Letters

Avionics Technicians

I have been an avid reader of your magazine for many years. The article about AET certification (Avionics, December 2007, p. 30) caught my attention, particularly the comments about A&P mechanics.

I started my career in aircraft maintenance in 1979; my first job was line maintenance on DC-6 freighters. I hold an A&P license with Inspection Authorization and a FCC General Radiotelephone license with Ship Radar endorsement. I am also a private pilot.

I completed an aviation electronics program in 1983 at a community college (12-month duration). I was probably one of the first A&P mechanics to cross over to the dark side. I agree that an A&P just out of school "knows just enough to be dangerous," however, I take exception to categorizing all A&P mechanics as incompetent to troubleshoot avionics systems. Any technician without proper training and experience knows just enough to be dangerous, including AET certified technicians.

I understand your magazine is primarily geared toward avionics professionals, however the reality of maintaining modern aircraft is that you have to know the entire aircraft, including hydraulics, pneumatics, engines and avionics. The FAA will not grant return to service authorization to avionics technicians, because they are avionics technicians and typically they don’t have the training or experience to return an "aircraft" to service.

I have yet to meet an avionics tech who really understood Federal Aviation Regulations. I can’t tell you how many times I have made a repair station rewrite a logbook sign-off because it was either incomplete or improper.

The line between avionics and the other aircraft systems has become less clear, with everything becoming intertwined. Neither an A&P or an avionics certificate is enough. To effectively maintain modern aircraft, maintenance technicians must be well versed in many systems.

My background is primarily corporate, involving work on Falcons, Hawkers, Citations and Saberliners. I currently manage the maintenance of two Hawker 800 XP aircraft with Collins Pro Line 21 avionics packages for a large corporation.

The technician who works for me and I both hold A&P certificates and FCC licenses. Last year, we successfully obtained a Limited Repair Station approval to allow us to do 91.411 and 91.413 checks on our aircraft. We did this because it became too troublesome to deal with outside organizations.

Generally speaking, the quality of maintenance work performed at most repair stations has deteriorated. In my opinion, this is because there is too much specialization. I can give an example that really happened while one of our aircraft was at a large, well-known repair station for warranty work. Our aircraft are equipped with an Airshow unit that displays logos and in-flight information to passengers, and a software update was needed. For the update, all that was needed was to replace a CD in the unit, just like the CD drive in your computer.

Step one: Interior tech removes carpet. Step two: Airframe tech removes floor panel. Step three: Avionics tech replaces CD. Step four: Avionics tech ops test system. Step five: Airframe tech reinstalls floor panel. Step six: Interior tech reinstalls carpet. Step seven: Inspector returns to service (A&P mechanic).

I am skeptical about the labor shortages written about in your magazine as well as in others. The only shortage I see is a shortage of experienced people willing to work for low wages, without benefits. The amount of work being outsourced to Mexico, Central America and Asia increases every year. This is due to low labor costs.

The reason there are less A&P/Avionics training schools is the simple fact that too many U.S. employers will not pay enough to attract and retain the best people. Few people are going to spend the time and money to go to school and then get a job that pays $12 per hour with lousy health care benefits.

When I completed A&P school in 1979, the various aviation schools were heralding the upcoming labor shortage due to the World War II generation retiring, then they talked about the Vietnam era generation retiring, now they are talking about the "Baby Boomer" generation retiring. The labor demand then is not much different than it is today. Good people will always cost more to attract and retain.

I realize you were just interviewing Mr. Ochs, but his take on the technician shortage is wrong. The real issue is employers not willing to pay quality wages and benefits for quality people. I also believe the same can be said for the aerospace engineering field.

Herman (Fred) White
Milwaukee, Wis.

Travel Stories

Enjoyed, in a sadistic way, your tale of traveling to BWI (Editor’s Note, October 2007, p. 6). I, too, have been traveling for over four decades, thankfully less these days than my days at Bendix and Smiths.

I recently spent about 24 hours returning to Seattle from Pennsylvania on US Airways. The trip was a last minute booking and included a change of planes in LAS. We departed PHI four hours late, obviously missing the SEA connection in LAS.

I arrived at LAS at 2:30 a.m., and was rebooked by US Airways on a 12:59 p.m. flight to PHX and a 4:15 p.m. flight to Seattle. I requested my bag at 3 a.m. and received said bag at 5 a.m. I trekked to a Hampton Inn for a shower and a couple of hours of sleep. I noted that the hotel shuttles arrive and depart downstairs on the "O" level, not at the baggage claim level "shuttles" area. The folks at the Hampton were great and the room was very nice.

I attempted to rebook on Alaska and United, but their Friday flights were all full until the evening, so I had to stick with US Airways. The good old days of rebooking the next flight because of a delay are gone. I miss those days when flying was more exclusive. The old joke about air travel has come true — it truly is a glorified Greyhound bus trip.

Larry R. Putrick
Bellevue, Wash.