Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
VC-10
Topic Author
Posts: 3552
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Tue Jul 24, 2001 5:02 am

I posted this as a reply to a particular post but I feel it deserves a wider audience:-


Why time & time again on this site do people ask some pilot to enlighten them ? Engineers are the people who sign a/c out as airworthy before EVERY flight. To do that they have to attend an 8 to 10 week course on the aircraft systems, be examined on each system and to pass each exam, must have attained at least 70%. (Until recently every question you got wrong lost you 1/2 a mark). This process has to be repeated for every a/c type you are required to certify.

That is addition to 4 years basic training and attaining an Engineers Licence and/or A & P.

I appreciate what pilots have to do to qualify but my point is we engineers are the system specialists.
 
aaron atp
Posts: 517
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2000 1:17 pm

Why.

Tue Jul 24, 2001 6:44 am

Because our English-speaking cultures glamourize pilots.



-Sorry if that offends you, or anyone else. I hold you in the highest respect, and I feel you are undoubtedly the most knowledgeable and experienced engineer on this forum.

The other members of my extended family in the aviation industry share your profession, and I assure you that when I need info, I go to the 'big hangar' to find out, not the office. On another note, please realize that there are quite a few mechanics out there who aren't receptive to questions from pilots or outsiders unrelated to their current function. I understand that population also exists among the 3/4 stripers, but I've been given the cold shoulder in the hangar a few times, probably from persons who thought I was wasting their time (No, I didn't walk in sporting wings and stripes).

Looking in the same direction; what I see as a major problem in my line of work are Pilots who write up important squawks without giving the mechanic any details of the problem/malfunction. I've written squawks for things I would consider otherwise difficult to troubleshoot over a page long. The first time a mechanic came looking for me after writing one of those novels, I thought I was in trouble. Turns out it saved the guy several hours of knuckle-busting labour. If the mechanic isn't willing, we get a return to service/no discrepancies found/ops check ok, which doesn't usually help the situation and results in the pilot's distrust of the mechanic.

It seems like with all the Human Resources Management strategies we've seen (many of which have been effective, i.e. CRM), nothing has been done to bridge the rift between pilots and mechanics. Stick a mechanic in the sim during a hectic SE go-around in a thunderstorm, and put the pilots in the hangar to trace a bad wire through cramped spaces and bulkheads when it's 110°F outside. Just a suggestion, let the HR guys work out the details.



v/r
aaron
 
Guest

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Tue Jul 24, 2001 6:54 am

What you say is very true and the airline would not be able to operate without you men. You do indeed deserve more credit than you receive that is a given. When there is a problem onboard needing expertise with a very technical problem you men are the first we pilots call. Either on ACARS or land line from the jet way or on the VHF. In answer to your question I think it is only because those on the "outside" do not have a clue as to the big picture of what is really going on. Please don't feel slighted. We need you. Cheers, Max
 
uvalencia
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2001 12:23 pm

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Tue Jul 24, 2001 8:10 am

It is true that unfortunately the engineers not always receive the credit they deserve. I would say that the general public only see the top part of the great effort that engineers and everyone else do in an airline and which is represented by the pilots, because of course you dont get too much public in the hangar at 2 or 3 in the morning while the manteinance is performed right?. The thing is that pilots are an essential part in the operation of and airline as also are the engineers. I would like to invite all the airline pilots to recognize and appreciate more deeply the great effort the engineers do everyday trying to solve problems on a highly complex machine and some times with confusing reports written by the pilots. Thank you.
 
Western727
Posts: 1957
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:38 pm

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Tue Jul 24, 2001 8:18 am

>>Why time & time again on this site do people ask some pilot to enlighten them ?<<


Uhhh... because they get paid more?
Jack @ AUS
 
VC-10
Topic Author
Posts: 3552
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Tue Jul 24, 2001 9:25 am

Aaron atp,

Many thanks for your comments.

Pilots coming to the hangar would be most welcome where I work. Maybe the reason some Engineers don't like it is because they don't know the answer to your questions.

Re Tech Log write ups, all information is gratefully received, as well as saving time troubleshooting, it can also save the airline money by preventing the wrong componant being changed. Detailed write-ups are particularly important with autopilot/autothrottle/autoland defects, the number of write ups I have seen about such defects where the crew don't mention which a/p was in use or what mode it was in don't bear thinking about.

