But wait there's more

[frank marriott]

Comment by Tony King - looks like the ever changing goal posts for a L1 are on the move AGAIN "ref: next phase"

 

Haven't see anything official from RAA, but why does it no longer surprise me. Mini GA with escalating costs. At some stage the members will realise where this mob are heading, in all probability too late.

 

Yes Daryl, that’s right. Used to be that getting your RAAus Pilot Certificate would also give you the authority to maintain your own aircraft (as long as it’s only used for private operations). That ended a couple of years ago because it was recognised that there’s nothing in the pilot training syllabus that would qualify a person to maintain an aircraft. The L1 (owner/maintainer) maintenance authority presently requires you to complete online training and pass an exam. That helps ensure you know what the maintenance requirements are, where to find essential information, etc., but it still doesn’t confirm that you know which end of a screwdriver to hold. The next phase is in development and almost ready for live trials, which is what Dan is talking about. This will help ensure RAAus owner/maintainers have the practical skills to safely maintain their aircraft.

 

You’re right that the majority of RAAus crashes are pilot related rather than maintenance related, just like every other sector of aviation. However the ability to maintain your own aircraft is one of the key points of difference between RAAus and RPL or PPL. In order to protect that privilege, and as a responsible industry player, having identified a gap in the training available RAAus is taking steps to close that gap. For those who already have the knowledge and skills it’s a mere formality (although you never know what you might learn). For those who don’t and want to maintain their own aircraft, it will make them safer and more capable.

 

 

[facthunter]

Will the Blind lead the blind? Where is this expertise coming from? It can be done, but what has been done well lately in all this? Nev

 

 

[Brett]

I see no problem in having ppl do a maintenance course like what the SAAA offers. Helped me be compliant through their education. It would need to be more accessible than trying to do the MPC.

 

 

[Bats]

The MPC is an example of exactly what a maintenance certificate should not be! It is the kind of paperwork / tick box exercise so beloved of management consultants that does precisely zero for actual productivity, but creates a warm n fuzzy feeling that "we're doing something".

 

 

[Brett]

I knew more about maintenance and compliance after that course than before it. Who is training people to do their maintenance on RAA aircraft and keep the correct records? Oh that's right,,, although no one really builds planes anymore in RAA so we don't need that now.

 

 

[turboplanner]

I see no problem in having ppl do a maintenance course like what the SAAA offers. Helped me be compliant through their education. It would need to be more accessible than trying to do the MPC.

No one should fall into the trap of believing just box ticking will dave them when an accident occurs. The first shock will be the EXTENT of the investigation which will quickly establish whether the person was box ticking or putting into practice what they were taught (“living the legislation” according to Vicroads), then the flame comes up to the teachers and whether they were qualified to teach the person involved in the accident ( should the person be cleared, but a major mistake could have been avoided), and again, not surprisingly, the investigators will be looking for box tickers and teachers who simply reeled off a general list of books, without checking to see if the student absorbed anything.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

I love the idea of comprehensive and ongoing training about aircraft maintenance, its a shame the RAA is so heavily focussed on compliance.

 

 

[Bats]

I knew more about maintenance and compliance after that course than before it.

Mmm, I must have slept through the bit where they taught you anything about maintenance. Compliance by the bucket load, the nitty gritty of keeping your aircraft airborne safely, not so much.

 

 

[facthunter]

A lot of that appears to be about required documentation. Over the years I've been to a lot of SAAA stuff (expensive) and learned little . I'm not against LEARNING. Knowledge (qualification) has to be renewed each 2 years is the go lately. With the myriad ways of building /repairing aircraft even people working in the Industry wouldn't be across all of it. Does your local GP do that? Nev

 

 

[planesmaker]

My local GP would not know where the engine is on an aeroplane, and only guesses at diseases and how to treat them

 

 

[Keith Page]

Comment by Tony King - looks like the ever changing goal posts for a L1 are on the move AGAIN "ref: next phase"Haven't see anything official from RAA, but why does it no longer surprise me. Mini GA with escalating costs. At some stage the members will realise where this mob are heading, in all probability too late.

Yes Daryl, that’s right. Used to be that getting your RAAus Pilot Certificate would also give you the authority to maintain your own aircraft (as long as it’s only used for private operations). That ended a couple of years ago because it was recognised that there’s nothing in the pilot training syllabus that would qualify a person to maintain an aircraft. The L1 (owner/maintainer) maintenance authority presently requires you to complete online training and pass an exam. That helps ensure you know what the maintenance requirements are, where to find essential information, etc., but it still doesn’t confirm that you know which end of a screwdriver to hold. The next phase is in development and almost ready for live trials, which is what Dan is talking about. This will help ensure RAAus owner/maintainers have the practical skills to safely maintain their aircraft.

 

You’re right that the majority of RAAus crashes are pilot related rather than maintenance related, just like every other sector of aviation. However the ability to maintain your own aircraft is one of the key points of difference between RAAus and RPL or PPL. In order to protect that privilege, and as a responsible industry player, having identified a gap in the training available RAAus is taking steps to close that gap. For those who already have the knowledge and skills it’s a mere formality (although you never know what you might learn). For those who don’t and want to maintain their own aircraft, it will make them safer and more capable.

