I play the alto saxophone actually!

Sorry eh, my hoser brain missed that while I was oot having a dart

The pay is certainly not glamourous, unless you play your cards and get on with a big company and a good position. But even then, I've always thought that were underpaid for the work we do (the good ones) and the toll it takes on our bodies.

That being said, I've never questioned my career choice. I've wanted to be an avionics tech since I was old enough to walk, and I love my work more than a paycheck can say. I'm extremely privileged to have a wonderful fiance who allows us to have dual income, so we are both comfortable at the moment. That being said, if we ever did decide to uproot I have no doubt the earning potential of both her and I would play a part in where we decide to go.

I use my education every day, and I also use all of the on the job training I've gotten since day one of beginning my career. I did a lot of box swapping with the airliner, but in my job now I'm always challenged with troubleshooting, fixing snags, install decisions, and relying on my knowledge to complete my work. While box swapping is a part of my job, a lot of it is also finding damaged wiring, tracing pitot/static leaks, and understanding the software that this equipment is running and being able to configure it.

A vast majority of systems can be tested on the ground using test boxes that simulate radio NAV signals, handheld VHF radios, and airspeed/altitude. Our test procedures are almost always included in the install documentation, so as long as we follow that we are allowed to let the plane fly as is.

That being said, autopilot and a number of other systems do need flight tests, and so at the end of most major installs we have a test procedure that we fly with the pilot who either owns or operates the aircraft.

I am not a licensed pilot, so I never get behind the controls. My boss is though, so occasionally he will taxi and perform engine run tests with us but its the owner who always does the final flight test. This also gives them an opportunity to ask any questions they might have for me, and get situated with the new system while the installer is there with them.

I was laid off from my previous employment with the national carrier in Canada when covid hit, but airlines are very volatile with their employment and lay-offs/recalls are commonplace. Private aviation sector has been booming in my experience, and I've never been concerned with losing my job at my current employer.

I'm also in Alberta! There's really not much to it, it's a 2 year diploma course followed by 2 year apprenticeship with a company of your choosing. The best way to start is ask the schools about open houses! They'll give you a tour of their facilities and all sorts of info that you can use, plus you can talk to the instructors and get a feel for the industry. If you're in Alberta the two schools you'd most likely be looking at is SAIT (Calgary) and BCIT (Vancouver). I'm a graduate of SAIT so please if you have any questions, DM me and we can get more into details!

Not difficult at all! The caveat is you'll need to go to a technical school... BCIT, SAIT, and Canadore all have avionics specific programs and they'll get you well on your way. They start you from the ground up, so any electronics or mechanical background will give you a great advantage.

These schools also have open houses, so please reach out and see if it's something you'd be into! We need all the capable hands we can get.

The only thing I can come up with is space vs ground based navigation. Most old planes will not be equip with built in GPS (I admit I don't know what equipment these jets have) and only use VOR or ADF technology. VOR and ADF are both ground based radio navigation tools, so easily sabotaged by destroying a radio tower, meaning your planes lose navigation. GPS, though, is space based and a lot more difficult to disrupt. If I had to guess this is the reason... It's also a lot easier to preplan and map a GPS plan, as you don't need to worry about tuning VOR beacons and switching the nav source.

Chips make my stomach hurt. I'm a saltine cracker kind of dude, sorry to disappoint.

The fella who we were doing this for was a native English speaker who lived in Ontario, so English only was perfectly acceptable haha!

Not at all, in fact once you get above a few thousand feet above ground level, the cell towers simply wouldn't reach you. Contrary to what you might think, cell towers are very directional and don't propagate particularly well. That's why you don't get signal in valleys etc. Same goes for in the air, there's no point in pointing the dishes UP, so you have almost no signal at all unless it's some bounced waves off of mountains

Hey! You're very welcome, I'm learning as much as everyone else is by trying to give as good an answer as I can to you all!

In general, I worked on the A220 very little and I'm not trained in any official capacity on it (no type course or anything). Moreover, the aircraft operations I work with now don't really overlap with any A220 operators so take my answer with a grain of salt, and it's going to be pretty generalized.