As I am in Maint Control I am one of the engineers who get the SATCOM/HF/ACARS calls from crews. I hope you appreciate it may take a couple of minutes to 'tune in' to your problem when you contact us. You may have been discussing it for 5 mins before you call, but you catch us cold.


Western727

If you were being serious, knowledge is not directly proportional to wealth. Remember, they can make automatic pilots but they can't make automatic engineers.

By the the way, re your profile, there is only one 'f' in professional.
 
PanAm747
Posts: 4711
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 4:46 am

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Tue Jul 24, 2001 9:45 am

No offense VC-10 and other ground crew because I have been there also.

I was an engineer at a major U.S. airline and I could say a pilot has more responsibility than a ground crew member. Even if you are perfect in every aspect of your job, the pilot still must solve life threatening problems at almost the speed of sound. I just don't think it can go the other way around. You could see it refelcts in their paychecks, they have more responsibility and therefore receive more compensation.
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
 
Klaus
Posts: 21642
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Tue Jul 24, 2001 9:56 am

Western727: >>Why time & time again on this site do people ask some pilot to enlighten them ?<< Uhhh... because they get paid more?

Well, being the culprit in this case who had the misfortune to spring the lurking trap, I must say at least for me that´s not true.
I have already apologized for the misdirection of my original question (which was indeed a systems-oriented one in its final form) and I´m sorry I´ve inadvertently poked an open wound.

I do know the perspective of the engineer all too well (better than that of the pilot). Even though the (non-aviation) software business is quite different in many respects (people´s livelihoods do depend on my work, but not people´s actual lives), people still tend to forget the amount of work that goes into a system that operates flawlessly. It´s only when things get difficult that people start to notice what it takes.

I´ve got the utmost respect for all the people involved in making aviation as safe (and even pleasant) as it is today. I just got the address wrong on this question.
Sorry.
 
Western727
Posts: 1957
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:38 pm

All Of You

Tue Jul 24, 2001 10:17 am



MY GOSH PEOPLE!!!! LOOSEN UP!!! IT WAS A JOKE!!
Jack @ AUS
 
Western727
Posts: 1957
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:38 pm

VC-10

Tue Jul 24, 2001 10:18 am


VC-10,

Thanks for the spelling heads-up.
Jack @ AUS
 
Buff
Posts: 1066
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 1:29 pm

RE: Engineer's Vs Women

Tue Jul 24, 2001 10:34 am

What you say is very true and the airline would not be able to operate without you men.

Max - you've just opened up one big can of worms here...

Incoming!

Buff
 
JETPILOT
Posts: 3094
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 6:40 am

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Tue Jul 24, 2001 11:06 am

Most of the time the questions are airplane specific. Sometimes we have an enginer here who has experience on such an airplane, sometimes we have a pilot who has experience on that airplane.

If you know how a system works you know how it works. The questions here arent that specific or maintenance oriented that a pilot couldn't give a complete and informed answer.

Pilots should able to answer any question one may pose about a system from a cockpit operational standpoint. Most questions dont dig much deaper than that.

JET

 
Guest

Buff

Tue Jul 24, 2001 11:08 am

I hope that does not in fact open a can of worms?? But given the way some of these posts go I would not be suprised. I was just responding to a (Male Engineer's question) If it was a Female rest assured I would have said Women or ladies or "yes dear".  Smile Take care and have a great nite. Cheers, Max
 
airplay
Posts: 3369
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 1:58 am

Engineers Vs Pilots

Tue Jul 24, 2001 12:33 pm

Here's another can of worms.....

When you say "Engineer" do you mean the people who design the airplane or maintain the airplane? Is the term "engineer" appropriate?

I was "heavily" involved in a discussion (arguement) on a Canadian Aviation forum on this point. I wonder what the general feeling of contributors to this forum is?

 Smile

 
XFSUgimpLB41X
Posts: 3961
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2000 1:18 am

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Tue Jul 24, 2001 2:43 pm

When i originally read this, i thought you were maybe talking about a flight engineer (3rd crewmember guy)... are you talking about the guy that designs the planes?


Even though some of the questions on here ask for a pilot's advice... any knowledgeable person is welcome to pitching in... as the A&P's or "engineers" may know much more detail about that certain area (take the real big discussion on AOA vs airfoil lift a couple weeks ago). The pilots tend to get alot of the glory...but everyone contributes.
Chicks dig winglets.
 
EssentialPowr
Posts: 1732
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2000 10:30 pm

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Tue Jul 24, 2001 3:02 pm

Engineers vs pilots is plural, not possessive...

