MECHANICS AND TRAINING Law enforcement, medical professionals, fire fighters and pilots complete much training. The cost of this training is absorbed because we know it pays off when the skills are needed. Once an A&P mechanic gets the basic federal certificate, OEM training on the aircraft or simply training on how to do the job safely can become the exception rather than the rule. OEM aircraft factory courses are expensive. I’ve met many mechanics who’ve been maintaining aircraft for 10 or 15 years and who have never been to any OEM schools. Working on makes or models for which there has been no “formal training” is legal in the U.S. but not in many other countries. Having an OEM instructor next


to you and showing you how to perform a task is invaluable. Being shown jobs that are performed infrequently is a confidence booster when it is time to do them. On- the-job-training is great but there is no gauge for it. It can be better than OEM training in some cases or dismally bad in others. In both cases it would legally qualify a mechanic (in a non-repair station environment) to perform or supervise the performance of others in a critical task AND return an aircraft to service. No test or qualification checklist, no check ride and no oversight other than the person training you is required.


Why isn’t everyone OEM factory trained? Why is it so hard for some organizations, private or public, to justify increasing the amount of initial and recurrent training that is provided to mechanics? Some would say, “If you have an A&P, doesn’t that mean you have been trained?” Think about this — a certificated mechanic may not exercise the privileges of their certificate and rating unless they understand the current instructions of the manufacture and the maintenance manuals for the specific operation concerned (CFR 65.81(b)). Are there any other requirements? Within the last 24 months you must have worked actively for six months using your certificates (65.83). What does that entitle you to do? CFR 65.81 also says that a properly-rated mechanic can perform or supervise maintenance for which they are rated; however, they may not supervise someone else or return an aircraft to service unless they have satisfactorily performed the work at an earlier date. If they have done it before (there is no time limit on how long ago they may have satisfactorily performed this work) they can perform or supervise it. If they haven’t done it before they can perform it, but in order to supervise it, they would have to perform it by demonstration to the satisfaction of the administrator or to an appropriately-rated mechanic or repairman who had done this job before. (Again, no time limit as to


when they did it last). I’m all in favor of passing along


information by “each one teach one” but now we have a potential for bad shortcuts, forgotten cautions or complacency resulting in the performance of the task being something other than what the manufacturer had in mind. This kind of training might be fine for much of what we do. Police, firefighters, airline pilots, nurses and many other occupations are regularly doing recurrent training or requalification (endorsed from the top down) but floor mechanics or field mechanics are often seen as being too busy making things go, and their time can’t be spared or there is no money for it. Besides, aren’t their errors often caught before an aircraft rolls out the door or takes off? We can only hope. Pilots have check airmen who meet written and approved qualifications for each company. There is no equivalent of a check airman for maintenance. There is only the requirement that if you have a repair station, you must have a training manual and a person responsible for training. In small shops the person who pulls the training trigger is likely the owner/CFO of the company and they have many issues on their plates besides knowing that more training is better.


Once an A&P mechanic gets the basic federal certificate, OEM training on the aircraft or simply training on how to do the job safely can become the exception rather than the rule.


43


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60