PLANE TALK
Great vigilance will be needed by every AME and operator to preserve the basic philosophy of the system which has served aviation well for more than 100 years.
a licenced AME to be able to inspect and certify aircraft work has forever created some misunderstanding among people. It is not possible in a four-year program, two of which may be an apprenticeship, to provide enough technical training to make an AME a master of all the knowledge needed to cover all in-depth technical work. When one remembers that the AME’s world goes from fabric covered to supersonic aircraft, one can see the education challenges. So, a large part of their education is the regulatory aspects of the licence to certify. Therefore, the concept of having specialized AMOs arose from the old company approval system which had aircraft and off -aircraft work shops. These support technicians would then work in specialized AMOs Their technical training and certifi cation to a trade standard would be accomplished through
the CCAA programs. The next decision was around the Shop Certifi cation Authority. The idea of additional AME Licence categories was rejected as much too expensive to maintain and would undermine the aircraft licensing system. Since Transport Canada had limited time to develop national Shop Certifi cation Authorities standards for all off - aircraft shops it was tempting for Transport Canada personnel to fall back on the “E” or “S” in avionics and structures. Even if Transport Canada is not actually requiring the licence in a specialized shop, but even suggesting one needs to meet the same level of basic trade knowledge as such licences is the root of today’s issue.
TODAY’S ISSUE Some of the specialized AMOs technician standards were rather easy to set out, such as welding and
Non-Destructive Testing / Non- Destructive Inspection (NDT/NDI) as there existed national training and certifi cation standards. The other trade standards were developed by the CCAA. It appears to some that structures work off -aircraft shop certifi cation authority could be a problem and a simple rectifi cation would be to require the S licence. Of course, this goes against the basic philosophy of who needs a licence and why. The other area is avionics, which in my defi nition includes all systems which have electronic or electrical based components. Why not use the E licence, because it would not be in accordance with basic aircraft and off -aircraft work division. The avionics fi eld has advanced to mainly a plug and play systems approach.
One needs in-depth avionics training to understand and certify complex systems on aircraft, however
56
DOMmagazine.com | oct 2019
Come Visit us at the NBAA-BACE 2019 Las Vegas Convention Center | Las Vegas, NV October 22-24, 2019 | Booth #: N2715
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 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92
