Get A&P license to maintain own Airplane

I did it in a bit different order, and for slightly different reasons, but without a doubt the A&P cert is valuable. Whether it is worth it to you is another story.

I was an aerospace engineer and got the A&P to add a hands on component to my resume, then worked as a mechanic at an FBO in exchange for flight time to get my PP cert. Not a situation that would be called typical, but just to show different ways it can be done.

The regs regarding recency of experience and currency for mechanics have been interpreted pretty loosely, it's not hard for an owner to maintain. I currently do my own maintenance on my plane, hire an IA for annual inspection, and do annual condition inspections on a family member's homebuilt.

The A&P has definitely saved me money as an owner, but less than the cash cost of the cert. The knowledge, the value to my resume and career, etc. however, is hard to put a price on. For me it was well worth it.

Just be careful, the price you quoted seems low for a proper 147 school, make sure you know what you're getting. My program ended up being around $15K including tools, testing fees, etc.
 
alfadog said:
No, you need an IA to perform the annual inspection. Then he can sign it off. Anything else is "pencil-whipping". Here is a couple of thing I have seen so far...
- IA signs off on an annual after an A&P performs and signs off on a 100-hr. Pencil-whipping.
- IA comes on site and signs off the annual taking the word of the A&P that he performed the inspection and everything is good to go. Pencil-whipping.
- IA works as a CFII for the aircraft owner and signs off the annual after work done by non-A&P workers with minimal supervision by A&P. Pencil-whipping.
Click to expand...

My humor is wasted on you. ;)
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
I appreciate your enthusiasm...but that’s not correct. ;) A&P I/A here.


Don’t make me post the chief counsel’s letter that sez so. :D
Click to expand...

From your link.

Maintenance Records. This evidence or documentation, when required, could include records showing performance or supervision of aircraft maintenance, return to service (RTS) documents, and/or copies of maintenance record entries to determine the type of maintenance activity performed, considering any special expertise required. The quantity of maintenance activity demonstrates if the applicant was actively engaged."

That would seem to make the earlier comment by you less than accurate.

Checkout_my_Six said:
Nope...any loggable Maint entry counts as being actively engaged. ;)

And the Balt FSDO agrees...for almost 10 years with multiple renewals.
Click to expand...

It does not take just any entry. It takes multiple entries in a quantity sufficient enough to convince the ASI. If your FSDO is accepting an insufficient amount then they are wrong.
 
How much is enough? ...and what kinds of activities? Here's a copy of the worksheet my FSDO requires....and I supply sufficient info to meet the requirement at each renewal. AFS-300 has an order for this....maybe for giggles I go get that? :D

With respect to the "actively engaged" requirement, the policy notes that "[a]ctively engaged means an active role in exercising the privileges of an airframe and powerplant mechanic certificate in the maintenance of civil aircraft. Applicants who inspect, overhaul, repair, preserve, or replace parts on aircraft, or who supervise (i.e., direct and inspect) those activities, are actively engaged." The policy does not specify the quantity of work for part time mechanics.

Accordingly, the FAA has adopted a broad definition of ‘‘actively engaged’’
to include not only part-time employment but also occasional activity, which does not require employment and can occur on an infrequent basis. The FAA believes it problematic to list every situation that could be considered actively engaged, and that approach may exclude situations that an ASI would determine meets the regulatory requirements. Additionally, as indicated in the proposed policy, the FAA values the substantive nature of experience rather than a strict quantity formula.

The FAA has concluded that requiring ASIs to evaluate evidence or documentation provided by the applicant will facilitate a consistent review because the ASI will have more than the applicant’s self-certification to make the determination. This documentation, when required, could include records showing performance or supervision of aircraft maintenance, return to service documents, and copies of maintenance record entries. The FAA expects documentation will establish an applicant’s continued contributions to the aviation industry and ability to demonstrate compliance with 65.91(c)(1)–(4).
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