The Airbus A220 was originally the Bombardier C110 and C130 (different variants) and was subsequently redesigned to the CS100 and CS300 in 2009. Bombardier had a rocky start with it, having an engine failure early on in flight testing and getting into a pretty aggressive race with Airbus and their A320 program, which Bombardier was attempting to square off against.

After more testing, the CS100 and CS300 got Transport Canada approval in 2015 and 2016 respectively, and in 2018 Airbus aquired the type certificate and rebranded to the A220. (I gathered most of this info from the Wikipedia article... I had no idea about the pretty fascinating history of this thing besides the Bombardier involvement so thank you for prompting this!)

My opinion on the aircraft is generally good. I think it was designed to try and do things differently both in terms of customer experience and technologically. Innovation is not something that aviation is altogether famous for, and generally when a company does so in such a way that Bombardier did they come under heavy scrutiny by both Transport and the commercial market (which, realistically, is pretty cornered). I think this point increases tenfold with the early issues that the C100/130 had in testing. Getting approvals for anything is a huge time dedication and requires incredible amounts of persistance, money, and time. Our company has been involved in applying and receiving STCs (basically paperwork and plans that allow and certify modifications for an aircraft) and they take years of work to complete. I can't imagine how much more intense the process is for a commercial passenger airliner.

All of that to say, I would trust a Canadian or American maintainted A220 with my life. But that is just based off of what I know of the airframe and moreover, the industry itself and our standards for safety. Things break, but in general there are always safety nets that pilots and aviation professionals can deploy to mitigate any real world risk in 99% of situations.

I will never say that aviation is perfectly safe, because nothing is perfectly safe. But I have seen the firsthand diligence and procedures that we go through to minimize the risk to the absolute lowest probability, and it's a risk that I accept and face whenever I fly commercially, privately, for flight tests, and everything in between.

No, I'm not currently employed there. I'm with a small shop (15-20 guys) based out of Calgary. I'm not performing this AMA in conjunction with my company though, so I won't advertise or namedrop them here. If you are interested in the company I have it listed on my Reddit profile. Thanks for the question!

Very good question! I'm honestly not the most up to date with ADS-B and diversity nuances (and Garmin's answer to these) besides some basic knowledge (Canada's rollout plan and the fact that diversity is required for aircraft operating in Canadian and US airspace both)However, I feel that you deserve a more fleshed out answer than I can provide this morning (and you've piqued my interest also), so I'm going to learn and get some info together for us and come back tonight with a great answer. Stay tuned!

I can say that the standard salary has certainly not gotten to a level that rivals overseas work, or even work south of the border. I know of a good handful of techs that live on Canada and work in the US, just due the substantial wage difference. I'm fortunate enough to have gotten in young and gotten on with a really generous company that meets my needs at present.

Our MRO does line maintenance occasionally, and I did daily line maintenance with the airline I worked with for a short period. Overseas work in my future certainly isn't off the table, but it's not in the cards for the next five or so years. Thank you so much for the compliments though my friend! I wish you the best of luck on your ventures in other timezones!

To be frank, this is the first time I'm hearing of both Garmin's advertising of the updates over wifi, and issues with the technology. I'm quite low level, so the package and purchase decisions are typically made above my head prior to my involvement. I'll say that I've always done my software loading of any sort over usb and SD card (for no political reason besides that's just how I know to do it) and the odd time when a customer has asked for guidance with the process I've always instructed doing so via hardware storage device.

That being said, if it's a lapse in our marketing I'll perform my due diligence and bring it up to my PRM and DOM when I'm in today that this technology is potentially flawed. Thank you for the insight!

I would say that it's pretty lucrative and you're in a good place for career growth. Most shops we go and contract for are hurting for in-house avionics, and we are very busy for the majority of our work year. The maintenance force in canada also has a very high average age, and there are way more guys retiring than there are people available to meet the maintenance demands. As with anything though, there are caveats and certainly ways by which you can improve your chances in getting a good job close to graduation. Do your best to have a good rapport with your instructors; their word has been enough for companies to give me a chance. The industry is small and you want to stand out as much as you can.

