What's new

Military Ame's ?

tDawe

Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2003
Messages
87
Reaction score
0
I was on the DND website the other day, and I'm curious, how does the Aviation System Tech. compare to an AME in the civilian world?

Does Transport Canada recognize military service in this field if someone decided to leave the service to pursue a civilian career would he still have to serve his time as an apprentice or could he just write a series of exams to cross over?

Anyone serving who might be able to compare the two?
 
TC does not directly recognize the military Aviation System Tech as an AME. CARs says that an AME must have certain time in the business on Canadian registered civil a/c and have had approved training at a civil school.

That being said, CAMC, TC and the DnD have been working for a number of years to harmonize the training and occupational standards between the two industries. At the moment DnD is looking for avionics techs and are paying $22, 000 per year plus tuition and books for civvies to go to tech schools with the provision that they join the military in the first year, go to basic training between 1st and 2nd year then put in certain amount of time after graduation where they will be sent out into the field as a Cpl after a bit of specialized training.

For the guy getting out who want to get his AME license TC looks at the time more favourably than they have in previous years
 
G1:

Basically, you are correct. I did get pemission to write the "long hand" (no muli choice) on the S^!. Basically they recognized the Sea Pig time and experience. Plus I had worked part time for about the first 7 years I was in. I guess having a "B" license before I got in helped.

The Aviation System Tech is a combination of the old Aero Engine tech (MOC 511) , Air Frame Tech (512) and the Instrument Electrical (can't remember the Mil Occupation code for that one.) They have also combined the Metal Tech, Machinist and refinishing tech into the Aircraft Structures technician, I believe.

TC does, for some unGodly reason tend to favour the Flight Engineers, more so than the Shop floor grunts.

I would recommed that anybody that's still in try to get some part time work, even if it's working on 150s at a flying club. It will give you some exposure to the civil end, not much but enough to get TC to look at your application more favourably. Oh and buy a logbook and log your tasks. Make sure you gt a licensed enginner to sign that you've completed it!

As for the newbies that are taking their basic trades training like avionics and structures at civil schools like SAIT, TC does have a tendency to look at them more favourably.

Hence the rapid jump to Corporal ( pay was around 48K) when I packed it in in 91. MAy be more now. It's a heck of a jump from Private.
 
Just spent 11 years as Avionics tech 91-02 and the gap between civvies and military isn't closing any time soon. The two are quite different as we in the forces were more like a 'jack-of-all-trades' often doing just servicing the aircraft for years on end. Once the aircraft were down the pilots walked away and it was ours until they wanted to fly again...in other words the aircrew were spoiled rotten. We then did all the servicing, grooming and towing and then did any maintenance required and readied it for the next mission. I believe you are granted some of the required apprenticeship hours and then you have to sit your exams for your ticket. By the way...pay for corporals is close to 50K's now.
 
Military Ame's, come on give us a break!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :shock: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

'jack-of-all-trades' ?? good grieffffff hahahahaaaaaaaaaaaa (master of none)!! :shock:
 
Jack of all trades? It takes two techs just to get all the required "knowledge" to do the task of one civilian AME. I have had the pleasure of knowing some very good and motivated military techs that went out on their own and got the necessary requirements in order to get their AME licenses.

Techs HAVING to tow aircraft. More like job protectionism where the flight crew were not allowed to tow the aircraft even if they had the proper DND license. Part of the reason that hours of maintenance are so high on CAF aircraft is due to the small army required to tow an airplane out of the hangar. If I re-collect properly it took :20 minutes to tow a Sea King out of the barn but it was done by 5 technicians for a grand total of 1:40 of "maintenance".

As well aircrew couldn't refuel their own airplanes at a CF airbase as it was considered "unsafe" by the maintenance branch in the CAF, but if away from a CF airbase either in transit or when deployed it was no problem for the aircrew to perform re-fueling as well as daily minor daily maintenance since it wasn't "cost effective" to have two techs and a sergeant along to do the work and then sign off the required paperwork.

I was involved in many proposals to try and get more aircrew involvement in the above two scenarios, plus others, but I was continually shot down by the Air Maintenance CO who generally cited safety as the reason that aircrew could not and should not do minor work on CAF aircraft. All I was looking for was an edge in order to keep the techs inside working on the "down" aircraft instead of constantly shuffling in and out to take care of parking, fuelling, or DI'ing inbound and outbound machines.

Grooming in a Canadian military aircraft? None of the ones I flew ever received more than a cursory grooming by the techs. If any grooming was done it was done by the pilots during some down time or in transit with a paint brush to get the accumulated crap and corruption out of all the nooks and cranies around the instruments. What about the 412 that had the tail rotor delaminate but the cracks were never found due to the preponderance of soot on the tail rotor. I have also washed many a tail boom, tail rotor, fuselage, etc both in and out of the military.