"Engineer" and "efficient" are the two most incorrectly used terms on this forum. Engineer (to me) means someone who has a 4 year engineering degree from (in the US) an ABET approved school. Otherwise, system knowledge is system knowledge, and one doesn't have to be able to build an a/c to fly it, and vice versa.

"Efficient" requires boundary conditions...Often times on this forum someone will write, "aircraft xxx is more efficient than yyy..." w/o defining boundary conditions, which therefore negates the argument...
 
VC-10
Topic Author
Posts: 3552
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Tue Jul 24, 2001 4:42 pm

To begin with on front of my Licence which qualifies me to certify aircraft it say's "Aircraft Maintenance Engineers Licence"

Pan-Am 747

"I was an engineer at a major U.S. airline - let me know which airline please. I don't want to fly on an airline that employs 16-20 year olds (your profile) to maintain their a/c.

You also miss the point I am not whining about the disparity in remuneration. I am just talking about how some users of this site think Pilots know everything.

Since you bring the reponsibility argument up, a Pilot is responsible for the 350 people on his flight, an engineer is responsible for those 350 & the next 350 and so on that fly in that a/c when the Pilot is in the hotel. When I was on the line yesterday I certified 4 a/c so that was 1400 passengers flying on my certification that the a/c were airworthy

The reason why Pilots get paid so highly is because if they strike, the company stops supplying it's product instantaniously, while for an engineers strike to be felt it takes weeks. I don't think most engineers could afford to be on strike for weeks. Additionally I think most engineers are too apathetic to all belong to the same strong union like Pilots do.



Anyway to return to the point this thread was only opened with regard to people on this site appearing to believe Pilots are the font of all knowlege in the avaition world.


 
Twotterwrench
Posts: 1087
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2001 5:57 pm

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Tue Jul 24, 2001 5:12 pm

PanAM - I am not knocking a pilot's responsibility here, but your post is way off base. You make it sound as though a pilot is making life saving decisions every time he touches the controls. This simply isn't the case. Most pilots go their entire career without ever having to deal with a true emergency in flight. The reason for this: enigineers and A&P's are really damn good at what they do. Sure, we aren't in the cockpit when the shit hits the fan, if it does... but we are out their at 20 below freezing our f***ing nuts off night after night making sure that the pilots and passengers don't have anything to worry about. Also, I offer to go on every test flight I write up in case something does go wrong. Most pilot's I work with appreciate a mechanic who will put his ass in the next seat to make sure everything is ok. By the way, I am curious how you could have worked as an engineer when you are only 16 years old. you aren't old enough to be certified.
 
Klaus
Posts: 21642
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: VC-10

Tue Jul 24, 2001 6:46 pm

VC-10: Anyway to return to the point this thread was only opened with regard to people on this site appearing to believe Pilots are the font of all knowlege in the avaition world.

Again: That´s not my view.
I was asking a question that was related to an aspect of rotation; And the answer could be known by people from design, maintenance or the flight deck. I just failed to address the question as broadly as I should have. No neglect or offense intended.
 
PanAm747
Posts: 4711
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 4:46 am

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Tue Jul 24, 2001 6:55 pm

VC-10,

>>"I was an engineer at a major U.S. airline - let me know which airline please. I don't want to fly on an airline...<<

I worked for them on an internship basis, I didn't bear the "full responsibility" if that's what you mean.

>>You also miss the point I am not whining about the disparity in remuneration. I am just talking about how some users of this site think Pilots know everything.<<

>>Why time & time again on this site do people ask some pilot to enlighten them ?<<

I think it's because most people on this forum are wannabe pilots and who better to understand their questions than pilots. The questions in here aren't like "How do you change skydrol", it's more like "When do you fly at full throttles...." They are more from an operational standpoint than a maintenance standpoint.

>>Anyway to return to the point this thread was only opened with regard to people on this site appearing to believe Pilots are the font of all knowlege in the avaition world.<<

It's because to most of the people on here, the wannabe pilots, the other pilots on this forum have the knowledge they are seeking.



Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
 
VC-10
Topic Author
Posts: 3552
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Wed Jul 25, 2001 4:09 am

It's funny how these youngsters exaggerate what they have done until they are questioned, like Iainhol being a consultant to the Pentagon a few months ago.

Pan Am 747,

What you did cannot be compared with releasing a/c for flight and making technical decisions. You mentioned in your earlier post that pilots have to make quick decisions, well engineers do to.