Talk to as many people in as many companies as you can... when I was graduating I drove to some shops and hangars around the airport and asked to visit their avionics departments... it's good to know what you might be signing on for and it helps show great inititive.

Overall I think as long as you demonstrate your desire to learn and understand, you'll find work. In this industry, your reputation is key so make sure you take small steps to build that up a little bit more every day.

Yes, you're absolutely right. Definitely a mistake by me, thanks for the source and the correction!

Yes, youre right. Definitely a mistake on my part, thank you for the correction!

Mayyyyybe....

I'll be honest and say the news coverage from other parts of the world hasn't grabbed my attention. I know for certain that Canada and the FAA in the States are mandating limitations and safety margins for these technologies, and I've heard EASA in Europe is also aware of the concerns, but I'm most informed on my own regulations and I don't know the extent to which other countries are handing it.

Keep in mind that aviation in developed countries strives for absolute safety and huge margins of error to make air travel as safe as possible. This system, of course, is not perfect... But when I say things like "cause for concern" in my replies, I am very much not saying these technologies ARE volatile and ARE going to cause crashes. The closest thing I can say for certain is we don't know, and when we don't know, it's best to assume the worst and take steps to get as close to certain safety as we possibly can in order to avoid the unknown.

Many countries do not operate in this manner, as we've all sadly seen on the news with occasional aviation accidents that could arguably be avoided. Knowing this, the 5G mandates that we put in place in my country could be very different from what other countries may or may not do. And the outcome of that is, unfortunately, only going to show itself in time.

Hey there! Thanks for the question and for getting our next generation up in the air safely!

I've worked for a large airline pre-covid as well as the smaller shop that I'm with now, and I've noticed that most of the really neat stuff is concentrated towards the big jets, rather than smaller aircraft like the stuff I work with now. With the stuff I have now, it has a definitive identity and it mostly works to chase the changes in policy like ADS-B and diversity transponder (basically turning the transponder from air to ground to air based, to more air to air/space based... think communication to space based satellites rather than a ground station... this gets complicated due to the differences in US vs Canadian transponder infastructure). There are a lot of cool little hidden features in the small planes, like units that can autotune to a frequency based on GPS position (it knows ground is 121.8, so you can just 'tune ground' rather than dial in the frequency), or integrated airport charts that you can pull up on your screens which completely negate the need for an EFB with charts. I also really like synthetic vision and going in that direction for IFR flying.

But the REALLY cool stuff is on the big jets.

The Airbus A220 was just coming into our fleet as I was leaving, and I was privileged evough to run a bit of maintenance on it. The thing that blew me away is that this airliner had like, 10 buttons. The rest was all automatic or virtually controlled. It was like the inside of a really really nice car, instead of the spaceship esque interior were used to seeing. And on top of that, it had about 6 physical circuit breakers, with all the rest being virtual. You could go into your maintenance menu, select the type of maintenance you were doing, and the plane would just pull its own CBs. It was wild.

But the coolest part was the onboard communication integration.

During flight, it would send any snags that it sensed to an iPad that a maintenance personel had inside a van. That maintenance engineer could see the problem, and poke around the aircraft computers for info DURING FLIGHT from the ground. The plane would then talk to a database and tell the maintainer what parts it needed, give you the maintenance reference, tell you affected systems, etc... all while the plane was happily flying to you. I have never felt so obsolete in my life, but it was DAMN cool.

EDIT: Ok, the cockpit definitely has more than 10 buttons... The image I had in my mind was a bit different from reality! In general though, the layout and general complexity of the cockpit was vastly improved compared to what I usually saw in the A320 or 757/767/777.

Oh thank you for the question!! Sorry I couldn't give a super awesome breakdown for you!

They can vary widely depending on airframe and package details, plus what equipment you settle on obviously. I'm not exclusively privy to that information but from what I know, a G1000 is roughly $300,000 USD to $400,000 USD for parts and labor. The G1000 is a full conversion mod with integrated autopilot, so that will be near the top end of the price range for Garmin installs.