How trustworthy are your test kits (Alk/Ca/Mg)? | BRStv Investigates

[User1]

They used the Trident as just another test to include in the averages. They even dismissed the low Trident Mg results "as not enough tests". If they would have compared it to a calibrated Trident it would have still been flawed, but not as much as the the average of averages. Using a test standard fluid or comparing to an ICP test would have been even better. Another way to think about it is that they took multiple torque wrenches and technicians to get close enough for that bolt on your aircraft versus tighten to T.O. standard with a wrench that just came back from PMEL.

I have seen a few threads of people comparing Trident to kit X using tank water, but I have missed Trident vs kit x using the remainder of the calibration fluid. (aside from 2 posts down from yours. I'm glad I read the whole thread before replying ) I'm really excited for Trident users once that type of confirmation starts making their rounds.

For the Director, it is more of it missing from the website under test kits than not being in the video. If it was linked to test kits it might get an uptick on sales for them since it is a Alk tester.

So...you are also used to checking torque wrenches for dates eh? ;D

One of the first items QA would always look at when stopping by our plane. Torque wrench dates and if we had our TO or JG.

 

[vangvace]

So...you are also used to checking torque wrenches for dates eh? ;D

One of the first items QA would always look at when stopping by our plane. Torque wrench dates and if we had our TO or JG.

Dates and initials because never make it easy for QA. Though except for a stint supporting -135s, I was ATC Radar maintenance or comm for 20 years.

 

[User1]

Dates and initials because never make it easy for QA. Though except for a stint supporting -135s, I was ATC Radar maintenance or comm for 20 years.

F-15's, RF4C's here, then later C130's before I moved to explosive and ground safety.