  • actively engaged.pdf
    70.7 KB · Views: 9
Last edited:
I'm getting ready to take an early retirement and get my A&P, but it'll be as a hobby rather than thinking I'll save money on maintenance. A few points, some that others have already hit on:
  • I doubt the $3500 training is all in. I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up being 3X to 4X that. Does it include the lab time you'll need to have enough hours for the A&P? I doubt it. It certainly doesn't include tools.
  • What about the opportunity cost of spending all that time in school when you could have been earning income? If it takes you two years and you give up a full time job making $40k but take a part time $20k job while in school you've lost $40k in income. That's real money.
  • I have 2 planes and have never paid for any maintenance labor. I'm fortunate to have a circle of aviation friends that includes several A&P/IA. I do all my own maintenance under their watchful eye. I pay for just the inspection part of annuals ($300-$400) but do all the work myself. I also pay for transponder checks. My planes are simple, fixed gear, single engine so they don't require much maintenance. If I had complex aircraft that would sway the math a bit in favor of having an A&P but I still doubt it would make financial sense.
  • Even if I'd have paid for labor it wouldn't have added up to much. The real cost of plane ownership is the high cost of replacement parts, hangar rent, and insurance.
  • You'll also be tempted to use your A&P to help out other plane owners and make a little money. What is the cost of liability insurance? It sounds like you're young so may not have a lot of assets at risk but you'll still need to protect yourself. This is a huge issue for me since I'm older and have accrued substantial assets over the years. I haven't figured out this part of the equation yet.

I don't want to sound discouraging because I wish I'd have gotten my A&P decades ago. But not to save money - just because I enjoy learning new things and it would be another thing to cement me into my local aviation community.
 
Punkinhead said:
I'm getting ready to take an early retirement and get my A&P, but it'll be as a hobby rather than thinking I'll save money on maintenance. A few points, some that others have already hit on:

...
Click to expand...

Pretty much how I did it. I took the early retirement with an eye toward working toward CFII but my Arrow broke and I did not have the $$ to fix it. I have been mechanicing at a high level since I was 15 and was lucky enough to have both the aptitude and a father that was a genius at things mechanical. I've now accrued over a year of A&P experience working for others which has validated my ability to to this work solo. I am going to continue toward IA and have picked up again seriously on the CFII track.
 
John - I'm very curious what your plans are for protecting your assets as both an A&P and CFI. Do you have a ballpark on what liability insurance costs?
 
Punkinhead said:
John - I'm very curious what your plans are for protecting your assets as both an A&P and CFI. Do you have a ballpark on what liability insurance costs?
Click to expand...

I had not considered that. I accepted my first payment for A&P services rendered just last week. Food for thought. Please keep me posted on anything you come up with and I will look into it and do the same for you.
 
Punkinhead said:
John - I'm very curious what your plans are for protecting your assets as both an A&P and CFI. Do you have a ballpark on what liability insurance costs?
Click to expand...

I will start a new thread and ask the folks here regarding A&P issues. I am months away from worrying about the CFII.
 
Punkinhead said:
I doubt the $3500 training is all in. I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up being 3X to 4X that.
Click to expand...
FYI: If available to you, the community college route is by far the best and cheapest way to go. The private schools are north of $10,000 and have been for years. The $3500 tuition is on par for a CC and from my limited knowledge the student is required to buy a personal tool set and pay for the DME tests separately at the end. All said, I know of several people you got their A&P for less than $5000. So it all depends.

EDIT: I stand corrected. The $5000 figure above was school costs only. Add another $1500 for tools and tests: $6500.
 
Last edited:
Bell206 said:
FYI: If available to you, the community college route is by far the best and cheapest way to go. The private schools are north of $10,000 and have been for years. The $3500 tuition is on par for a CC and from my limited knowledge the student is required to buy a personal tool set and pay for the DME tests separately at the end. All said, I know of several people you got their A&P for less than $5000. So it all depends.
Click to expand...
It's good that it's available that cheap in some areas. In my neck of the woods the costs (not including tools or FAA exams) would be $10k for a community college or $15k for a state university. In my case the community college campus is too far away to be a reasonable commute so I'll be going the state university route.
 
Punkinhead said:
It's good that it's available that cheap in some areas. In my neck of the woods the costs (not including tools or FAA exams) would be $10k for a community college or $15k for a state university. In my case the community college campus is too far away to be a reasonable commute so I'll be going the state university route.
Click to expand...

