L-1 Maintenance Course/Exam

[Roundsounds]

This course was intended to be the first part of a three step process. The first part (this course) was to establish the person has an understanding of their rights / responsibilities relating to owner / operator maintenance under the RAAus system.

 

The next steps were to be practical training and assessment, this was stated at the beginning of the “trial” period. It seems as though this “trial” period has been extended.

 

I don’t believe this course prepares anyone to perform maintenance tasks beyond the paperwork.

 

 

[kgwilson]

If you have built your own aircraft from scratch including all electrics, engine installation, setup, tuning etc I think you will be fairly well qualified to maintain it so long as everything has been completed to a high standard with written and photographic evidence and has been properly inspected. I didn't do any study or complete any of the test questions & passed. There are some ambiguous questions/answers(or were when I did it) & a couple I thought their correct answers to were wrong. One was "What is the best way to join a wire?". Using spade connectors or something like that was the correct answer. I disagreed as the best way is to solder the wire and put heat shrink insulation over the join. If both ends are properly tinned first & the join twisted and then fully soldered there is no better way IMO.

 

I know of some pilots who are not that mechanically minded & have purchased an aircraft & then did the test so they can maintain their own aircraft. There is a potential issue here.

 

 

[NinjaNate]

L1 course now done and dusted! Definately more of a "search and find" box ticking exercise than anything else.

 

 

[John Nooyen]

I am not doing this "Test" out of protest.

 

I did a L1 maintenence course at Boonah a few years back, Which has the ops managers signature on it, and RAAUS Letterhead.

 

I built my aircraft, which has flown for 12 years now.

 

Then they tell me I need to do an online course, with NO practical component???

 

This is box-ticking.

 

 

[Yenn]

Kgwilson. I have not bothered with the tests, but your example of an incorrect answer is suspect. In aviation the soldered joint has failed so many times that a mechanical joint is considered superior. Soldered joints cause embrittlement of the wire adjacent to the joint, so they are only safe to use if there is no chance of movement at the joint.

 

I would agree that there are many poor correct answers to multi choice questions.

 

 

[facthunter]

A soldered joint is the only type which could be considered fully connected. The brittleness at the ends of the solder are caused by the stiffness of the fused joint ending at a point . A sleeve (shrink) over the joint going a bit further, beyond the solder, will fix that. Nev

 

 

[spacesailor]

KGW

 

I agree "solder & twist the wire and put heat shrink insulation over the joint. If both ends are properly tinned first & the twisted joint and then fully soldered there is no better way IMO."

 

But I cant DO these type of test due to lack of education.

 

But can and do pull down & repair motor engines, starter's, alternators, and brakes,

 

because it is interesting!.

 

Failed my general aviation, stupid answer to "what causes icing" Moisture?

 

Bad place for icing is Darwin while great flying at McMurdo Dry Valleys in antarctica

 

Also loft, laminate & carve my prop's

 

spacesailor

 

 

[facthunter]

Copper wire work hardens, so locate it so as not to be working at any localised point. Nev

 

 

[freddy]

Hello All,

 

Please see below. It is true that not all their answers are correct.

 

I believe you should visit this question.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From memory, there were 2 yes and 2 no answers. I originally answered one of the no ones. On reviewing answers before submission, I came across the published information for BRS. This included the following:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The safety pin only secures the firing handle to its mount. It does not prevent triggering if the

 

 

 

housing is pulled forcefully. For example, if you were to remove the canister mount and pull

 

 

 

 

 

the whole canister and rocket away from the handle, the rocket could fire because the action

 

 

 

 

 

is the same as if the handle was pulled. Of course, you should not remove and pull the

 

 

 

 

 

canister; this is merely an example to explain the possibility. If the housing (the plastic sheath

 

 

 

 

 

protecting the activating cable inside) is properly secured along its path with durable

 

 

 

 

 

attachments, the unit has little likelihood of deployment by force exerted on the housing

 

 

 

 

 

itself.

 

 

 

 

 

Installations with sloppy or dangling housings are not adequately safeguarded against activation

 

 

 

 

 

by a force pulling directly on the housing. If you have any questions on this subject please

 

 

 

 

 

contact BRS for advice

 

 

 

Since there was only 2 answers with a yes possibility, one of them must be correct. The first answer read something along the lines of " pin must be in to fire". Patently untrue, therefore the correct answer should be the other yes answer, no matter how not quite correct it is.

 

 

 

 

 

I.E. IT DOES NOT MATTER IF THE PIN IS IN OR NOT. IT CAN BE FIRED BY PULLING THE CABLE HOUSING IF NOT SECURED CORRECTLY

 

 

 

 

Ideally, it is best to run the cable housing in a straight course from the rocket to the mounting

 

location. However, this is usually not possible or practical on most aircraft. In these cases,

 

you must assure that the housing routing follows these simple rules:

 

1. The housing should be secured along its route. To prevent any chance of firing the

 

rocket because the housing—not the handle—is pulled forcefully, it is preferred that

 

the housing be attached or secured

 

 

 

 

REF: http://www.brs-vertrieb.de/wp-content/uploads/pdf/owners_manual.pdf (Links to an external site.)

 

 

 

And the reply from Haley Wilson:

 

 

 

Thank you for your feedback. This question has been reviewed and agree it requires amendment. It will be removed from the question bank until it is revised. Thank you.

 

 

 

At least this time they are fixing their mistake.