Aircrew spoiled rotten? Yeah well the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. Different jobs in aviation have different patterns of busy times and slow times. What do techs do when the airplanes are out flying on a three hour mission?Once the aircraft were up the techs walked away and it was ours until they wanted to fix it again...in other words the techs were spoiled rotten.

IMHO.
 
I know many great techs, hard workers and some very knowledgeable. Having said that, I'm with Louie and Mark Dip, if our techs could just shadow an AME looking after several aircraft at some commercial base they would have a rude awakening. I have been on many deployments, to this day it still amazes me that we can't tow an aircraft out of hangar without having a committe when one AME or ramp rat can do it with a lawn tractor by himself. Or why I have deployed with a Bell 212 to a place with three techs when the company down the ramp had a 205 and two 206s looked after by one AME, and yes they flew plenty and had snags.

There is a reason why we have techs the way we do, you may disagree and not think I am right but it is the same reason why we fly a 212 with two pilots. It is for combat, to help run the base when we deploy and man the guns if need be and two drivers cuz one of em' is expected to die in battle and the other can bring the asset back to fly again.

As for spoiled aircrew, military aircrew unlike many (not all) commercial pilots are officers first and pilots second. We had numerous non-flying related duties and projects, professional officer (military studies) course to do etc.

Our day to day job never has been all about flying. That's why after 22 years in the Air Force I have 3500 hours when my friend flying commercially has 9000 hours after the same amount of time as professional aviators.
 
Mmmm, some interesting commenst MR Dip.

Firstly your comment on grooming. I have never groomed a mil helicopter NOR a civilian helicopter - not my job nor do I have the time. I'm an engineer NOT a freakin groom. I clean my hangar, it's my office, I like it clean! I count and clean my tools, and my flyaway kit. You want the machine groomed? It's you freakin office you clean it! Windows dirty?? I don't care, as long as I can see to inspect what I need to inspect, it's your problem. :angry:

If you think engineers are going to groom your machine when you get out in the real world, are you in for a world of hurt!! :unsure: I'd almost pay to be at that company just to assist with you "training". Obviously, nobody's ever showed you the article "How to Operate a Helicopter Mechanic." :up:

As for your Mil techs being spoiled, maybe you should ask them, or the Det Chief, how they feel about the fustration in lack of parts, or the Wingy Sqd Commanders that make unrealistic commitments to MAG HQ, without ever talking to the Det Chief.
:angry:

Oh, by the way, when was the last time you went down on the floor and offered to help the guys? Brought them down a coffee or maybe a bozx of BMS?? 🙄

You do know that the mechs don't get those things, don't you?? Or are you too busy playing Foos Ball in the mess?? 🙁

Techs don't sit around or walk away when a cab lifts off. Not when I worked in D, E and F hangars. We were to freakin busy robbing parts out of engine bay, and off the Periodic machines to try and get the det machines serviceable. Next time the mechs are doing a head change or an engine change in the middle of the nite, half way across the pond, trying crawling out of your rack and giving them a look see. Come back and tell me they're spoiled rotten.

Lookit man, I've been on both sides of the fence. Ain't nobody in the mil spoiled rotten. If you don't know what your maintenance crew is doing, ya better get to know them! After all, you are the one flying the machine off the deck, in the middle of the night. Maybe you should know who the peole are thats fixing your machine, and maybe you should know what they actually go through.
:unsure:

Personally, if it were me, I'd make sure I was on great terms with the people tasked with giving me a machine that could keep me alive. Couple of cups of Timmies = cheap insurance! 😀

But, hey...maybe it's just me! :wacko:
 
I'll go along with Bullett on a number of issues. Inthe mid 90's I had the occasion to visit the Twin Otter det in Yellowknife. It was -40 outside, just another pleasant day north of 60. Out of the 4 TOs, 2 were in snow banks with ?? snags, one was u/s because it needed a bit of tweaking on the FCUs and it was too cold for the DnD manual to do it.
The other was serviceable. I would guess that there was 20 or so maint guys sitting around the coffee room bitchin about how hard done by they were.

As I had just left Ptarmigan's hangar where they had 20 servicable aircraft and 4 AMEs, I asked the herd if they had ever met any of the civvy guys. The answer was no. I also said that perhaps they should go down and learn how to take care of Twin Otters from some guys that knew what they were doing - but common sense got in the way.

I went away thinking thta these guys were in for a real eye opener if they ever thought thye could hack it in the real world.

Of course this was jsut one instance as I know ther are some good techs stil left in but it truly reminded me of how different things are.
 
Before we start slinging too much mud at one another let me expand on my comments thus:

The majority of DND's problems with maintenance are systematic, they are not the fault of our techs on the floor.

Our supply system sucks, there is no other way to describe it. We have had aircraft stuck on an airfield waiting for a part the size of D cell battery and only the fourth one shipped made it to the aircraft. The first three were lost in transit because DND's supply system must use it's archaic way of shipping, usually by road, then Air Canada cargo, which gets sent who knows where if it is not on an airfield where AC has a cargo terminal. There is no customs clearing mechanism built in. The fourth part eventually made it because it was hand carried by another tech! Incredible waste of our tax money. We (the crews) have begged them to use a courier like Fedex or UPS but the "system" won't allow it.

