首页> 外文期刊>Aviation maintenance >Should Training Be Mandatory?
【24h】

Should Training Be Mandatory?

机译:培训应该是强制性的吗?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

I read with some interest that the Professional Aviation Maintenance Association is calling for additional maintenance training requirements for maintenance technicians and linked the problems to three accidents as examples of maintenance training issues. I could be pessimistic here in thinking that PAMA is trying to use some deflection tactics from the professional flying fraternity. It is not always the maintenance technician who is at fault. Does the maintenance technician have duty hours/times rigidly enforced as the professional flying fraternity enforces on the rest of the public? Maintenance technicians are an expendable commodity in the overall scheme of things to be hired and fired at the whim of the shareholder, as the shareholder must make his profit per year.
机译:我有些兴趣地读到,专业航空维修协会正在呼吁对维修技术人员进行额外的维修培训要求,并将该问题与三起事故联系起来,作为维修培训问题的例子。我可能会因为PAMA试图使用专业飞行兄弟会的一些偏转策略而感到悲观。并非总是维修技术人员会出错。维护技术人员是否会像专业飞行兄弟会一样对其他人严格执行值勤时间/时间?维护技术人员是在总体计划中消耗大量商品的一种消耗性商品,因为股东必须每年从中获利,因此股东一时兴起。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Aviation maintenance》 |2007年第8期|6|共1页
  • 作者

  • 作者单位
  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 航空;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号