Fly Lah!

Let's deliberate on this. Mind your language guys.

There has been 'voices' suggesting that the DCA should accept EASA-66's Certificate of Completion as a basis for the issuance of DCA's Part 66 AML with the required corresponding mandatory practical assessment and live aircraft practical experience.

I do not know what is/are the exact motive/s of such a proposal as the DCAM has yet to conduct their own Part 66 examinations that will commence this July 2011.


Gentlemen, your views.

Torx.

Hello sifu torx

my opinion is ...what the reason DCAM not accept EASA? Are the EASA standard r lower than them ? Why a lot country already follow up EASA but DCAM not ?

I get some info in other website http://www.acda.org.tw/news_info.php?doc_num=1282725757 it's taiwan website those donno read chinese pls translate to english , the main content is... now worldwide are going to follow the standard of EASA... except US , even Japan also actively turn their way to follow up EASA ... why ? cos the standard of EASA r strictly. That y we treat it as "international license" due they could convert to a lot different country license.

let talk about pros and cons if DCAM should accept EASA

pros : I believe a lot native would like to work in local if their easa license r accepted. Decrease the shortage of LAE. Decrease brain drain issue.....

cons : Maybe the license system will become complex, cos DCAM also conduct their own "part66" "part147",some newbie may confuse.....

I just a newbie with no exp yet so that all my personal view.

Correct me if I'm wrong - Previously people who have EASA Pt66 license B1 will get DCA LWTR in A&C. Those with EASA pt66 B2 get DCA LWTR EIR. There is no black & white on this but I think some people have got it.
But this was EASA license holders, not "certificate of completion" holders.

In my opinion, if DCA can recognise EASA license holders converting to local DCA license, I don't see why not DCA cannot recognise pass certificates of modules done by 147 schools. The experience required on live aircraft maybe should be done in Malaysia...

Hi...y'all,

1. Who are this 'voices' ??? Are they the EASA Part 147 second site 'ORGY' who are now in "deep sh**" trying to convinced their unhappy graduates who thought that DCAM will accept their certificate and work schedules then issue them DCAM Part 66 licence. What a crap !

2. If they (grads and orgy) have followed EASA Part 66 programme then EASA NAA (e.g.CAA,UK) should be the issuance authority for their licence not DCAM. This issue has not been 'solved' by EASA Part 147 such as TAECO/Aviation Australia/MIAT/AeroBildung/AST/KISTAA as the issuance of licence will be CAA,UK.

3. Why Malaysian students who went to UK Part 147 colleges such as CBC/Glam/Kingston/Brunel were denied access to British registered live aircraft??? National security threats??

4. DCAM Part 66 licence holder should be ACCEPTED to work any where in Europe without any prejudice whatsoever if they want DCAM to accept EASA. If cannot...WHY ????????

5. EASA (European Aviation Safety Agency) SHOULD NOT interfere in any National Aviation Authority law and regulations in any countries.FULL STOP !!!

6. ...to be continued (teh tarik calling)

9M

I

so if what brader ninermike told us,why DCA doesnt hav any understanding with the part 147 guys,to do DCAM PART66,why must the 147 wasted the student money,time and others particular to them,so sad la for the young Malaysian future,...

singonn2 wrote:;) Hello sifu torx

my opinion is ...what the reason DCAM not accept EASA? Are the EASA standard r lower than them ? Why a lot country already follow up EASA but DCAM not ?

I get some info in other website http://www.acda.org.tw/news_info.php?doc_num=1282725757 it's taiwan website those donno read chinese pls translate to english , the main content is... now worldwide are going to follow the standard of EASA... except US , even Japan also actively turn their way to follow up EASA ... why ? cos the standard of EASA r strictly. That y we treat it as "international license" due they could convert to a lot different country license.

let talk about pros and cons if DCAM should accept EASA

pros : I believe a lot native would like to work in local if their easa license r accepted. Decrease the shortage of LAE. Decrease brain drain issue.....

cons : Maybe the license system will become complex, cos DCAM also conduct their own "part66" "part147",some newbie may confuse.....

I just a newbie with no exp yet so that all my personal view.

Honestly I think you also get confuse with the scenario by having a glance at your words.. peace. Please laa...respond to the topic. DCA is now moving to EASA concept...Do comprehend the topic please.

The issue is, there are parties who want DCA Malaysia to accept 'their students' easa certificate of recognition' which are issued by them(after completing all modules only) for an issue of DCA AMEL. In the first place, 'these smart people' 'did' collaborate with 'foreign' authority' but in the midst, it seems that...they just realized the path taken is not what it suppose to be...according to their plan.

Tell me under which point, should DCA make an acceptance of the easa cerfificate of recognition where is it totally NOT under DCA responsibility??? Tell me how???

*I am sick of thinking why some people just 'cannot understand' our simple regulations/law but always keep busy in promulgating their own sick laws.

Moral of the story guys?

mosumo wrote:
Honestly I think you also get confuse with the scenario by having a glance at your words.. peace. Please laa...respond to the topic. DCA is now moving to EASA concept...Do comprehend the topic please.

