the same league.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
" A licence does not mean you are a good technician. Likewise, lack of a licence does not mean you are a good technician. All a licence really is, is a measuring stick. A qualification set to streamline the hiring process. Other qualifications include type ratings, ACA's and experience.
Before you two start bickering we should make sure we are talking about the same league. "
Exactly:
I was only pointing out that nothing is cast in stone in aviation, we just happened to have carved out a niche area that works for us.
There is one factor that works in our favour, our clients have the money to afford to pay well, because buying and restoring warbirds is not a hobby for the poor.
The issue of being licensed does not enter into it because our work all comes from referals.
By the way there is a great devide between replacing components on an Airbus and being able to ressurect an old piston pounding warbird back into flying condition.
Cat
Before you two start bickering we should make sure we are talking about the same league. "
Exactly:
I was only pointing out that nothing is cast in stone in aviation, we just happened to have carved out a niche area that works for us.
There is one factor that works in our favour, our clients have the money to afford to pay well, because buying and restoring warbirds is not a hobby for the poor.
The issue of being licensed does not enter into it because our work all comes from referals.
By the way there is a great devide between replacing components on an Airbus and being able to ressurect an old piston pounding warbird back into flying condition.
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