It has forced us to sometimes "acquire" parts from some extremely supportive and cooperative civilian operators throughout the world. Thank you one and all. I would start naming them but the list is literally too long.

The other frustration is how our technicians are taught, what they are taught, their poor level of pay and how aircrews treat them. Military aircrew are used to being coddled and babied, I can say this because I'm one of them. Because of old military traditions in our historical aviation world, some pilots still think they wear a silk scarf, that they bought their commission because they came from a wealthy family and that being an aviator is for the prividledged and rich, thus a mere grease monkey should shine your chariot and hand you your harness straps as you climb in.

The truth is that we are officers first, have numerous extra duties and jobs and that our techs do all the maintenance including cleaning the windscreens because most of the time the aircrew is busy doing those non-flying duties. Having said that, the best example I have ever seen of cooperation is when we are deployed on operations. That is when you will see pilots help wash the aircraft, do routine servicing and pitch in.

What most of us (I speak for pilots) forget is what Bullet and Graunch amongst others have stated and that is that a cup of timmies goes a long way. Although we lofty officers often have other work to do, there are also times of extreme aircraft unserviceability when we "knock off" pretty early and the boys on the floor stay and work their wrenches off to get our birds working so we can ply the wild blue again and we are guilty of forgetting to just stop and say thanks.

DND needs to clean house way way way up top. Fix the bureaucracy of the supply system, pay techs much better money, train them in a more compatible way to an AME and support them with parts and training. As for us drivers, just stop and say thanks once in a while. My berating has never been for the great folks I work with, my frustrations lie with our system that essentially forces us to be so ineffective at home. A system we (aircrew and techs) tweak and re-arrange, legally and safely, whenever we deploy to make it work as it should. That is why we enjoy being deployed on flight ops 1000 times better than being at our home units. (Note to wives and sweethearts-except for the time we spend away from our families of course, just like anyone in aviation)

All I know is that if 4 AMEs can keep 20 machines on the flight line there has got to be some validity at looking into such a system. We will still need more folks for "military duties and to maintain a war footing" but by golly they're doin' something right. Whether it's a military mission or a revenue generating machine, we are all on the same team. An busted aircraft in the hangar cannot do it's job and if the trained monkey doesn't fly it then the guy with the wrench has no work either.

I'll take an apple fritter and a large with cream, thanks. :up:

PS: The trained monkey reference comes from my wife. In my younger days, whenever I would start sounding too lofty about being a "pilot", she would come interject with the comment, "yeah yeah whatever, just remember the first astronaut was a trained monkey". Still makes me smile and rightly so, puts me in my place.
 
Nicely said Vortex Ring..

Great picture too... One of my favorite movies... Yes, to be Capt. Wild Bill Kelso...

Cheers
 
VR

My response/retort was NOT directed at you. I have no doffering opinions to those which you have stated herein. Quite the opposite. Everything you have stated has been and is the unmitigated truth. :up:

Nor was my response intended to be "mudslinging." As I stated in my prior response, "Ain't nobody in the military spoiled." :down:

I do take exception to anybody wheteher it be the Wing Commander or the AGeneral in charge of Air Commnd. making stupid statements. Especially when they have no concept of what is really happening.

I was fortunate enough to work with some exceptional drivers, both professional and personable. Young fellers like Wagstaff, Jubba the Hud, Dave Trask, Black Mac's young fella who flew out of HOTEF. All great guys when I worked with them.

I was also unfortunate enough to work with several "Old school" drivers. One of which got out and went to work for the "Pepsi" coloured company. He made the mistake of demanding that I clean his cockpit and window. After the thrid time he poked me in the chest with his finger, I broke it for him. He got back in the mil, then retired again and went to work for TC, in the enforcement area. Haven't seen nor heard from him since. Just as well. :down:

You are most correct in your stance regarding the mil supply system. I have experience that continuing fustration numerous time. And, as Graunch stated, The Mil CFTOs are a joke, written by jokers. If you read through the Sea Pig's manual, specifically MRH rigging, including the aux block, it is physicallyimpossible to rig them per the CFTO. I wrote a UCR report on it back in the early 80's. The guys I know that are still in tell me that there has been no change. I also wrote up a UCR for the stupid SI on the starter/gen. No valid reason to pull them of as frequently as dictated. They're still doing it!! :down:

Kinda interesting, Your Missus' statement about "trained monkeys" Funny too. PM me and I'll send ya a copy of "How to Operate a Helicopter Mechanic." That article makes a reference to that expression. 🙄

In the mean time. please continue to express your thoughts. I find them most refreshing and thought provoking. Further, when ya decide to pull the pin, let me know. Heck, if ya get out to Cowtown, let me know. I'll buy! :up:

BR
 

Latest posts

Back
Top