I think I once figured out what I paid for tuition at George T. Baker 2013 - 2015 and it was $7900. Add $360 for writtens and $1000 for the practical. I had plenty of tools for school but have purchased about $3k in aviation-related and sheetmetal tools since.
 
Go ahead and get the education or, as others suggest, work toward the certificate with another A&P. Too many pilots hop in their plane assuming it it airworthy because it's "in annual" and some A&P and/or IA did some work on it last month.

I sometimes pay people to work on my cars, which I love to do, but don't always have time. I tried at least a dozen shops around town before I found one I trust to do things right. I know a few other A&Ps I would trust to work on my plane and many more I would not. Having my A&P and experience with avionics pays for my weekend aviation habit. A software engineer job pays the rest of the bills.
 
donjohnston said:
Another approach would be to purchase a completed E/AB aircraft. You can do everything except the annual. And then, only an A&P is needed for that, not an IA.

Just a thought.
Click to expand...
Still another approach - taking things a step further - is to purchase a factory built SLSA and work through a DAR (I used Rainbow Aviation Services in Corning, CA) to change the certification to ELSA so you can perform your own maintenance and modifications. Then take the 16 hour Light Sport Repairman Certificate-Inspection course and get the FAA LSR-I certificate so you can perform and sign off the annual condition inspection on your own airplane.

I'd caution anyone considering going this route to understand the associated responsibilities, both from a safety and legal standpoint. For 20 years I did owner assisted annuals on my 172 under the watchful eyes of my A&P I/A, and that included actually performing all of the required tasks. I also accumulated all of the tools necessary for checking control cable tension, performing mag timing, compression tests, cleaning and gapping spark plugs, servicing wheels and brakes, etc. Anything I don't feel competent to do, I pay the A&P to either do it or supervise me as I do it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cdb
idahoflier said:
what were your average annual billable hours? How did billable compare to actual?
Click to expand...
I didn't use a billable hour model. I flat rated or charged block time. I would supplement bill by hour if needed or requested but I didn't track hours in that manner. Also I don't think billable/actual works in aviation mx due to the stop/start nature of the work flow and seasonal cycles. But if I had to guess, I probably would have been around an efficiency/utilization of 40%-50%.
 
Bell206 said:
I didn't use a billable hour model. I flat rated or charged block time. I would supplement bill by hour if needed or requested but I didn't track hours in that manner. Also I don't think billable/actual works in aviation mx due to the stop/start nature of the work flow and seasonal cycles. But if I had to guess, I probably would have been around an efficiency/utilization of 40%-50%.
Click to expand...
yup....billable models are expensive. :eek:
 
donjohnston said:
Another approach would be to purchase a completed E/AB aircraft. You can do everything except the annual. And then, only an A&P is needed for that, not an IA.

Just a thought.
Click to expand...
Stan Cooper said:
Still another approach - taking things a step further - is to purchase a factory built SLSA and work through a DAR (I used Rainbow Aviation Services in Corning, CA) to change the certification to ELSA so you can perform your own maintenance and modifications. Then take the 16 hour Light Sport Repairman Certificate-Inspection course and get the FAA LSR-I certificate so you can perform and sign off the annual condition inspection on your own airplane.

I'd caution anyone considering going this route to understand the associated responsibilities, both from a safety and legal standpoint. For 20 years I did owner assisted annuals on my 172 under the watchful eyes of my A&P I/A, and that included actually performing all of the required tasks. I also accumulated all of the tools necessary for checking control cable tension, performing mag timing, compression tests, cleaning and gapping spark plugs, servicing wheels and brakes, etc. Anything I don't feel competent to do, I pay the A&P to either do it or supervise me as I do it.
Click to expand...

Good points and they bring to mind something that I have trouble understanding and that irritates me a fair bit. With all of the possible option out there that allow an owner to do his own work to varying degrees, why do some owners who choose to stay with certified aircraft, ***** and moan so much about having to use an A&P/IA?