I work in Maintenance Control and we are the first point of contact for Pilot's when they want technical advice. It is not unknown for an a/c to develop, say, a Flight Control fault shortly after TO. The crew then get on to us wanting an interpretation of the implications of the fault and may be asking if we want them to return. If they return it means dumping $1000's of fuel plus possibly the airline having to find hotel accomodation for up to 800 pax (the outbound leg + return sector). Obviously we assess the situation from a technical point of view, but if we make the wrong call that is how much it could cost the company.

In the hangar and on the line you have to balance safety with economy. You have to ask yourself when inspecting a componant, is it in good enough condition to last until the next time it is inspected. Any fool can just replace a componant just because it is worn, but is it worn to limits ? If you and you collegues keep replaceing componants early you won't have a job to go to after too long because the airline will have gone bankrupt.



I consider myself an Engineer after 4 years basic training, a multitude of a/c type courses, years of practical experience in addition to passing the written & oral examinations required to qualify for my Civil Aviation Authority Aircraft Maintenance Engineers Licence. I don't what it is like in the US, but this attitude that you have failed academically unless you have been to University only appeared in the UK about 10 years ago.

Good luck to Uni graduates but in my experience they have no idea of the 'real' world of aviation when they get their first job. We 'grunts' have introduce them to airlines operations and the fact a/c on the ground is loseing money.

An example, I once had a structural engineer design a repair scheme for some leading edge damage. It was a wonderful repair but would have taken 3 days to complete. In view of the fact the a/c was going into a hangar input about 10 days later I suggested an alternative repair that would take about 12 hours . After pointing out the fact were trying to run an airline and make money, he went along with my repair.
 
DE727UPS
Posts: 809
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2000 10:55 am

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Wed Jul 25, 2001 5:17 am

"Additionally I think most engineers are too apathetic to all belong to the same strong union like Pilots do."

Why do you think that is? I've always wondered why mechanics couldn't be more organized, and thus more effective, as an airline labor group. I don't buy the theory that an airline can run for weeks if the mechanics are on strike. If things don't get signed off, and/or fixed, the planes don't move....



 
Twotterwrench
Posts: 1087
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2001 5:57 pm

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Wed Jul 25, 2001 7:07 am

I dont' know why mechanics can't organize 727, but it drives me nuts sometimes when we don't. I had one experience while working at Markair. The Pilot's went union and managment did nothing. The F/A's went union and management got upset, but again, did nothing. The mechanics passed out cards, didn't even vote, and management wouldn't let anyone come to work until the mechanics gave it up. The owner put the hangar up for sale and said that if their was anymore talk about organizing from maintenance, he would shut the doors. No one doubted him for a minute and hey, we all needed jobs. Also, while working for ERA avation in Anchorage, cards were again passed out. Within 3 months, those who were involved in trying to organize had all been terminated. Obviously again, the union movement faded away and died. Perhaps mechanics are just too lethargic too fight it out......I don't know. I do know that the industry is screaming for new mechanics and talented ones are leaving right and left. Something is going to have to give or we are all going to be in big trouble. Hopefully, we don't all have to walk out to get managements attention, but maybe that's what it is going to take. I know we are all a lot less likely to get fired for labor actions now than we were 10 years ago when there were 20 guys standing in line to take our jobs. So, my fellow mechanics, what's it going to take????
 
PanAm747
Posts: 4711
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 4:46 am

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Wed Jul 25, 2001 7:40 am

VC-10,

We're off the topic again, but I can assure you that I wasn't exaggerating my role. I probably did a lot of what you do when I was with them. All I didn't do was sign off on paperwork. I worked on the GE and CFM engines.
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
 
Twotterwrench
Posts: 1087
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2001 5:57 pm

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Wed Jul 25, 2001 9:31 am

If you never released an aircraft, then you have never done the job. It doesn't wake you up in the middle of the night wondering if you missed something important until you have to put your name to it. I, for one, can't stand you mechanics helpers, especially when you try to claim equal status. I paid my dues, I earned my license and I can't stand it when some punk like you makes a living off of my license. Think that isn't how it works? Well, someone with a hard earned license had to sign for what you did... do you really think that makes you a mechanic.
 
