[marc.arendt@cargolux.com]

Dear colleagues,
Who has a good tutor/mentor training available ref a.m updates?
Anybody interested to share best practice?
Looking forward to your replies.
Marc

[Neil.Williams@ResourceGroup.co.uk]

Hello Marc, I hope you are well.

Maybe you should ask Harald to put it on the Agenda for the next GA. I think we would all benefit from sharing ideas on implementation.

Regards, Neil.

[marc.arendt@cargolux.com]

In the last AG, the request was brought up to raise the membership fee by 12%.
This request was accepted by a majority of the members.
Now my question – What is the added value of this for the members (or is it only a value that we work more for EASA)?
Since years (we are not even talking about it during the GA’s anymore), we did not even have an instructor seminar and nobody complained. I hope that, with the increased fee, hosts will be supported more in order to be able to organize this event again. This has always been one of the values of our club but that seems to have changed now.

Questions to EC & SB; Are there plans to re-launch this again with a higher support (if needed for the host) and do you have plans for the future to do something against the shortage of new people joining aviation (organizing events ??)
Looking forward to many comments/replies.
Marc

[Julio Rico Garcia]

Hi Marc,
I also think it is necessary to increase the activities, events, seminars, and hope this increase of the fee will allow that.

Kind Regards

Julio Rico

[Romain Wagner]

Dear Marc,

with the increased membership fee I have not directly an issue as we effectively have seen an increase over the last years of all costs , so that I voted for it.
But you are right we should concentrate more again on our core business at EAMTC , myself and some other colleagues were missing the more detailed presentations / discussions and Workgroups at the GA about recent respective future changes in EASA Regulations impacting our daily business. Like the EASA Part-66 changes applicable from June 2024 on. Part-147 changes to come !?
Yes we saw a few slides but no changes were really discussed or highlighted.
An instructor seminar would be a good opportunity again for our trainers to meet at their level!?
Shortage of people in aviation and in technical areas in general is impacting us all in Part-147 as in Part-145 , so it should be more in our focus for the coming times.

Kind regards,
Romain Wagner

[jay.pointek@delta.com]

I understand that costs have risen across the board and that may have been the primary reason for the fee increase, but longtime members like Marc and Romain raise a good point regarding what members are getting for their investment.

It is my belief that the absence of an instructor seminar and less detail and engagement in major regulatory initiatives is a result of “pandemic hangover”. Value added initiatives were discontinued because the pandemic restrictions made it impossible to perform effectively. But just as the recent EASA decision regarding examination policies for distance learning address a return to more effective practices, our organization should shake off the lingering COVID aftereffects and do the same. While I haven’t had the opportunity to attend an in person meeting recently I always found the spirited debate and insight to regulatory intent very valuable, especially as foreign organization. Likewise our instructors always had positive experiences attending the seminars.

It’s my opinion that focusing on a return to these standards will go a long way to reconciling the additional expense to our membership.

Kind regards,

Jay Pointek
Delta Air Line TechOps Training

[margriet@co-guard.com]

Thank you, Marc for raising this.
I also support that the value for the members and the costs should be related. There were significantly less activities for the past years, for obvious reasons, indeed.
The cost structure also changed with new remunerations a few years ago. Though 12% is not breaking the bank for most of us, I share the viewpoint that the vote should have been aligned with future plans and shaping of the EAMTC, not the other way around.

Apart from the member fee, costs for attendees have also gone up. For each member it is an investment of actual money, time and effort. Value for (all) the members should be discussed openly.

What I heard last meeting there are three main reasons for people to join: 1. networking, 2. training and sharing in training and industry challenges and opportunities and 3. the authorities/ legislation side of our activities (in any order).
Though others may have a different analyses, people are there for different reasons and though an attempt is made, are we meeting the needs of the members and attendees sufficiently in the current set-up (of the meetings) to remain a sustainable and successful platform in the future? I am not so confident at this point and wish I were, as the EAMTC has provided and can provide great value to the industry and its members.
In that sense, Marc, I fully agree that value and costs (investment!) should be discussed in relation…

[Harald Strehling]