After all you can:
1. Build an EAB, get the repairman certificate and then do all mx and inspections yourself.
2. Buy an EAB and do all the mx yourself and just hire an A&P for the condition inspection.
3. Buy a LSA and take the 120 hour course for the repairman certificate w/ mx rating that allows you to do the mx & the inspections.
4. Buy an E-LSA and take the 16 hour inspection course which would allow you to do the inspections as well as the mx allowed by it being experimental.
5. Stay certified, do your own PM, and do owner-assist work with your A&P/IA.

Plenty of good options.
 
SkyDog58 said:
Good points and they bring to mind something that I have trouble understanding and that irritates me a fair bit. With all of the possible option out there that allow an owner to do his own work to varying degrees, why do some owners who choose to stay with certified aircraft, ***** and moan so much about having to use an A&P/IA?
Click to expand...

To me, the answer is fairly obvious in many cases. It all comes down to money and the owners are cheap.

The only place you're going to get such a low buy in to aircraft ownership is in the old certified airplanes that are already fully depreciated. These are the airplanes typically needing the most work and they also happen to be the airplanes offering the least amount of latitude on who can do the work and how it can be done.

The way I see things, the cost of aviation and aircraft ownership is roughly the same no matter how you go about it. Want to spend less on ongoing maintenance? Spend more and buy a newer airplane that isn't worn out or buy/build an experimental. Want to spend less on the initial purchase? Buy something older but be prepared to spend more for the ongoing maintenance.
 
Bell206 said:
I didn't use a billable hour model. I flat rated or charged block time. I would supplement bill by hour if needed or requested but I didn't track hours in that manner. Also I don't think billable/actual works in aviation mx due to the stop/start nature of the work flow and seasonal cycles. But if I had to guess, I probably would have been around an efficiency/utilization of 40%-50%.
Click to expand...

Thanks!
 
SkyDog58 said:
Good points and they bring to mind something that I have trouble understanding and that irritates me a fair bit. With all of the possible option out there that allow an owner to do his own work to varying degrees, why do some owners who choose to stay with certified aircraft, ***** and moan so much about having to use an A&P/IA?

After all you can:
1. Build an EAB, get the repairman certificate and then do all mx and inspections yourself.
2. Buy an EAB and do all the mx yourself and just hire an A&P for the condition inspection.
3. Buy a LSA and take the 120 hour course for the repairman certificate w/ mx rating that allows you to do the mx & the inspections.
4. Buy an E-LSA and take the 16 hour inspection course which would allow you to do the inspections as well as the mx allowed by it being experimental.
5. Stay certified, do your own PM, and do owner-assist work with your A&P/IA.

Plenty of good options.
Click to expand...

Not all of us mind hiring a shop and/or working with an A&P/IA. I can only speak for myself, but in my case there are only two shops on my field and both have a one to two month backlog of work. Neither shop will perform owner-assisted annuals, let alone supervised maintenance. I would love to work with an A&P/IA, but that's not an option...

As far as building/buying, there isn't an EAB, E-LSA or S-LSA that fits my mission, so I'm stuck with my certified aircraft...
 
SkyDog58 said:
After all you can:
1. Build an EAB, get the repairman certificate and then do all mx and inspections yourself.
2. Buy an EAB and do all the mx yourself and just hire an A&P for the condition inspection.
3. Buy a LSA and take the 120 hour course for the repairman certificate w/ mx rating that allows you to do the mx & the inspections.
4. Buy an E-LSA and take the 16 hour inspection course which would allow you to do the inspections as well as the mx allowed by it being experimental.
5. Stay certified, do your own PM, and do owner-assist work with your A&P/IA.

Plenty of good options.
Click to expand...

Great laundry list of available options for saving $$ on maintenance.
 
The A&P’s I’ve met have not been interested in doing owner assisted maintenance. I’ve poked around about it thinking about getting an old fabric t/w. I think that’d be the way to go, then log the time and get one of them to sign you off to take the exams and then do your own maintenance.
 