The issue is, there are parties who want DCA Malaysia to accept 'their students' easa certificate of recognition' which are issued by them(after completing all modules only) for an issue of DCA AMEL. In the first place, 'these smart people' 'did' collaborate with 'foreign' authority' but in the midst, it seems that...they just realized the path taken is not what it suppose to be...according to their plan.

Tell me under which point, should DCA make an acceptance of the easa cerfificate of recognition where is it totally NOT under DCA responsibility??? Tell me how???

*I am sick of thinking why some people just 'cannot understand' our simple regulations/law but always keep busy in promulgating their own sick laws.

Moral of the story guys?

OPPS... i did't see clearly about "EASA-66's Certificate of Completion"... ya , i agree with 9M and mosumo ,about the license issue r not related DCAM, but some airline lik MAS,AirAsia should give them a chance to working for collecting work exp and finally get the basic license as wat Shumway said.

Shame on you DCA ... ... you have NOT even practised and have experiences on Part 66 and Part 147 ... and now you want to talk about accepting other technical qualification.

Shame on you DCA ... your ATO being imposed to comply with Part 147 within 6 months and here you want to accept other technical qualification.

I could not find any clause in MCAR Reg 31 that allows the DG to accept other technical qualification EXCEPT AN1101 para 4.5(c) ... and the AN 1101just came out of the oven. For goodness sake; let the system matures.

And of all the system you want to adopt; it is EASA where EASA itself has not matured. They had problem with JAA; that is where EASA came into the picture. Okay, the politically correct version: JAA evolved to become EASA.

If you talk about ICAO Annex 1 - then you can join me for a teh tarek.

orang tua wrote:Shame on you DCA ... ... you have NOT even practised and have experiences on Part 66 and Part 147 ... and now you want to talk about accepting other technical qualification.

Shame on you DCA ... your ATO being imposed to comply with Part 147 within 6 months and here you want to accept other technical qualification.

I could not find any clause in MCAR Reg 31 that allows the DG to accept other technical qualification EXCEPT AN1101 para 4.5(c) ... and the AN 1101just came out of the oven. For goodness sake; let the system matures.

And of all the system you want to adopt; it is EASA where EASA itself has not matured. They had problem with JAA; that is where EASA came into the picture. Okay, the politically correct version: JAA evolved to become EASA.

If you talk about ICAO Annex 1 - then you can join me for a teh tarek.

orang tua, are you responding to the topic or...is this the latest from DCA?

EASA 66 Certificate of Completion is not mentioned by name in our MCAR nor is it mentioned by name in the AN. Therefore on that ground; DCA Malaysia should not even entertain the thought of accepting EASA 66 Certificate of Completion.

In the same token; MCAR Regulation 31 mentioned the acceptance of "foreign" licenses; and that is what the DCA Malaysia has been practising i.e. accepting "foreign" licenses on case to case basis. Mind you: NOT any Tom, Dick or Harry can simply enter Malaysia and "convert" their license. They must have "sponsors and basis". In most cases the sponsors are the likes of Malaysia Airlines etc and the basis is NOT enough people to certify. Even that is NOT strong enough; business expansion is added on top. Please bear in mind; it is NOT total acceptance; this foreign license holders are already type rated with years of hands on certifying experiences AND they still have to sit our local Air Legislation papers and company procedures exam. This issue also ties up with other rules and regulation of Malaysia such as the Immigration and the HR policies.

On that similar token, other countries have been "reciprocal" and accepting Malaysian licenses.

====================================
To be fair to DCAM; we have to read MCAR reg 31 together with AN 1101.

MCAR Regulation 31 (6) when read together with AN 1101 para 4.5 (Malaysian Part 66) is a double edge sword. I am NOT questioning the power invested on DCAM nor am I questioning their actions as I do NOT have access to all the data and info that lead to this "voices"; I am questioning the timing.

We have NOT even started on the Part 66 and you are already "thinking" of accepting "others" Part 66 Certificate of Completion. I dont think this is fair on the people (Malaysian) NOR it is fair on the ATO. UNLESS!!!! a very big UNLESS!!!! I accept your certificate of completion AND you accept my (MALAYSIAN) certificate of completion.

======================================

MCAR Regulation 31 (6) when read together with AN 1101 para 4.5 (Malaysian Part 66) is a double edge sword.

The moment this is exercised; a precedence would have been set; and the floodgates will open.

========================================

People who collaborated with foreign institution and try to "sell" EASA 66 already knows what they are into. Therefore; why should we symphatise with them.

The MCAR and the AN is public domain; go and read them; if you decided NOT to follow the law of the land; why should I symphatise with you.

These are the people who do not understand the local needs required to further develop the Aviation industries in Malaysia.

=======================================

For those graduates; whose certificate of completion or licenses NOT accepted by the DCAM. Sad to say; you are caught in the crossfires.

Another things: those people with "frozen" UK licenses; I was told they are Cat A holders. Malaysia do not have Cat A yet (hopefully in July) - that is why "frozen".

CAT B license holders: they only need to sit for Malaysian Air Law papers. Cat B1 becomes A&C. Cat B2 becomes EIR.

If still NOT accepted; maybe the whole pictures not painted for the rest of us to understand.

To be fair to DCAM; they do not simply "reject" NOR do they simply "accept".

=======================================

Dear Mosumo,

I am responding to the topic.