Out of pure interest, because of all the chatter about poor engineering maintenance... If someone, ab initio (but with the actual ability) wanted to go and gain licences to work only on the SEP Fleets, and set-up a maintenance organisation; what would be the process/steps/hoops to jump through... How would they achieve it?
If you have a 145 shop and an inspector, you can do any kind of work but you can't sign off on it. My aircraft mechanic is a car mechanic with no formal qualification but he does all the work as a subcontractor but the signoff is done by the inspector.
The path to inspection authority is a long one, you have to work in a 145 for several years and you slowly gain authorization. Setting up and running a 145 is apparently a lot of administration work.
So talk to Werner Helm at your airfield, maybe he will let you do work within his premises (important) as a freelancer. Depending on how that goes, I might do the 10 minute hop to EDTY and give your abilities a try 
Interesting... so the premises have to be authorised... mmm...
But LOL - the thought came up over a beer last night while I was chatting with a friend about getting maintenance costs down; I'm quite happy driving a car, that I have taken apart, but not sure about flying in something :-)
Although if the industry I work in continues the way it is going, this might suddenly become a serious option.... :-#
But do you need to be an EASA 145 company?
That's mandatory only for AOC work.
Here in the UK, most firms doing piston GA work are not EASA 145.
Anybody at all can do the actual work - I mean legally, not just referring to the obvious fact that anybody at all can physically do it. Most of the bigger firms are full of kids fresh out of college, not EASA Part 66 qualified. It's the signoff that "matters", AIUI.
In the FAA world, it's the same. Anybody can do it. An A&P needs to sign off most work, and an A&P/IA is needed to sign off the Annual.
The IA is also needed for some obscure bits; from vague memory, installing any geared engine is one of them.
Pilot maintenance privileges are similar between the two regimes, but I don't think they are relevant to the "poor maintenance" angle, because the really dodgy maintenance practices are on stuff that would be outside pilot privileges anyway.
What N-reg makes easier is the ability to just rent a hangar and do an "owner assisted Annual" with an A&P/IA. This ought to be possible under Part M but only by some sort of delegation from a Part M company which would have to pretend that the work was done on their (national CAA inspected) premises.
But LOL - the thought came up over a beer last night while I was chatting with a friend about getting maintenance costs down; I'm quite happy driving a car, that I have taken apart, but not sure about flying in something :-)
There is nothing preventing you from rendering an aircraft unairworthy. I have done that many times when I take my airplane apart. Then comes my inspector, takes a look and puts a stamp in my logbook, returning the aircraft to service.
So if you find the right IA, you can do everything down to pulling pistons and removing wings.
Yes I think anybody can legally dismantle a 747.
There is usually no issue with finding the IA. The real issue is political and is to do with property revenue protection. The vast majority of hangars (excluding the farm strip scene, where anything goes) do not allow maintenance. Obviously you can do trivial stuff if you can do it when nobody is looking. But even taking cowlings off is a no-no.
Having found a suitable hangar ... most freelance IAs work regularly for maintenance companies - signing off Annuals is their regular income. Such an IA will not want to openly assist you to leave your MO and rent a hangar somewhere for a few days. It's down to knowing the right people...
Right now I know of a hangar I can rent for £20/day, where anything can be done.
...because of all the chatter about poor engineering maintenance.
Once you have set up your own maintenance organisation (I would say around 2025 if you begin your apprenticeship as an aircraft mechanic tomorrow) you will be faced with the same problem as everybody else: GA is not attractive for good people - be it pilots, mechanics or other ground personnel. Apart from a few enthusiasts (luckily there are some left) everybody will run for more money, a stable duty roster, fixed working hours and white turbine oil instead of dirty black piston oil at the first opportunity. You will find yourself training your own mechanics and see the best of them leaving for the airlines or one of the large maintenance companies (Atlas, Jet Aviation, RUAG to name a few here in Germany) the very moment they become productive. Just ask the person that achimha recommended to you in his answer above!
Additionally, GA companies tend to be small but are faced with the same administrative burden as the larger companies. You need almost the same number of unproductive office personnel to handle the paperwork for a three-man outfit that you need for a 30-man company. Very inefficient for a small business and financial suicide. Again, ask Mr. H at your airfield why he was able to take over the long-established maintenance shop at your airfield so easily...
The real issue is political and is to do with property revenue protection. The vast majority of hangars (excluding the farm strip scene, where anything goes) do not allow maintenance. Obviously you can do trivial stuff if you can do it when nobody is looking. But even taking cowlings off is a no-no.
That must be a UK thing? Never heard about such restrictions here. However, a 145 shop is not allowed to carry out work outside its approved premises unless they get a case by case exemption. So I do the work in my hangar, push the plane 100m to the shop and there I get the stamp in my logbook.
Yes I think anybody can legally dismantle a 747.
But, I think NOT if you want to put it back together!
Maybe you refer to specific dismantling procedures?
They won't apply to most stuff though.