They could be having a bit of razzle dazzle regarding the practical side of things, we will see.

When the AGM was held in Bundy the subject of the practical aspect of the L1 was raised and we were told it will be out just around the corner- must be along corner.

 

The big problem is finding people to deliver it.

 

KP

 

 

[Yenn]

I did the MPC course and as far as I am concerned it really does very little for aviation safety. It makes sure that you are aware of the legal requirements of maintaining an aircraft, but it does absolutely nothing about actually doing the job. You could pass the course and still not know what a valve spring was or where to find it. You would know where to enter info about it in your maintenance records.

 

 

[Brett]

Ppl that don't know what a valve spring to begin with then shouldn't be doing the maintenance.

 

 

[SSCBD]

People need hands on courses (not costly talk fests)

 

AND

 

Kids (city) these days don't know how to change a car tire. Really - last few boyfriends of my daughters could not and I kid you not!

 

 

[turboplanner]

People need hands on courses (not costly talk fests)AND

Kids (city) these days don't know how to change a car tire. Really - last few boyfriends of my daughters could not and I kid you not!

Simple solution; remove self maintenance.

 

 

[slb]

They could be having a bit of razzle dazzle regarding the practical side of things, we will see.When the AGM was held in Bundy the subject of the practical aspect of the L1 was raised and we were told it will be out just around the corner- must be along corner.

The big problem is finding people to deliver it.

 

KP

recognised courses on the L1 syllabus page. The HGFA course has practicals.

 

I have completed the SAAA MPC/ HGFA Engine and Airframe course, do I need to complete the L1 exam?

 

No, but you will need to provide RAAus with evidence before this can be recognised. If you have completed the SAAA MPC/ HGFA Engine and Airframe course and would like to apply for recognition of prior learning, please email [email protected] with a copy of your course certificate so that we can update your member record.

 

 

[frank marriott]

The emphasis on self maintenance is misguided - trying to "fix" a problem that does not exist. Just like a political issue, certain people grab an idea and get carried away to excess merely for self grandeur.

 

The facts do not support the excessive & continuing agenda.

 

Any considered look at the incidents/crashes etc points to a common problem and it is has nothing to do with L1 maintenance.

 

From my observations since joining RAA there is certainly some questionable expertise with "SOME" L2s (protected????) but the L1s, at least the ones I know of, seek assistance with anything that they are not comfortable/capable of doing.

 

When input to agenda is limited to thought bubbles of a couple of Canberra centric individuals it is an expected outcome.

 

 

[slb]

I agree with you Frank, but I was referring to the reference below

 

When the AGM was held in Bundy the subject of the practical aspect of the L1 was raised and we were told it will be out just around the corner- must be along corner

and pointing out that the HGFA Engine and Airframe course does provide practical aspects for anyone seeking assistance to enable them to do their own maintenance. It is not mandatory but available for those who want it.

 

 

[kgwilson]

I know every nut bolt and rivet in my airframe. I bent up all of the frame extrusions, cut and folded all of the sheet. I installed the engine and did all of the electrics, avionics, cables, hydraulics, made the fuel tanks installed fuel lines & pumps, made the mass balances, canopy etc & this was theoretically a kit. I also painted it & test flew it. It exceeds the 51% rule by about 45%. Some quick build kits are like plug and play assembly so it beats me how they can say it is 51% amateur built. I've also pulled engines down & rebuilt them mainly because I could not afford to pay someone to do it. I reckon I am qualified to maintain my own aircraft but a lot of pilots I talk too haven't got a clue when it comes to aircraft construction & maintenance but I'm sure that they could pass the exam with a bit of study.

 

To me the L1 exam was a box ticking exercise. I did no study & passed. A couple of the answers to questions were wrong & these have now been modified by RAA. A practical course is the only way to ensure that prospective maintainers have the real skills.

 

 

[SDQDI]

But if there isn't planes falling out of the sky because of dodgy L1 maintenance why put everyone through a costly course?

 

 

[turboplanner]

But if there isn't planes falling out of the sky because of dodgy L1 maintenance why put everyone through a costly course?

I know one which not only took out the pilot/owner but his instructor, and another one who took out the tester, and another clown who put another instructor through the fence at the end of the strip, and that’s what I can remember in the time it took to write this. Then there are the engine failures, one doozy being the spark plug falling out of a Rotax. It would be more helpful if RAA presented the reasons along with a list of the failures that led to them.

 

 

[SDQDI]

I know one which not only took out the pilot/owner but his instructor, and another one who took out the tester, and another clown who put another instructor through the fence at the end of the strip, and that’s what I can remember in the time it took to write this. Then there are the engine failures, one doozy being the spark plug falling out of a Rotax. It would be more helpful if RAA presented the reasons along with a list of the failures that led to them.

Were they specifically L1 maintenance issues or just maintenance in general?

 

 

[turboplanner]

RAA should have the accident details.

 

 

[M61A1]

Why then, did I recently read in an RAA article that over 90% of our accidents are directly attributable to pilot HF?

 

The maintenance issue is something that is being pushed by certain people and by our own stats, will affect less than 10% of the problem.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

TP, those 3 failures are in the context of the 380,000 hours that the RAA pilots fly every year, it's incredible safety record less than 1 incident per 100,000 hours