SDQDI Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 Good Morning SDQI,Considering your thoughts on the L1. L1 is a fill in exam? The L1 covers the uncomplicated maintenance. I can not understand why there is no need for a practical component. KP Well where are the stats that prove that L1s doing dodgy maintenance are causing heaps of incidents? You need to seperate any incidents which were done by L2s or higher and lames. I think that without a proven reason then a forced practical course is unnescesary and goes down the road of extra regulation for no good reason. I think the most important thing for L1 maintainers like myself is to know the correct place to go to get the right information which is easily covered by the online test. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank marriott Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 This L1 crap is all smoke & mirrors. Where is the demonstrated safety issue supported by crash statistics to justify all this envolvement to fix this perceived non existing problem. This last one is the 3rd L1 course I have completed (the first one run by RAA cost $100) and not learn't one useful thing relating to maintaining my aircraft. Interestingly the previous courses issued a certificate to show your participation - the latest nothing? The crash stats that I have looked at appear to have a constant obvious stand out thread - pilot error. Various flying schools have their own standards, which varies considerably across the board. I would suggest monitoring/auditing of outputs would produce surprising results. Naturally this will not happen sitting in Canberra beating on ones own chest. (Maybe influenced by the approach where the ops and tech managers have their own private incomes/business and RAA is a second income). The real problems have NOTHING to do with owners doing their own maintenance for PVT operations. There are some L2s about that I wouldn't trust near my aitcraft with a screwdriver in their hand - this unfortunately refelects adversely on the competent operators. I would suggest that flying schools not complying with the ops manual and some L2s getting paid for unprofessional work would be the first place to start to address the unacceptable crash stats. Making more rules/restrictions & exams will achieve nothing - there is already sufficient rules - just being,in many cases, ignored. Naturally you have to get out of Canberra to find out - Even regional representatives to keep an eye out (oh! that's right the current mob just spent thousands to get rid of that idea). I don't see any constructive approach to address anything REAL. All I see is PR rubbish and fiddling with things e.g. L1 authorisation, with NO interest in what is happening around the country. There are more pressing issues then a CTA endorsement for a RPC which should it be approved will still only be used by a minority (other then those that already have a part 61 licence so don't count). 3 3 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingVizsla Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 The L1 training got participants to read AC43, the Tech manual etc. Too many of us just assume we know what's in there. Multi-choice questions to see if you did read it. That's a step in the right direction. It affordable and easy to do for anyone with an internet connection. ELAAA are proposing a face to face course to teach practical skills, which has to be renewed. That has a cost involved, for the course and for your travel, accommodation etc. Keith, being a director of ELAAA, may be able to tell us how it all works. I understand they have already run a couple of Maintainer courses at Emerald & Innisfail Qld, a Human Factors course at Emu Park Qld and Safety for Pilots and one for Partners & family. So you can now choose (when ELAAA finally get approved) between two approaches to L1 etc. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrZoos Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Ive Done Kev and Carol MCNalley's rotax course twice now and it leaves anything RAAus is doing in its wake.... I think RAAus is taking a lot of steps in the right direction, but, God only knows why RAA hasn't endorsed them and a few similarly qualified guru's to travel and train everyone to at least a level 1... 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
storchy neil Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 now hold that bloody boat no the plane why not do the exam to get your L1 when you first decide to learn to fly ? neil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDQDI Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Ive Done Kev and Carol MCNalley's rotax course twice now and it leaves anything RAAus is doing in its wake.... I think RAAus is taking a lot of steps in the right direction, but, God only knows why RAA hasn't endorsed them and a few similarly qualified guru's to travel and train everyone to at least a level 1... 1: With what money? 2: Why? Are we having a lot of incidents caused by L1s? Not L2s or higher or LAMEs I have nothing against voluntary hands on courses, which only affect the hip pocket of those doing them, and I do think they should be encouraged but to force everyone through them would be hugely expensive. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingVizsla Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Ive Done Kev and Carol MCNalley's rotax course twice now and it leaves anything RAAus is doing in its wake.... I think RAAus is taking a lot of steps in the right direction, but, God only knows why RAA hasn't endorsed them and a few similarly qualified guru's to travel and train everyone to at least a level 1... Probably cost. It is very expensive to have people travel and present, particularly as RAA members are very widely spread. They also lead busy lives, so lobbing in to a Regional town for a Saturday course will not pick up all those who want to do it. Membership fees would have to go up to cover it. Then members in the far flung areas will complain they are subsidising the people in larger centres, or that the cost for them in travel, accommodation, time away from work / family unfairly discriminates against them, especially if it was compulsory. I can hear the "not applicable to my aircraft" brigade declaring it a waste of time too. I have some experience with Scouts. All leaders have to complete modules of on-line learning followed with practicals and then face to face training weekends with an accredited Scouts Australia trainer. We would have about 90 leaders in our Region; getting 10 of them together in one place is a major undertaking. For the most part, the trainers are volunteers, and the venue belongs to Scouts, the food is provided by participants, but there are still costs for the trainer's travel (usually from the capital), accommodation, incidentals etc which makes it very expensive when we have an average attendance of 3 to 4 for a training weekend. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank marriott Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 First L1 course I did was run by the RAA,(& sponsored by CASA) one day @ $100 per head with about 20 participants. No complaint about that BUT it is not recognised by RAA. Even spoke to the Barnfield about it and his reply was "we have no records". When I informed him that I was in possession of a certificate issued by RAA he was still not interested. - Everyone has to do this online course! So I am sceptical (I believe justifiably so) about anything having any effective life with the current approach. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Tuncks Posted February 8, 2017 Author Share Posted February 8, 2017 Frank, an old hand like you will have no trouble with the technical questions in the L1 test. They are very simple and basic questions. The only ones you could reasonably get wrong are those dealing with permissions. Like is automotive paint banned or not. Personally, I have a negative attitude about permissions with respect to my own property, so without studying, I guessed at what the right answer was. ( dunno if I got the auto paint one right or not) So while you are right about how you have already done the thing, I reckon it was the easier way out to just do the test and save your ammunition for another day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank marriott Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 Bruce I have done it and the previous online one as well. I have now qualified 3 different times!! in the last 8yrs since joining RAA. I comply, just don't "agree" with approach of "I think this is great and we we will make everyone do it again" It seems like Govt. employees thinking up ideas for another paragraph on their resume with no real interest in the results - and it is not even govt. 2 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 It's a result of "that was yesterday, I'm here now and this is the way it will be done," thinking. Also known as changing the goal posts . Or the multitudinous names for an Artificial Horizon. You understand it do you? Just a minute and we'll fix that. We're not happy till you are not happy. .Nev 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Page Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 It's a result of "that was yesterday, I'm here now and this is the way it will be done," thinking. Also known as changing the goal posts . Or the multitudinous names for an Artificial Horizon. You understand it do you? Just a minute and we'll fix that. We're not happy till you are not happy..Nev Till there is another driver at the helm, then there will be change again..:--- And the following phrases will be relevant once again.. "That was yesterday"...........and.........."The goal posts have a new set of tyres --- as the old ones have lost all the tread because of allll the moving." KP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 As they say, Keith. NEW BROOMS sweep clean. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Page Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 As they say, Keith. NEW BROOMS sweep clean. Nev Yep..."New Brooms Sweep Clean"...:- If only the broom drivers left their ego at the gate and assessed the situation on its merit, there would not be so much waste of resources and asset restructure. All this happens under the banner of "saving"? You know there are a lot of good structure implemented, well use it. Not all is wrong or useless. Normally when we see these broom sweepers in action tells me the wrong person has been employed. KP. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 Lot's of things can cause a good idea to falter especially when you are dealing with human nature. Some organisations may be write off's but usually only because of conflicts generated by not listening to other's input.. In The RAAus environment there would be a lot of wisdom in the ranks, which it's wasteful not to utilise. It's easier to be a (benign) Dictator, and IF you REALLY know your stuff might just move mountains in a short time. If you just eliminate the past entirely you may throw the baby out with the bathwater, and alienate more than you have to. Of course Pilots are just about the hardest people to please that I've ever met, but that's no problem, Is it?. Nev 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Page Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 The other point, when one takes over a basket case - it is what is salvaged governs the success it is not the whole sale changes that they dream up. It costs too much to implement. KP. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrZoos Posted February 17, 2017 Share Posted February 17, 2017 Sorry been extremely busy My suggestion is not that they make it compulsory or that they pay But certainly, certify them, encourage it and maybe subsidise it a bit... Even if RAA just did all their promotion and certified them thats better then the status quo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank marriott Posted February 17, 2017 Share Posted February 17, 2017 Even if RAA just did all their promotion and certified them thats better then the status quo With $70,000.00 on self promotion and advertising in the budget (or at least the last one I bothered to read) how much do think is reasonable? I obviously have a different opinion of effective use of members money! Think about measurable results V BS - we are not a chain store trying to sell consumables - but that is an individual view which many may (and apparently do) agree with. I can accept that but just shake my head in disbelief. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riley Posted February 17, 2017 Share Posted February 17, 2017 With $70,000.00 on self promotion and advertising in the budget (or at least the last one I bothered to read) how much do think is reasonable? I obviously have a different opinion of effective use of members money!Think about measurable results V BS - we are not a chain store trying to sell consumables - but that is an individual view which many may (and apparently do) agree with. I can accept that but just shake my head in disbelief. Frank, we have met the enemy and as you point out, it is us! As has been patently obvious over the past few years, as long as they have access to air space, the bulk of RAA members couldn't give a toss about how their money is spent or where the organization is heading or whether the Board has an overall effective objective (or perhaps, as some have suggested, a private agenda), and won't be bothered poking their head over the parapet until after the engagement is futile. Others, myself included, are so fed up with the curious management (??) style that interest has been lost in questioning what's being done and why it's being done and to whose benefit. At the present rate of spiral into impossibilty I reckon the wheels of RAA (AUF as we knew it) will fall off about the time that I have to hang up my headphones so I selfishly ignore the current curious Board thinking. I despair of the fate of the rag & tube fraternity under the guidance of the present regime. Rgds Riley 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrZoos Posted February 21, 2017 Share Posted February 21, 2017 With $70,000.00 on self promotion and advertising in the budget (or at least the last one I bothered to read) how much do think is reasonable? I obviously have a different opinion of effective use of members money!Think about measurable results V BS - we are not a chain store trying to sell consumables - but that is an individual view which many may (and apparently do) agree with. I can accept that but just shake my head in disbelief. Seriously??????..they have a built in newsletter subscription directly to every member's inbox they could promote them year round for $200 and that includes wages they already pay... its peanuts, for a HIGHLY desirable outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrZoos Posted February 21, 2017 Share Posted February 21, 2017 Frank, we have met the enemy and as you point out, it is us! As has been patently obvious over the past few years, as long as they have access to air space, the bulk of RAA members couldn't give a toss about how their money is spent or where the organization is heading or whether the Board has an overall effective objective (or perhaps, as some have suggested, a private agenda), and won't be bothered poking their head over the parapet until after the engagement is futile. Others, myself included, are so fed up with the curious management (??) style that interest has been lost in questioning what's being done and why it's being done and to whose benefit. At the present rate of spiral into impossibility I reckon the wheels of RAA (AUF as we knew it) will fall off about the time that I have to hang up my headphones so I selfishly ignore the current curious Board thinking. I despair of the fate of the rag & tube fraternity under the guidance of the present regime. Rgds Riley I hope your not referring to me ...i certainly do care about it , which is why I raised it... email marketing is the cheapest, almost free form of marketing there is.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Page Posted February 21, 2017 Share Posted February 21, 2017 I hope your not referring to me ...i certainly do care about it , which is why I raised it... email marketing is the cheapest, almost free form of marketing there is.. We as members are paying for the data we use, yes this includes all the data which has to be used to promote an organisation who wishes to promote themselves. KP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank marriott Posted February 21, 2017 Share Posted February 21, 2017 Seriously??????..they have a built in newsletter subscription directly to every member's inbox they could promote them year round for $200 and that includes wages they already pay... its peanuts, for a HIGHLY desirable outcome. Just look at the budget figures, you may be surprised, too many members accept the published BS - I was at the meeting involved with the board (or it may have been on line voting) when the advertising budget was increased from $50,000 to $70,000. I have given up, but still have my own opinion of misuse of members money. If people support this approach then I have no answer - Ultimately it is up to members to accept or change the current approach - I tried and got a kick in the teeth, no longer interested in wasting 5 or 6 hours a week (sometimes more) of my time to be insulted. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted February 21, 2017 Share Posted February 21, 2017 it's dependent on the prevailing Philosophy. Advertising costs have to be added to other costs and contribute to the price (member's fees) IF the advertising doesn't result in increase of numbers and they have a realistic retention rate, the cost is not justified. Growth is on their agenda. That's obvious.IF members are disenchanted some extra ones may leave, This would discount the "gain" from the new members being recruited. I can see there is an argument to be had here. I still believe the magazine being about is a big influence on the wider public. I can't think of another easy fix.Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Page Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 Hello Frank, OK..??????. Had a little thought. The big question, what else is placed under heading of, "Advertising". The headings are one thing - but analyse what populates these headings, that is where all the interesting details will be revealed. For an example in this case:- *airfares *accommodation *PR exercises just to name a couple which could be included in "Advertising". KP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now