242
Posts: 495
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2000 1:10 pm

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Wed Jul 25, 2001 12:10 pm

>>Why time & time again on this site do people ask some pilot to enlighten them ?<<

It all comes down to the basic understanding of the flying public. The airlines heavily promote their pilots and flight attandants, but keep aircraft maintenance hidden and generally treat them as a gigantic wart on the side of the comapny. The public seems to believe that these planes have the mechanical reliability of a new toyota, and management dosen't want to disturb those thoughts by promoting how good their techs are. But I think all of us in the trenches know the truth, some of these junk piles can't even fly one flight leg without something breaking or malfunctioning. Management knows that the fleet is doomed without a small army of skilled technicians. Organized, we would have as much, if not more power than the pilots to disrupt operations. After all, there are many wanting a pilot job, but practicly none in line to be a mechanic.

I, along with others, have stopped answering a lot of these posts. I figure if they want a technicians view, they'll ask. Since most pilots are trained on one or two aircraft, the post often goes unanswered.

>>Engineer (to me) means someone who has a 4 year engineering degree from (in the US) an ABET approved school. <<

The minimum required number of classroom hours to be qualified to take the airframe & powerplant exams is 1900. The typical four year college degree requires 1680. I think we can safely place ourselves at the same level as the university people , considering A&Ps have MORE formal training.


We technicians are our own worst enemy. We seem to have the hero mentality, that no matter what, (short staffed, no test equipment, extreme cold /heat, etc..) we're going to get the plane off the gate on time.You'll never see a pilot or flight attendant work short handed, meanwhile, the mechs are running around like mad trying to get everything done. It's really starting to burn out most of the good people I work with. I'm seeing things starting to change recently. Very few new people are entering this field to take the place of the droves that are retiring and leaving for brighter futures.

Check out fedupmechs.com and amfadelta.com - I think it's safe to say most of today's aircraft technicians are pretty pissed off, to say the least.
 
EssentialPowr
Posts: 1732
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2000 10:30 pm

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Wed Jul 25, 2001 12:11 pm

Engineers design systems. Technicians maintain them.
Interns... work for free.
 
XFSUgimpLB41X
Posts: 3961
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2000 1:18 am

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Wed Jul 25, 2001 2:47 pm

I dont want to get into this again...but:

You say it takes that amount of hours to get your 4 year degree... sure it may (seems to take alot more than that to me though)..but they pilots have a tremendous amount of flight training and expenses along with that 4 year degree. After i finish slam dunking my CFI,CFII, and MEI here in 4 weeks, we will have spent in the range of 25,000 dollars on my training, and a total of 340 flight hours (this is just engine runnning time, not counting my time spent studying, ground school and drooling over airplanes that i wish i could fly Big grin).

Either way..i have a tremendous amount of respect for the A&P's and the amazing job they do. I have some sweet pics i just got back from the NW heavy maintenance DC-10 and 747-400 bays. Anyhoo..bedtime for me... take care yall.
Chicks dig winglets.
 
Twotterwrench
Posts: 1087
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2001 5:57 pm

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Wed Jul 25, 2001 3:02 pm

242 - excellent post, my friend. Could not have said it better myself. Too bad we aren't paid well enough to pool our money and pay for a national ad campaign. If the public only knew what it took to keep these heaps flying, they'd never get on them again. Cheers!
 
VC-10
Topic Author
Posts: 3552
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Wed Jul 25, 2001 4:24 pm

242,

"We technicians are our own worst enemy. We seem to have the hero mentality, that no matter what, (short staffed, no test equipment, extreme cold /heat, etc..) we're going to get the plane off the gate on time.You'll never see a pilot or flight attendant work short handed"

That reminds me of the time we had an engine change in Santiago, Chile, on the flight down there from London we were talking to the FA's about what we were going to do, they were amazed & thought we were mad because we were to start work as soon as we got off the plane. They would have have gone to the hotel for 10 Hrs before they did anything


PamAm 747,

You troubleshot defects, replaced componants, carried out structural inspections, taxyed a/c, carried out hi-pwr engine runs, all un-supervised and then certified your work did you ? Oh no, you didn't certify, the bit that releases the a/c for flight.
 
PanAm747
Posts: 4711
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 4:46 am

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Wed Jul 25, 2001 8:38 pm

Twotterwrench,

I think we are not on the same page. I wasn't a mechanics helper, I was an Aeronautical Engineer. At the company many engineers didn't have A&P licenses. If I went back after I graduated I wouldn't be a mechanic but an engineer. However, we worked very closely with the mechanics.