LoLPilot said:
then log the time and get one of them to sign you off to take the exams and then do your own maintenance.
Click to expand...
Won't say it's impossible to go that route, but the feds haven't been receptive to mechanic experience sign-offs from individual A&Ps in quite some time. Even people who work at an aviation company struggle to meet the minimums. Contact a mx ASI at your local FSDO and inquire. Just be sure he's young enough to still be there when you finish your experience log.

And here:
https://www.faa.gov/mechanics/become/experience/
 
I always say we'd have come out financially ahead if I had sent Margy to A&P school rather than graduate school (in special ed).
 
LoLPilot said:
The A&P’s I’ve met have not been interested in doing owner assisted maintenance. I’ve poked around about it thinking about getting an old fabric t/w. I think that’d be the way to go, then log the time and get one of them to sign you off to take the exams and then do your own maintenance.
Click to expand...
I had a mechanic for a while who divided her customers into two categories (OK, she did have another scale based on payment promptness): those who would turn a wrench on their aircraft and those who were "just pilots."

The first time I needed an oil change, she said "Bring it over Saturday." I did and watched her change it.
The second time, she said "Bring it over Saturday" and when I got there she handed me a screw driver and a bucket.

We were in the middle of doing the annual (and a little deferred maintenance) one year and we'd broke for lunch and were eating pizza in the back office when a pilot came in and said he thought his battery needed replacing.
She told him to bring it in and she'd bench test it. A blank stare followed. "Oh, yes. You're 'just a pilot.' Ron, go help him take his battery out."
 
SkyDog58 said:
Then she’d have to deal with special adults (pilots). :D
Click to expand...
Yeah, after she became docent coordinator at the Museum she said, "Let's see. Emotionally disturbed eighth grade boys or retired pilots, about the same thing."
My college buddies all thought she was uniquely qualified to marry me.
 
Bell206 said:
Won't say it's impossible to go that route, but the feds haven't been receptive to mechanic experience sign-offs from individual A&Ps in quite some time. Even people who work at an aviation company struggle to meet the minimums. Contact a mx ASI at your local FSDO and inquire. Just be sure he's young enough to still be there when you finish your experience log.

And here:
https://www.faa.gov/mechanics/become/experience/
Click to expand...

18 months ea for Airframe and Powerplant or 30 months combined. It's 3000 hours, isn't it? So let's say you had a fabric plane and you it needed a recover. This is actually one of the big reasons I'd want to get an A&P. So you go to an EAA education event and attend the two day fabric school. You show the certificate to your A&P and they allow you to recover your plane with them checking up on your progress each day. I keep reading quotes of "1000 hours" to recover something like a Cub or a Champ. So you'd have the time you spent in the class, and then the 1000 or so hours you spent recovering your plane towards the airframe test. If you help with any major maintenance (strut replacement, cylinder replacement, etc) then there is log-able time. As I understand it you could even count PM towards it if you have an A&P check that you did a good job. Will you have it done in a year? No. In 5-6 if you have a plane that needs maintenance and that you can work on? Possibly. In 10? That shouldn't be a problem at that point. Between now and then you've learned a lot about your plane, decreased your maintenance cost, and earned a certificate that allows you to do your own maintenance. All while freeing up an A&P's time to work on others' planes while still paying him to check over what you're doing. It seems like a good plan to me. The problem (as I see it) comes from the fact that once you pass the exams and the FAA gives you the certificate then they're saying that you can work on others' planes in addition to your own.

There's no intermediate level. I can work on my own car. I just can't hang out my sign and charge the public at large to work on their cars and I can't *technically* hire my car out as a commercial vehicle. The "Primary Noncommercial Aircraft" idea that gets tossed around periodically seems to be a fantastic idea that creates that same bridge, but for some reason the FAA won't adopt it. So if they tell you that you can work on your own certificed AC, they're telling you that you can work on other peoples' planes too.
 
I think the ultimate is to do the same thing with airplanes that we did with the 3rd class medical ... Basic Med. Yes, I'm an IA and that would cut into my retirement fund, but it is going to be absolutely necessary to let IAs (just like we let MDs on the basic med) "qualify" an individual to work and/or annual their own aircraft. Perhaps make the sign-off specific to a type or even down to a particular N-number.

