Reader Feedback: A&P Helicopter Rating

In response to the very fine article by Brian Finnegan (see AM Feb. 2007, p. 40) in the February 2007 issue of AM magazine, I would like to give the author my full support and add a few thoughts of my own. As an Airworthiness Inspector who has been the holder of an Jamaican AME License from 1969 and an A&P from 1975, as well as someone who was trained under both the Canadian and UK systems, I can safely say that I have seen both the strengths and the weaknesses in the A&P during the years and think that there is room for improvement and that the time is now. Jamaica has had a separate rotary wing rating since 1997 ("R" Category) and issues aircraft type ratings to those persons who have completed manufacturer’s courses, have the required years of experience and have sat and passed a government exam (oral) on the aircraft type. While type ratings used to be issued on aircraft up to the size of the, B727, DC9 and DC8, we no longer issue for any aircraft above 12,500 pounds MCTOW because of the complexity of the modern aircraft. Approved maintenance organizations (or FAR 145 Repair Stations) must now handle all large complex types. The maintenance of rotary-wing aircraft is different enough to warrant a separate rating and should be treated as such. No Joe Blow who has seen a blade tracking done once should be allowed to carry out and certify that job on his own the next day just because he has an A&P. It is theoretically possible for someone to hold an A&P who has never been properly taught how the rotor system on a helicopter keeps it in the air or how the controls work. If there was a requirement for a rotary-wing rating, with the appropriate training, experience and examination guidelines, then we should all feel more comfortable. Please note that I also support fully your editorial in the same magazine, particularly with regard to Flight 5481. I treat that accident as a case study in how things should not be done and stress the importance of following procedures to each and every trainee mechanic that I meet. I think that there were issues relating to mechanics not having been trained on the aircraft and to the conflict of duties/roles being fulfilled by the same individual. In the system under which we operate, as taught by the British, each and every flight control task must be inspected independently and certified by two (2) maintenance engineers trained and rated on the specific aircraft type. Keep up the good work. I love your magazine.

Howard McCalla

Send letters to:

Editor, Aviation Maintenance, 4 Choke Cherry Road, Second Floor, Rockville, MD 20850 or e-mail jfinnegan@accessintel.com. Please include name, address and phone number. We will withhold contact information if desired. Aviation Maintenance reserves the right to edit letters. All reader letters represent the opinion of the readers and are not necessarily those of the magazine.

Correction:

In the May 2007 general aviation edition of Aviation Maintenance a product name, the Olympus IPLEX II R Videoscope, was misspelled. This product appeared on page 26. Please accept our sincere apologies for the error. — Editor