VC-10,

Although I didn't make B747s out of scotch tape and cardboard I did do something. You make it seem as my position was worthless. I did almost all of the things you listed. However, mechanics taxied the planes and mechanics ran the tests. Of course I didn't sign off on anything, I don't even have a B.S. yet, but that's about all I didn't do.
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 30130
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Wed Jul 25, 2001 10:17 pm

Another point to note is
The Maintenance guy or Engineer as its stated in our licence as "Aircraft Maintenance Engineers Licence"
Works on every part of the Aircraft,depending on his qualification.
I have a no of pilot friends that drop by the Hangar during our Major checks & We guys are quite happy to show them around & answer their questions.
They are good at Flying,But we are Good at Mantaining those very Aircrafts & see that they fly Safe.
I guess The Maintenance Guy is the Dirty handed guy thats never seen by the Public unlike the clean collored Pilots or FAs.
We work at odd times & under weird weather & circumstances to complete a Job.
At times We are so tired on getting home We just can't wait to rest.
But I still feel If Pilots & Engineers discuss the Aircraft, both can learn a lot.
regds
HAWK.
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
aaron atp
Posts: 517
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2000 1:17 pm

EssentialPowr

Thu Jul 26, 2001 1:45 am

EssentialPowr, I thought engineers drove trains?

There is nothing wrong with using the term engineer as it has been in this thread. Look it up in a dictionary.


aaron
 
242
Posts: 495
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2000 1:10 pm

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Thu Jul 26, 2001 4:40 am

>>EssentialPowr, I thought engineers drove trains? <<

>>There is nothing wrong with using the term engineer as it has been in this thread. Look it up in a dictionary.<<

I completely agree.

Look at the compuer industry. Do you think every "Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer" has a degree in engineering?

The terms "engineer" and "technician" are used interchangeably in many professions, incuding this one.

 
EssentialPowr
Posts: 1732
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2000 10:30 pm

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Thu Jul 26, 2001 5:02 am

I agree with the above. The person sitting sideways on a 727 as well as the guy driving a GE locomotive for Union Pacific are both engineers by common use of the term. How do you distinguish these folks from those that have at least 4 year, ABET engineering degree?


Thanx, Webster's DOES offer many definitions...so somehow we need the ability to distinguish what is needed: someone sitting sideways in a transport category a/c, a guy with a bandanna, cap and coveralls, or a white shirt/tie guy with an HP in his pocket.

EX: If an a/c is recertified to land at a higher landing weight, as has been farily common on the 727 due to changing ownership over a long service life, who signs off on it? A Professional Engineer - non railroad, non technician, non backseater...although he/she may be those things as well.

Cheers.
 
airplay
Posts: 3369
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 1:58 am

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Fri Jul 27, 2001 1:37 am

The word "engineer" is being taken out of context in this thread. An "Aircraft Maintenance Engineer" is not an "engineer". A "Flight Engineer" is not an "Engineer". A "Sanitation Engineer" is not an "Engineer".

These titles are only valid if they are not taken out of the original context. If I walk up to a stanger, and I tell him "Hi, I'm an engineer" it would open an infinite amount of possibilities, but the obvious one would be that I was some sort of "Professional Engineer".

These terms should not threaten anybody. They are merely titles. An AME cannot typically do the job of a P. Eng and a P. Eng cannot typically do the job of an AME. They are very different professions.

Of course there are always the stories about how some P. Eng screwed a design up or how an AME did a poor repair, but these stories are only offered as some sort of weak attack on the "other" profession following a percieved threat to one's ego.

So, let's call ourselves what we really are, and stop making ridiculous statements which compare P. Engs to AMEs and Flight Engineers. They are NOT THE SAME!


 Smile


 
VC-10
Topic Author
Posts: 3552
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Fri Jul 27, 2001 4:22 am

Airplay,

"These titles are only valid if they are not taken out of the original context." - You are the only one who has got "bent out of shape" about this. Everybody was quite happy until you posted your first post. You obviously didn't like the response you received
 
VC-10
Topic Author
Posts: 3552
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Sat Aug 04, 2001 10:34 pm

I have just seen a post about which A & P school. Maybe that is the difference between a mechanic & an engineer. I did a four year apprenticeship followed by further study to gain my Engineers Licence and am currently studying for my 'electric's' licence.
 
Guest

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Sat Aug 04, 2001 10:42 pm

VC-10 a engineer in the US is called a mechanic.
Iain
 
dc10hound
Posts: 460
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 4:18 pm

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Sun Aug 05, 2001 3:31 am

>>VC-10 a engineer in the US is called a mechanic.
Iain<<

We're now supposed to be called an "Aircraft Maintenance Technician" (AMT), according to the FAA and the Union contract.  Big grin




"Eagles soar. But weasels never get sucked into jet intakes.."
 
