Blastr42

Blastr42

Member
I'm interested in being able to do all my own work on my aircraft, including the annual condition inspection (I was not the original builder). How hard is it to become an A&P? It seems like half the people in aviation are A&Ps! I am a full time engineer and have thought about becoming a light sport mechanic, but I would rather go to the higher rating if that is a "not insane" idea. What are the ways to become an A&P? What is the least time intensive? Am I just screwed in my desire?

Thanks a bunch,
Jeff
 
Lots of time involved. Either 1900+hours at a 147 school or 3 years in an apprentance type position. You might want to consider the advantages of doing the maintenance yourself, and having an A&P do you condition inspections. Most people in experimental aviation would argue that you can do all you own maintenance on the RV, and just need the condition inspection done by an A&P. Others might argue that you should at least have an A&P inspect and sign off major work done. I fall into the later category, but I'm biased since I am an A&P. Either way you can do the majority of the work. Just make sure either way it gets logged!
 
school

went to a two year school 40hrs a week. some unrealted stuff in there such as basic acedemics.at night would have taken 4 years.
 
Chiming in...

No A&P required to do normal maintenance work on an experimental. See 14 CFR 43.1 (b), "This part does not apply to any aircraft for which an experimental airworthiness certificate has been issued, unless a different kind of airworthiness certificate had previously been issued for that aircraft."

Now, you start tearing into a major alteration without an A&P or Repairman certificate, and you will probably have a problem with the FSDO when you try to get your operating limitations worked out. And of course, if you don't know what you're doing, don't do it!

Couple of additional points to those already posted. Can go to school, work under an A&P, OR get the endorsement from the FSDO (FAA) using your experience building your experimental. Has to meet some time requirements, etc., and your not guaranteed to get the endorsement. But it is possible. I got an airframe endorsement from the FSDO after showing that I built my plane. Tried to squeeze a powerplant endorsement out of them since I overhauled my own engine, but I think they just felt that was being too generous and balked.
 
Last edited:
Chiming out...

So how do you get an endorsement from the FSDO? I suppose you still have to take the tests, right? If there is a possiblity that I can use construction experience/time that I work on LSAs after I get my sport mechanic certificate to get my A&P certificate, then I'll definitely try for it. Do you have any suggestions for the best way to work that kind of (evil) scheme?

(everything's better when it has an evil scheme :)

Jeff
 
Blastr42 said:
So how do you get an endorsement from the FSDO? I suppose you still have to take the tests, right? If there is a possiblity that I can use construction experience/time that I work on LSAs after I get my sport mechanic certificate to get my A&P certificate, then I'll definitely try for it. Do you have any suggestions for the best way to work that kind of (evil) scheme? Jeff
Click to expand...
Made an appointment with a maintenance guy at the Houston FSDO. Brought in a completed 8610 (I think it was) and my building records. They thumbed through my stuff and asked a few questions. Signed my form for airframe only.

As for the tests, that's up to you after you get the endorsement.

As for your evil plan with the LSA, it might work. Gotta find a reasonable/knowledgable person at the FSDO to work with. What I've learned is that not all are very familiar with the experimental world and will just say "no" without really knowing.
 
Last edited:
The long/short of obtaining A&P

This topic is of a nature to cause much desparity in opinions. The basics are fairly simple, that being ,an A&P is a certificate issued to an individual by the US government that allows one to perform various degrees of maintenance on a wide spectrum of aircraft. Once issued, it must be used in a safe and confident manner, as the actions performed under it ultimately could result in injury or death to others. The result of such,can and have resulted in severe federal penalties, I.E. jail, ect. I realize most interested in this post probably do not consider the liabilities of others in obtaining an simple A&P, but I can tell you as a 27 year holder of an A&P/IA, it is a reality. I have, and will again, write letters of recomendation to the FAA for certain individuals to be considered candidates for testing , however, I then also become liable for the required oversight of required hands on work qualifying the individual. The FAA is becoming increasingly weary of these approvals, as their A&P requirements become more demanding.I encourage anyone seeking the short-cut approach spend some time with a competent A&P/IA before diving in. There are plenty of A&P's that will do assisted maintenance.... What you dont learn is what will hurt you most.
 
fixnflyguy said:
The FAA is becoming increasingly weary of these approvals, as their A&P requirements become more demanding.I encourage anyone seeking the short-cut approach spend some time with a competent A&P/IA before diving in. There are plenty of A&P's that will do assisted maintenance.... What you dont learn is what will hurt you most.
Click to expand...
I'll stretch a little and assume you may mean using my 39 months of building an RV and overhauling my engine as grounds for petitioning the FAA for the aircraft mechanic's endorsement is a short-cut approach. Perhaps I should have mentioned that I worked almost weekly with a 40 year A&P/IA, commercial pilot, retired NASA engineer. He personally referred me to a similarly qualified FAA employee at the FSDO, who had previously inspected and issued my airworthiness certificate, for review of my mechanic's endorsement request.

The method I used to acquire an endorsement was exactly as allowed by the FAA, which, to me, makes it just as valid as any other means for acquiring an endorsement.

