Well, on an hourly basis aircraft maintenance really isn't expensive when compared to cars. In fact I've owned a car in which I paid more for the oil change than you would in a 172. The challenge is that there is much more maintenance required. Cars don't require annual inspections and have powertrains that are mostly controlled by computers so don't need adjusted like our planes to make sure mag timing is good, oil pressure and MAP are in spec, etc.
Maybe in the mid-term but unless the money is as good or better than similar trades we'll continue to see fewer and fewer A&Ps.
$50 is probably low given the amount and type of oil that was required, but to your point I could have had an indy shop do it for maybe $100.
It would depend on your point of view. The insurance market for roving A&Ps has gone in the other direction. When I retired, the number of underwriters willing to write a non-domiciled freelance mechanic policy were down to 2 entities. I paid for coverage I could never claim on as they only sold me hangar-keepers policies. Have a shop roof over your head and you got a better deal. There were 2x more freelance mechanics 15 years than now so I doubt it will be the future. Larger shops (CRS) with mobile crews will more than likely be the future but at a cost.
I found the high end market went to "high end" shops and the only time a lesser shop could make in roads was when the high end shop was swamped. Unfortunately once the swamp dried up no more work for the little guys.
If owners would maintain aircraft over the course of a year as the guidance points to instead of fixing everything at annual could change the market and support a 5-mech shop especially at a busy airport. My owner-assist group worked like this and there was always something to do during the year plus the annuals weren't as intense. So its possible with the right owner market.
The problem is the new mechanics are going to Part 135/121 ops and have no intention of working on small GA aircraft. And its not just because of the money issues. Most want turbines, jets, or helicopters. And the money they pay at those locations is more than acceptable for those who take that route. To me nobody wants to work in the trades as before since the same issues are affecting all trades and not just aviation mechanics.
Man I wish I had met you before I sat for my exams in the good old USA. I didn’t need to actually know the answers to the questions on the test or the two day long practical test…
And people still waste time now. Its only a series of tests. The learning happens after those tests. Getting the authorization to take the tests is everything.
The school numbers have declined simply due to declining enrollment numbers, i.e., lack of students. One school in TX was saved recently because the local community joined togather to support the college based A&P program with outside money and guaranteed enrollment numbers. And as a FYI, your Part 65.77 school needs a regulatory path to be feasible and 65.77 only requires experience in 50% of the categories that are found in a 147 school. Regardless, as I've said before its not the A&P process that is lacking, its the lack of people wanting to be A&Ps. Fix that, and the process will fix itself.
However, in order for anyone to apply your programs knowledge toward their experience qualifications the "school" would need a regulatory connection to 65.77 in some way or the time spent learning the "schools" information doesn't count at all.
Except when using the 65.77(b) experience route for test authorization, it only requires experience in 50% of the areas a Part 147 school will cover. So OJT and other methods can and do cover the minimum requirements. The choke point is at the FSDO ASI level who needs to make a judgement call whether the applicant meets the minimum. That said, there still are ASIs who will accept a signed A&P letter attesting to the knowledge level of the aspiring A&P and will issue the 8610-2s based on that letter alone. The key is to find what your local ASI wants up front and tailer your experience documentation to meet those requirements.
I guess I'm not following your thought train. You call it a "school" but give the "students" nothing tangible toward obtaining their 8610s to take the certification tests. I have been helping people get their A&Ps for a number of years using various methods. To me the primary goal is to obtain the required experience in the least amount of time and cost to get their 8610s and take the test. If they're still weak on the basics, go to Bakers and take the tests. There's already a number of aviation maintenance references out there that would do the same as your "school" for free. So short of the FSDO lowering the requirements to take the test I just don't see the benefit of your "school" as it is presently depicted.
No its not. I’m more a “facilitator than a “teacher.” After the individual figures out their path and determines what their local ASI will need, I simply offer several directions to follow. No “classes” on magnetos, or oil systems, or weight and balance and so on. If they inquire on study material, I send the links listed below. If applicable, and I have the contacts, I’ll assist in finding places where they can build OJT experience. Years ago when I still worked, I would put them to work to build OJT toward their 65.77(b) experience requirement. However, nothing I’ve done lately will get them any closer to getting their 8610s tickets to take the test. That’s all on them. I just help them take the easiest path--no "classes" required.
What skill level?
FYI: you'll find those are administrative "levels" which have no bearing when applied in actual testing. Writing standards requires following certain guidelines. You'll find when it comes down to the physical testing, skill level is not discussed rather only if the applicant can perform the task requested.
Not exactly. i was interrogated by the insurance companies lawyers who insisted that somehow, something I had done caused the event. They wanted me to admit that somehow I was responsible and should be held financially accountable. They threatened a lawsuit. It cost me some money to defend myself, and lots of grief. they never filed any suit as they didn't have any case. It was simply........Go after anyone who might have some money we can get our hands on. Someone who might be intimidated enough to take some financial responsibility.
That factor is what scares some mechanics out of GA and into auto or truck or heavy equipment maintenance. As long as greedy lawyers and plaintiffs keep doing that, GA will suffer.
That changed around 40 years ago and A&Ps are now skilled labor per the Dept of Labor.