All we need is a champion in Congress to stick a pin in the FAA mossbacks in OK City and DC to get off their butts and come up with a reasonable plan. Or have it stuffed down their throats like the Basic Med had to be.

Jim
 
Amen Jim....:yes:

....but it's gonna take more than a pin prick....more like a spike and dagger thru the heart of bureaucracy.
 
LoLPilot said:
The problem...
Click to expand...
Is that it's not how you get experience. The problem is the FAA has not been accepting the 30 months combined experience you receive working under a standalone mechanic. The link lists the 3 ways.

LoLPilot said:
"Primary Noncommercial Aircraft" idea that gets tossed around periodically seems to be a fantastic idea
Click to expand...
Yes it is. And a similar system has been working in Canada.
 
Bell206 said:
Is that it's not how you get experience. The problem is the FAA has not been accepting the 30 months combined experience you receive working under a standalone mechanic. The link lists the 3 ways.


Yes it is. And a similar system has been working in Canada.
Click to expand...

Then why is supervised maintenance and logging time under a mechanic still listed as one of the ways to gain the practical experience to take the exams - even on the FAA website it lists, working in a shop under supervision of a mechanic. Im sure they mean employed, but there is nothing I see directly prohibiting working under a single mechanic and getting them to sign you off so I think you could make a very good case to a FSDO that you are within regs by doing that.

But as stated the best way is the PNC stipulation. It hurts me to admit when the Canadians get something right and we don’t, but here it is.
 
Bell206 said:
Is that it's not how you get experience. The problem is the FAA has not been accepting the 30 months combined experience you receive working under a standalone mechanic. The link lists the 3 ways.
Click to expand...

People's experiences with gaining experience this way and having someone at the FSDO accept it seems to vary from place to place. As far as I know, it is still a possibility in my area but I believe it requires more proof of actually working/having the experience than it did when I did it.

LoLPilot said:
Then why is supervised maintenance and logging time under a mechanic still listed as one of the ways to gain the practical experience to take the exams - even on the FAA website it lists, working in a shop under supervision of a mechanic. Im sure they mean employed, but there is nothing I see directly prohibiting working under a single mechanic and getting them to sign you off so I think you could make a very good case to a FSDO that you are within regs by doing that.
Click to expand...

The mechanic you're working under really doesn't sign you off for anything, which I believe is part of the problem. Unless you have good documentation of the experience you've gained (such as paychecks showing the amount of time you were compensated for) how are you going to prove to the ASI that you actually qualify to take the tests?
 
LoLPilot said:
Then why is supervised maintenance and logging time under a mechanic still listed as one of the ways to gain the practical experience to take the exams
Click to expand...
mondtster said:
People's experiences with gaining experience this way and having someone at the FSDO accept it seems to vary from place to place
Click to expand...
First, I'm not trying to discourage you. The more the merrier.

But in mainstream aviation the link I provided is what I've personally seen. For experience: go to a 147 school, work at a FBO or Repair Station, or join the military. However, Modtster has a good point as in some areas, outside mainstream aviation, where schools/FBOs/RS are few and far between then things can be different. The same goes for one man Repair stations. That is the reason I stated "almost impossible."

Unfortunately, you "don't make a case to the FSDO" as you must follow what they require. So as I mentioned above, tomorrow, call your local FSDO and ask to speak to a maintenance ASI (Aviation Safety Inspector) and inquire what he/she requires for you to develop a log for recording maintenance experience toward getting your "authorization tickets" to take the General, Airframe, and Powerplant certificate tests. Then you will know exactly what you will need for that record. Report back with any questions.

FYI: I got my A&P test authorization tickets based on experience in a Repair Station many moons ago. Things have changed a lot since then. One of the main reasons the Feds are hesitant to accept experience logs outside the 147 school/FBO-RS/Military environments is that standalone mechanics normally do not offer all the "required mx disciplines" needed for obtaining an A&P. Just look at the study guides for the tests. Or, as I tell people, look over AC43.13-1B and see if your example of buying a rag and tube aircraft and working under an A&P will cover all the listed areas in the AC.

Good luck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top