I do understand and appreciate your point about liability. As a 20 yr commercial pilot and cfii/mei and 18 yr professional engineer, I too appreciate the significance of professional liability, signing log books and cutting pilots loose to go fly around alone with their wife and kids. It's very serious business, indeed.
 
Last edited:
Low Pass said:
I'll stretch a little and assume you may mean using my 39 months of building an RV and overhauling my engine as grounds for petitioning the FAA for the aircraft mechanic's endorsement is a short-cut approach. Perhaps I should have mentioned that I worked almost weekly with a 40 year A&P/IA, commercial pilot, retired NASA engineer. He personally referred me to a similarly qualified FAA employee at the FSDO, who had previously inspected and issued my airworthiness certificate, for review of my mechanic's endorsement request.

The method I used to acquire an endorsement was exactly as allowed by the FAA, which, to me, makes it just as valid as any other means for acquiring an endorsement.

I do understand and appreciate your point about liability. As a 20 yr commercial pilot and cfii/mei and 18 yr professional engineer, I too appreciate the significance of professional liability, signing log books and cutting pilots loose to go fly around alone with their wife and kids. It's very serious business, indeed.
Click to expand...


The whole A&P program is becoming a joke
 
wheres the joke

WOW to think one could qualify for the AP tests after building one airplane over a span of months equal to or greater than experience required by the FAA is amazing. experience workin on one plane, one doesnt know what they dont know, ya know. To be honest it does let a little wind out of my sails when I hear of this because during my apprenticeship we needed time documented on singles, twins, turboprobs, jets, all systems including hydraulics, elec, air, nitrogen,o2, etc... all engines assoc with each. having said all that... I have enough to worry about so to all I say go for it but work with a very competent IA because you will miss something.
 
Pat is right. No A&P could possibly know everything. Some of us got our ticket by working on Cubs and reading books at home, while others went to a first class trade school and had a much broader experience. Same license, different knowledge base and skill set. My hat is off to those who work on helicopters and turbines. I have never done it and could only do it legally with expert supervision. By the same token, the turbine guy might know very little about dope and fabric. Clint said it best, "A man's got to know his limits." Steve
 
"The whole A&P program is becoming a joke"

Which part is the joke??? The Faa actually wanting people to have validated work experience to apply for the authorization to test ?

The joke is highly qualified mechanics are losing their jobs daily to outsourced maintenance done by unlicensed individules who are "supervised" by an A&P certified person in another room, Thats the true joke.

A&P's are as responsible for the safety of the aviation system as are pilots are for the safety of flying. Two different licenses with two different skillsets and qualifications.

I have been an A&P, Inspector, and GA/Airline mechanic for 30 + years, yes I do feel its fair for a experience sign off on the airframe if you build your own RV but to sign one off to get a powerplant with overhauling one engine would be a stretch even under the old qualifications.
 
Last edited:
santa claus

there was a guy in georgia that some called santa because with 300 dollars he would give yoyu a little present.still many competent a&p guys went there because it was cheap..i must admit by the time i got there it had changed and i had to do all kinds of stuff. the depressing thing for me was i was making more part time at sears automotive then the guys working there..but they simply loved aviation...
 
School is long and interesting

I own a 6A, and I'm in the second full time semester of a good California A&P school having a blast. It is a really long road to get those 1900 hours. I'm probably going to finish in four years at a steady 3/4 load pace. Good luck.
 
Last edited:
The only good things is you can buy the ticket but not the experience! I made a pretty good living doing sheetmetal work for A&P's that couldn't get the job done. I have more tools than most commuter airlines and about 28 years of experience. So when they had the tough jobs they called me and I command top dollar.. It's easy to do sheet metal when everything is right but a true craftsman knows how to properly fix screw ups. At the majors I was the janitor fixing screw ups that substandard A&P's made! I do not train people as it is job security for myself... Heck most A&P's at the major airlines don't even know their rivet sizes and drill bits! You just got to laugh at e'm. Go get e'm seat tiger!
 
Last edited:
RV505 said:
The whole A&P program is becoming a joke
Click to expand...

Well, not exactly. The process of earning the A/P is not a cake walk, no matter how you do it. I've been told the 10 day final exam course is extremely challenging.

The means of getting the certificate is not the problem, the problem is what people do with it after they earn it. Dig into the log of a 50 year old Cessna or Piper and see how much is not there, or worse yet, engine for sale, log missing.

This, of course, has no bearing on the original question - is getting the certificate worth the time and effort for the owner of an experiemental airplane he did not build? I think not.

The problem, from my perspective, is that unless you practise the trade every day, you'll never be good at it. Guys coming out of a 4 year A/P school don't know as much as they will 5 years later if they go to work. Same can be said for a newly certificated pilot.

My cut on all this is if you are interested in the experimental airplane you did not build, you can learn enough about it to maintain it. It would be convenient to have the A/P certificate to do the paper, but there are guys who will look over your shoulder and do the log. That's not a bad system. Two sets of eyes are always better than one.

In some cases the original builder holds a repairman certificate and may be interested enough in the future condition of the airplane that he will be that paper person looking over your shoulder.

dd

 
Last edited:
A&P stuff

"The means of getting the certificate is not the problem, the problem is what people do with it after they earn it. Dig into the log of a 50 year old Cessna or Piper and see how much is not there, or worse yet, engine for sale, log missing."