Guest

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Sun Aug 05, 2001 4:02 am

Sorry DC10hound, I had not been informed of the change.
Iain
 
dc10hound
Posts: 460
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 4:18 pm

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Sun Aug 05, 2001 5:51 am

lain,
It's OK. I was only being mildly sarcastic. Most people still call us Mechanics. I don't really care.AMT sounds nice though.  Smile
"Eagles soar. But weasels never get sucked into jet intakes.."
 
VC-10
Topic Author
Posts: 3552
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Tue Aug 07, 2001 3:37 am

In actual fact the qualifications gained during my apprenticeship allow me the have 'T.Eng' (Technician Engineer) after my name.
 
fr8tdog
Posts: 120
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2000 4:25 pm

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Tue Aug 07, 2001 1:11 pm

This is my personal perspective on our respective positions at any airline.

We all need each and every person to do their job at an airline in order to make it run and run smoothly, from gate agents to ramp personal, bag runners, Pilots and Amt's.

I am certain that if any substantial loss of any one of those positions, due to sick outs, strikes or what ever.
The airlines will have trouble maintaining congruency and reliability in the current capacity.

This Industry unfortunately has a bunch of huge ego's that get bruised very easily.

Lets face it, We all need to work very hard in order to maintain a high level of profficency in our own niche.
If we dont, we are all out of a job.

Our professions cannot survive without the other.

Fr8t.
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 30130
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Thu Sep 07, 2006 1:56 am

Quoting Fr8tdog (Reply 43):
This Industry unfortunately has a bunch of huge ego's that get bruised very easily

A very Interesting Thread from longtime ago.Wonder if Opinions are different now.
But I agree its a Team game.All contributing their part to make things Sucessfull.
regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
KingAirMan
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 8:33 am

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Thu Sep 07, 2006 2:11 am

Who flies the planes ? O ya, we do . .  Wink
 
vc10
Posts: 1436
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2001 4:13 am

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Thu Sep 07, 2006 4:26 am

A lot of people have watched too many aviation movies where pilots, especially Captains, are protrayed as the all knowing god like figure who knows the answer to every problem. That is why they ask for the pilots opinion as they believe he/she is the source of all knowledge.

Like other occupations this might be true of some, but not all, and the sensible person whether that be a pilot or an engineer should not be too proud to listen to another person opinion on a subject, and I am sure this is the case with most people in aviation.

Ground engineers are respected group however the crew only have, what less than an hour, at a time to appreciate fully what the job entails. That is untill something goes wrong, and then I have to admit the first question crews ask the oily is "how long will it take" and once it is fixed they are gone.

I think respect between ground crew and flight crew increases in a small airline or on a small fleet in a big airline as then people get to know one another , and in my experience they then learn more about what other peoples jobs entail.

It always makes me laugh when people suggest that pilots live on a knife edge all the time they are flying, whereas in my time as a flight enginner I found that it was 20%fun,78% boredom, and 2% shear terror Big grin

At retirement a F/E was asked what he would now be doing. His reply was to drive a horse drawn hearst, and when asked why his reply was:-

"I have spent 30 years sitting behind two arseholes and I do not see why I should change now" now that is respect

Just for Big VC-10 I am sure you will acknowledge that like ground engineers ,
Flight crew sometimes work extended hours to get the passengers to their destination. I hate to think how many times with a single crew we stretched the flight time limitations, just fill in the paper work and do not do it too often.

Remember it is what respect you give yourself that is really important.

littlevc10
 
User avatar
CCA
Posts: 830
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2002 7:29 pm

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Thu Sep 07, 2006 4:42 am

Engineer is a wide topic that can go in many directions, as "training" to become an engineer is vastly different depending on what country you're in. So if what I write is different to your experiences it's because I'm talking about different countries. Cheers.

Firstly I'm happy with the associated title of "Engineer" being used, as for me it implies formal training. Until then your a mechanic as I'll explain.

In some cases it defines the difference in background between two roles such as Second Officer & Flight Engineer, my father was a Flight Engineer having completed a 4 year apprenticeship, to become an Aircraft Maintenance Engineer (AME), he then did the CAA Exams, while working on the specific aircraft types to gain the required experience to be eligible for a type rating and become a Licenced AME, which he did on the DC-8, 707 and others with electrical/radio extensions, some time later he became a flight engineer and flew the Convair 880, 707, L1011 & 747.

