Who this page is for

If you already hold a Part 66 licence and the exclusions are holding back your privileges, this is the right page.

This page is for engineers who already have a Part 66 category, subcategory or modular licence outcome and need excluded systems removed.

That usually means one of two groups. The first is engineers with grandfathered exclusions carried across from older licensing arrangements. The second is engineers who came through the modular licence system and now want to expand their scope.

It is also for engineers who are already doing the work in the hangar, but need a clean, compliant pathway to prove the excluded systems properly and get the limitation lifted.

How Sigma runs exclusion removal

Fast mapping. Tight scope. No generic detours.

Sigma delivers exclusion removals through RPL and gap training because the typical student is already an experienced engineer. The problem is usually not lack of exposure to aircraft maintenance. The problem is that the excluded system has not yet been recognised, assessed or closed in the way the rules require.

We start by reviewing your licence, exclusions, maintenance background and available evidence. From there, we map the evidence against the actual exclusion requirement and create a custom learning environment to fill the gaps

That can include the relevant units of competency, specific gap exams, and practical evidence against the excluded system. It does not mean pushing an experienced engineer through a broad qualification or unnecessary exams just to clear one narrow exclusion.

For busy engineers, that matters. The pathway needs to fit around work, not pretend you have time for a generic course you do not need.

Only study what the exclusion actually demands

This is where engineers usually waste time with the wrong provider.

Sigma’s approach is to map the exclusion to the real requirement, then keep the solution as narrow as the rules allow.

If the gap is small, we keep it small. If the exclusion can be efficiently handled as part of a packaged pathway because the requirements overlap, we do that too. In practice that can mean grouped electrical, instrument or engine exclusion pathways where the unit map and evidence base genuinely overlap.

That is a much better fit for experienced engineers than being pushed into a large, generic program just to remove one system exclusion.

The rule is simple: no padding, no made-up bundles, no modules to assess units, no unnecessary study. Just the requirement, the evidence, and the gap.