True. But that is also very indicative of previous owners contempt for their aircrafts records. Remember who is ACTUALLY responsible for the aircraft records and maintaining the aircraft in an airworthy condition.

The FAA loves to chase paper and if the paper isn't right, the plane isn't airworthy. It may not matter until something bad happens, but when it does, they are going over papers very carefully trying to find stuff to barbeque someone with.
 
The best friend the qualified A&P has is the FAA! If I see someone working on a plane without an A&P or a A&P that performed sloppy or unairworthy work you call the FEDs. It sounds harsh but you may save someones life! Following the rules and tech manuals is the only way to work and then you have no worries! :)
 
Last edited:
RV505 said:
The only good things is you can buy the ticket but not the experience! I made a pretty good living doing sheetmetal work for A&P's that couldn't get the job done. I have more tools than most commuter airlines and about 28 years of experience. So when they had the tough jobs they called me and I command top dollar.. It's easy to do sheet metal when everything is right but a true craftsman knows how to properly fix screw ups. At the majors I was the janitor fixing screw ups that substandard A&P's made! I do not train people as it is job security for myself... Heck most A&P's at the major airlines don't even know their rivet sizes and drill bits! You just got to laugh at e'm. Go get e'm seat tiger!
Click to expand...


You were a janitor and they let you fix aircraft? That must have been at Eastern when they were hiring scabs. I have never met an airline mech that did not know rivet size and drill bits. People that blow their own horn a little much tend to be just full of hot air.
 
That's a little rude accusing anyone to have worked for Eastern as a scab. (I havn't ever worked as a scab) However, some say that your Memphis outfit scabbed our mail contract but I'm not holdiing grudges. Yes, there are alot of A&P's working overhaul that that don't know rivit sizes. They only came into aviation for the big money!?!?! About half that were there didn't like airplanes or really care what they are doing but they saw those commercials on the military channel about making the big money and they got their ticket at some fly by night A&P school and get on at the Majors and all they do is seats and interiors...Untill management decides they need more S/M. Then S/M spends more time fixing stuff they messed up.. Which is OK because I got the Qvertime!! :D Show me the money!!! :D Yahoo! It still get's me happy!!!
 
Last edited:
RV505,


You just denigrated a wide range of people in one large general statement and then call me rude. Treat others how you want to be treated. Every person that holds an A&P is not on the same level experience wise. But I see that you are the kind to say snide remarks and not hold to what makes aviation safe. Learn, Teach, Do, repeat. Sometime soon you might have to fly on one of those aircraft worked on by one of those junior A&P's that you would not help gain experience. Your total commitment to your personal greed will bite you in the a**. Strangely enough EAA is also a strong proponent of learn, teach, do, repeat.
 
Last edited:
How do you teach someone for the most part doesn't want to learn.. There is world of difference between working S/M line and overhaul in the airlines and riveting a prepunched kit together. I have no problem showing some that is building a kit airplane. At least they will pay attention because their but is on the line. I stand behind my words as far as teaching Airline Mechanics, What can I say!?! I am a hired rivet gun :D
 
RV505,

Why don't you come out from behind your handle and post a signature with your name. And again, you just put a wide reaching general statement on an entire group of people.
 
Hi Ken,

I appreciate the input. I also appreciate free speech. I am not name calling. There are other threads that do not involve RV's. Are we to shut down those also? The CH-53 is a dang big aircraft. Have a good day Ken.
 
My take on the A&P business

First off it's a shame....

The average new car costs about $25-35K and if its improperly repaired most of the time it just dies and you stop and get out. The guy who repairs it gets $20/hr (my guess). The mechanic may be certified (whatever that really means) or learned from the school of hard knocks.

The average new single engine airplane costs ~+$200K and if its improperly repaired it is either grounded possibly (far from home) or falls out of the sky with fatal results. The guy who repairs it gets ~$15-20/hr (my guess) and spends ~2000 hrs getting his Government certification.

So lets recap. A&P responsible for a high dollar aircraft and flight safety but gets paid less then the average auto mechanic. It is a shame.

I have worked with a few A&P's. Most did minor repairs, engine work and general maintenance. Non had built an airplane before. Most of the work I saw was as good if not better then Cessna and Piper did from the factory. Most of the work I have seen on the majority of RV's over the years is far superior. I believe this is because the majority of the RV's builders know more about every inch of their aircraft, the systems, the engine and electronics then the average pilot or A&P (there maybe exceptions). Who better to service (except major engine overhauls and avionics) then the person who has built it.

Your mileage may vary.

Paul
 
Last edited:
Paul,


When you open up the discussion to who gets paid what, it really opens a few eyes. People that are willing to put out 80-100 dollars an hour for their cars will cry foul at paying 40-50 per hour for an aircraft. As far as workmanship and craftsmanship go I have seen a lot of beautiful experimental aircraft. I have also seen a few that were hammered together with a sledge hammer. On any scale in any profession you have a top and bottom. In any human endevor you have a good and a bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.