I followed in his foot steps, did my 4 year apprenticeship, did my CAA exams and spent 5 years working on the 747/767/757/737/A300B4 before getting retrenched, just before starting my 742 ground school to become Licenced. I then started flying and fortunately am now an F/O on the 742.

Now I tend to explain in my "terms" to other crew members that you could have 3 different types of people working on the aircraft at any one time, mechanics who are basically manpower, AME's (formal training and probably working to become licenced) and the LAME. Now the reason I do this is the company I work for doesn't explain that all the "engineers" working on the aircraft aren't licenced on it, therefore I find cockpit crew asking mechanics questions that should be directed at LAME's. These crew then get pissed because the guy doesn't know the answer, which leads me into my explanation, and a resounding "oh I didn't know that, how do I recognise the LAME ?"

Now back on topic, the reason I think people ask questions of pilots is that they assume pilots know every technical thing about the aircraft they fly. Now this may be true for a Cessna 152 but not your 747, there is simply too much to learn and the idea is to Aviate, Navigate, Communicate, not to get bogged down in technical details which have led to numerous crashes, and guess what? There are people specifically trained on every A/C who do know just about everything, and if not know someone who does or knows where/how to find it.

This is also the reason these days aircrew ground school is a lot less technical than some years ago, especially with the loss of the F/E who may well have been a LAME on the same A/C, as I've said a two man crew cannot afford the luxury of getting overly technical.

I'm glad I got an "old school" ground school, we did the entire F/E ground school prior to our pilot course, it took 5 weeks! Think about some of the things you read these days, courses that take less than a week, because technology has come so far, and due to the fact that technical help is just a phone call away. (SATCOM/ACARS)

So if you want to ask a question about flying a plane, ask a pilot. If you want to know something specific about a plane ask a LAME! Here's an example,

The other day we were taxiing head to head with a 744 having just landed, this -400 was taxiing for TO and the Capt asked what the difference between the -400 LE flaps and the "classic" was, so I slipped on my AME hat and said Group A & B LE flaps are different on the -400 vs the "classic", he said "no the -400 has an extra one on each wing" which I knew but had slipped on the wrong hat.
Enthusiast
 
modesto2
Posts: 2731
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2000 3:44 am

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Thu Sep 07, 2006 11:18 am

Interesting conversation... As someone else said, engineers (in the traditional sense) design while mechanics/technicians maintain what has been designed by those engineers. At least that's how I look at it.

The airline industry is different because there's not as much designing, mostly maintaining. It's the aircraft manufacturers that employ the engineers who design the aircraft. As Airplay said, an AMT is different from a PE.

I view mechanics and engineers as professionals with different skills and responsibilities. To group them together doesn't offer the appropriate respect and recognition that each profession deserves. Regardless, I respect engineers, mechanics and all of the above for their skill, professionalism and hard work that keeps our skies safe and friendly. Thank you!
 
320tech
Posts: 489
Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 11:38 am

RE: Engineer's Vs Pilot's

Thu Sep 07, 2006 1:23 pm

We're all going to hate each other soon if this keeps up.

Airplay, good to see you back, and that your opinion hasn't changed. I was the one you were debating with, on this forum, on the "proper" meaning of the word engineer. Don't worry, my opinion hasn't changed, either. And my licence still says "aircraft maintenance engineer".

Besides the meaning of "someone who designs things", engineer can also mean "someone who operates things". In a non-aviation sense, power engineers run boilers, train engineers run engines, Microsoft systems engineers run networks, and combat engineers run mine laying and clearing equipment. Aircraft maintenance engineers run engines, hydraulics, bleed, etc, etc.

I sincerely doubt that any AME holds him/herself out to be a professional engineer. AMEs have enough training and responsibility that we should be respected as we are.

It's also kind of handy that the terms "aircraft maintenance engineer", "AME", etc, are common to the English speaking world, outside of the US.

Regarding the original question, I agree with those who said that most people want to know how something operates in the air. The majority of laymen (oops, should I say laymen/women?) are not interested in the level of detail that AMEs require, and quickly tune out when we start talking about operating pressures, overtemp sensors, titanium versus stainless steel, minimum clearances, and so on.
The primary function of the design engineer is to make things difficult for the manufacturer and impossible for the AME.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos