No. you should know by reading the Part 66.. similar to EASA-66.

Which AN are you referring to, JohnMax?

I am in mechanical trade.

No, not ICAO, EASA! I don't think your instructor would make such a grossly mistake!
Members of ICAO are called CONTRACTING STATES, and Australia is already a member, just like Malaysia!

http://www.icao.int/cgi/statesdb4.pl?en

ICAO is an organization as opposed to EASA which is a REGULATORY BODY. Like CAA(now part of EASA) and the FAA.

CASA license won't be restricted but CASA'S Part66 equivalent license will be, just like DCA's Part 66 license!

Eg. I am a holder of DCA's AMEL with A and C trades endorsements.
When my license is renewed next year, it will be issued under DCAM Part 66 license format. I will be issued a B1 category but will have limitations under the electrical part of the B1 category. The specific limitations is spelled out in Part 66. Simple to understand?
These limitations will be removed when I take the necessary modules examinations as earlier posted.

Please have a good grasp/understanding how basic legislation and regulation works... you don't have to think or assume.


This post has been edited by jazzy939: Nov 4 2010, 07:57 AM

The objective of ICAO is to "Promote understanding and security through cooperative aviation regulation."
In short contracting states will have a common playing field to progress/develope and expand in the aviation industry.

Don't worry about it, we all have to start to learn from the ground up.

This post has been edited by jazzy939: Nov 4 2010, 09:12 PM

Graduating from a Part 147, you should have an LWTR. No priviledges for sure but you can be employed for a maintenance engineer position, given a type rated course, once passed will eligible you(after satisfying the minimum requirements) to sit for company's approval oral examination.
LAME is the path, should not be any less.
I wonder why you're still confused since you're already 'in the industry'?

Knowing the unforgiving industry, and companies trying to cut costs, armed with an LWTR you may be offered a technician/mech position.
Even desperate for a job, why must you compromised? Since when does a technician/mechanic need to have LWTR? Ask them to show their HR policy and the MOE.
It is however, a basic requirement to a position of LAME!
Please don't let them play you out. Honestly the industry is in dire need of licensed engineers.
The demand exceed the supply, time for them to pay you well!

I know AirAsia used to offer a Junior LAE position for LWTR holders.
Unless your appointment letter or offer letter specifically specified that you will be promoted or upgraded to LAME, you might end up as a Licensed Mechanic'.. becareful. I know one company is viewing such approach.

As I mentioned earlier. The market is on your side, the LWTR holder. There is not enough engineers to fulfill the industry requirements. Play your cards well my dear friends.

How can you graduate without an LWTR? Your training should be 4 years total/max.
Unless you're planning to work with just a completion of all the modules which is supposedly 2 years, then that would be the case.
As far as I know the industry (at least MAS) is looking specifically LWTR holders,not someone who just completed Part 66 modules.
The so called Part 147 ATO should offer an LWTR, not some course and certificates that 'would lead to' the LWTR as what has happened before with certain college that served as second exam site.
Please undertake such courses carefully and not to be duped with misleading promises.

A 'half baked engineer'...
Looks like thats the only path that you have to choose. Good luck.

Currently one DCA approved has boldly declared and getting 1st. public intake with regards to Part 66 syllabus. Search for DILOG.

APR has been carrying out 3 years training in compliance with Section L for many years and now 4 years for Part 66 compliance. Two batches has started.

Graduation is with an LWTR.

http://www.aeroprecision.com.my

This post has been edited by jazzy939: Nov 20 2010, 08:31 AM

Sure sounded stupid! but for those who doesn't know, it's a valid question.

If you want to work in the EU countries, then you would require the EASA-66 license. (You know EASA is for EU, right?)

DCA's Part-66 license is the LWTR required as a prerequisite before you are a type rated LAME. Comprende?

So, I guess you can answer your own question now?

This post has been edited by jazzy939: Nov 20 2010, 11:54 PM

OK, some progress here
MIAT is an Approved Training Organization!
MIAT should be able to coordinate and make the necessary arrangements..


This post has been edited by jazzy939: Nov 21 2010, 08:14 AM

Our DCA is adapting the EASA-66 syllabus and it will be known as DCA's Part 66.
At this point of time, we do not know where CAA UK stands. We are NOT part of EU. It is not the same EASA-66 albeit some similarities.
I suggest if you have intentions to work elsewehere especially in the EU, take the proper EASA-66 license. Conversion to DCA's Part-66 is much 'simpler'.
Our DCA has not make any stands with regards to recognising individual modules taken from other recognized authorities although the complete license is recognized for conversion.
As I mentioned earlier, conversion is for complete CAA UK's LWTR, not individual modules yet. There is currently no stand/policy with regards to this.

You can always email them for 'better' answers at amel66@dca.gov.my

Currently KISSTA is offering in collaboration with AST.
RM500 per module. Initial registration, once off at RM250.
CAA International is doing it every first friday of the month for GBP67 per module.
falcon, whats stopping you?

AST is a Part 147 approved by CAA UK.
Cost comparison, I'd say CAA International would be cheaper
Why can't you take it while doing your diploma? Is there a restriction?

Correct. From the first date you passed the first module, you have 5 years to complete the rest of the modules before it expires. Honestly at the rate of 2 or 3 modules that you are allowed to do in a month, 6 months is possible to finish them all!

Agreed. If you can give it a shot, why not!

Yes, you are correct.

Good progress!
Glad to help out.