Dear Marc,
let me reply as secretary to the topics I was involved relating to your post and the few comments received. To begin with, I am somehow surprised about the timing for rising these questions.
Let’s start with the budget. I posted the new budget options on Nov. 10th under “items to vote” in our member area under 79th GA. On November 14th I reminded the members to check the items for voting and to contact the EC if there are any questions. In Athens, Hans reminded the audience at the opening to check the budget options. So, it should not have been a surprise to anybody.
In the budget document as posted, it referred to the steady increase of costs and proposed the membership increase in Option B to maintain our current activity level in 2024 and safeguard our savings. Our Treasurer repeated this in his presentation just before the vote and pointed out, that the European Cost Index raised since 2015 by 24% and we ask to increase only by 12%.
I believe most members understood this and 76% voted for Option B.
Now, if you were looking for added value and more activities this should have been mentioned either before or during the GA. There were enough opportunities. Now the budget 2024 has been approved as proposed. We have made allowances for host compensation for 2 physical GA’s but no provision for extra host support, i.e. for hosting an instructor seminar as clearly visible in the document.
Now, let’s talk about the instructor seminar. Yes, Jay is correct when talking about the “pandemic hangover” because it was our main focus to return to 2 physical GA’s, as this was the main request by our members and the supervisory board. There was still a problem for some members to be allowed to travel up till now, I believe you were one of them. Some member organizations still have travel budget restraints to this date. This is the reason why we are still going to the extra effort and expense to do a live stream of our GA on WEBEX.
Historically, the instructor seminar was organized by a member organization showcasing their school and training activities with exchange from instructor to instructor. EASA sent a representative to give an update on regulatory changes and Ian supported the host in the administration of the event. In the past there was no financial support for the host as the participants paid for lunches and social event.
The one instructor seminar we had with QCM in Bern was of slightly different nature, Margriet will remember, as she did a lot of organizing and was heavily involved. As EC we had to travel twice to Bern to organize, support and do a large part of the instructor seminar. We received a large number of registrations and had to waitlist people, but ended up with a lot of now-shows with no explanation or excuses. The ones who showed up took part in the well-organized social event but some decided not to pay their bills leaving it to the host to cover it.
Now, to hold an instructor seminar, for the time being we would have to do it without EASA involvement. EASA just started to come to the GA again for the first time after the pandemic and this needs to be stabilized as they also have personnel shortage, budget constraints and travel restrictions. More important, we would need a host who has to show something in the way of new teaching technologies or different teaching approaches, something other instructors can benefit from. In addition, we should consider a substantial registration fee, to avoid no-shows and maybe use it for the social event. It would be of great support, if you could present this topic at the next GA to initiate a discussion and see, if we have potential hosts and get the members reaction to this.
A short side note regarding EASA. No, we are not doing more work for EASA; we are working in the different EASA WG’s in order to get topics important to us in their programmes and increase our weight when it comes to decisions. Again, this is in line with the request of the member and the supervisory board, to increase the EAMTC footprint within the authorities. Without these activities EAMTC and maintenance training needs would most likely not be recognized at all any more.
Lastly, to the point of detailed presentations on the Part-66 / 147 rule making changes which directly addresses me and was also mentioned in the feedback received. Please bear in mind that throughout the RMT’s .0255 and .0544 there was a steady process of presenting the changes from working group activities, NPA comments received and consolidated to opinion 07/2022 with a detailed presentation on the significant changes at the 77th GA in Kiel. This presentation is still available in the member area. The last presentation in Athens was a mere reference to the now relevant documents and discrepancies we noted and which are now being addressed by EASA. A presentation giving all the details would have taken the majority of the time of the GA and very much challenged some participants as feed-backs point out, not to go into details which can be read elsewhere.
Please note, that right now the NPA 2023-10 is being prepared as excel table by Carlos and will be available for your comments after the holidays. We are looking forward to seeing your feedback on this topic.
Finally, let me wish all of you a wonderful Christmas and a prosperous and healthy New Year
Best regards,
Harald

[jay.pointek@delta.com]

Delta is inquiring as to who can provide a B767 type course T1/T2 in STT starting before the end of January. Theoretical can be delivered in STT. Practical will have to be determined. Contact me directly at jay.pointek@delta.com

[marc.arendt@cargolux.com]

Dear colleagues,
I would like to hear
1) who’s using what tool/software to create User guides?
2) what tool are you using to visualize your processes?
Looking forward to many replies.
Marc

[marc.arendt@cargolux.com]

Dear colleagues,
Anybody willing to share what QDB you are using in your P-147 org?
And feedback if satisfied or not?
Marc

[Lionel ETIENNE]

Hello,

In Aerocampus-Aquitaine for basic training we are using Gems provided by ASTech.

We are quite sastisfied as the software is reliable with no bugs in exam layout. Nevertheless, the user interface is quite old but pretty much easy to use.

I hope it will help.

Warm regards.

[marc.arendt@cargolux.com]

Many thanks Lionel.
Same here for our P-147 org.
Plus, pricing structure/increases drives our “bean counters” to ask for more options.
Marc

[Andrew Gold]

Hi Marc, Here’s an option: All questions in the ATB QDBs are derived directly from the ATB B1, B2, and Cat-A modules. Each is 4x (including essays) and currently formatted to OSAC/FOCA standards. (2023-989 updates are in the works). I’m happy to send you details including the current matrix, user agreements, and sample questions for you to assess the quality. Please write back if you want to discuss, or I’ll see you in a couple weeks in Munich. andy@actechbooks.com

[marc.arendt@cargolux.com]

Hi Andy,
Many thanks for the feedback.
Sandra will be in Munich so you can show her what you have. Thanks.
Is this also for TYPE examinations ?
Marc

[Author]

Replies