ASIC AGAIN!!!

[facthunter]

I LOVE Facts. Bring them on. Nev

[kgwilson]

2 hours ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

It may be designed for it.; but does it achieve it? And is there a better way?

No it achieves nothing apart from an industry and a better way is what the rest of the world does, nothing.

[Ironpot]

On 15/11/2023 at 6:46 PM, Roscoe said:

 

My issue is the private pilot who lands and just wants to go into town to support the community!

 

Serious question: when you park up at an airfield and before you head into town, say Bundaberg for example, exactly how do you secure your aircraft?

[Blueadventures]

52 minutes ago, Ironpot said:

Serious question: when you park up at an airfield and before you head into town, say Bundaberg for example, exactly how do you secure your aircraft?

I have a throttle lock fitted and both doors secured with a lock.

[skippydiesel]

Hatch & ignition lock

[Roscoe]

5 hours ago, Blueadventures said:

I have a throttle lock fitted and both doors secured with a lock.

I seem to recall a law that came in years ago that required all aircraft parked outside had to be disabled by a lock. Piper Warriors have a unique throttle lock arrangement.

Jabirus have a hole in the throttle line through which a padlock can be installed.

[Blueadventures]

8 minutes ago, Roscoe said:

I seem to recall a law that came in years ago that required all aircraft parked outside had to be disabled by a lock. Piper Warriors have a unique throttle lock arrangement.

Jabirus have a hole in the throttle line through which a padlock can be installed.

Agree, years back when I had the Skyfox Ca21 I had to make a throttle lock to maintain the throttle at idle setting with a padlock securing it to meet the requirement.

[Ironpot]

Sure sure and you probably tie the aircraft down too.

 

 But do you never make contact with the ARO when you park-up up at an airfield? Do you just walk out the gate without talking to anyone?

 

If so how do you get the gate code if it’s not displayed?

[facthunter]

Becoming a bit of a "what if " IF you want more certainty, get in touch Prior.   Nev

[Ironpot]

2 hours ago, facthunter said:

Becoming a bit of a "what if " IF you want more certainty, get in touch Prior.   Nev

Sure, ring ahead if you are enquiring about fuel. But I don’t know of an ARO that will give you the gate code without seeing your ASIC. They might just say it’s the CTAF if it is … maybe?

 

My point is that, more than likely, your security for your very valuable  “pride & joy” relies on an ARO doing his job properly whilst you are away.  They shouldn’t be allowing anyone on a Security Controlled airfield without an ASIC. It’s a form of security for your aircraft and pretty cost effective when you think about it.

 

We have one guy on here from Longreach - last time I was in Longreach I had to hold my ASIC up to the camera BEFORE I could LEAVE through the gate and I was bursting for a piss! The ARO is sat in his office 50 yards away!

 

We have another guy on here from Mackay - the ARO there is next to the door of the aircraft as soon as you shut down (Brandon?) Lovely guy, and he wants to see your ASIC straightaway. Then he gives you a card with the current code in exchange.

 

So, if you just want to do circuits around your home paddock then you certainly don’t need an ASIC. But if you want to fly somewhere where you can wander into town and then you have to get back through the gate on your return, then you do need an ASIC. The batshit crazy, MAGA type sovereign citizens raving on here probably don’t fly in the real world so pay no attention to them.

[skippydiesel]

39 minutes ago, Ironpot said:

Sure, ring ahead if you are enquiring about fuel. But I don’t know of an ARO that will give you the gate code without seeing your ASIC. They might just say it’s the CTAF if it is … maybe?

 

My point is that, more than likely, your security for your very valuable  “pride & joy” relies on an ARO doing his job properly whilst you are away.  They shouldn’t be allowing anyone on a Security Controlled airfield without an ASIC. It’s a form of security for your aircraft and pretty cost effective when you think about it.

 

We have one guy on here from Longreach - last time I was in Longreach I had to hold my ASIC up to the camera BEFORE I could LEAVE through the gate and I was bursting for a piss! The ARO is sat in his office 50 yards away!

 

We have another guy on here from Mackay - the ARO there is next to the door of the aircraft as soon as you shut down (Brandon?) Lovely guy, and he wants to see your ASIC straightaway. Then he gives you a card with the current code in exchange.

 

So, if you just want to do circuits around your home paddock then you certainly don’t need an ASIC. But if you want to fly somewhere where you can wander into town and then you have to get back through the gate on your return, then you do need an ASIC. The batshit crazy, MAGA type sovereign citizens raving on here probably don’t fly in the real world so pay no attention to them.

Must be a QLD thing - have flown fairly widely around NSW - ARO? something to do with Robin Hood? - Gates codes? posted on the inside (probably never changed). Can't get in/out the gate ? Walk to the end of security fence (max 50 m) if there is one or say G'day to the folks in a hanger & walk right through.

[facthunter]

I'm not expecting any one could get the code details over the Phone but each place should have a system that works in practice for the users of the facility.   Nev

[kgwilson]

1 hour ago, skippydiesel said:

Must be a QLD thing - have flown fairly widely around NSW - ARO? something to do with Robin Hood? - Gates codes? posted on the inside (probably never changed). Can't get in/out the gate ? Walk to the end of security fence (max 50 m) if there is one or say G'day to the folks in a hanger & walk right through.

Yeah, it must be part of a job creation scheme to justify having such a dumb useless system.

[skippydiesel]

Some law review is happening - News today, a heap of redundant secrecy laws have been/will be struck off the books.

[turboplanner]

1 hour ago, skippydiesel said:

Some law review is happening - News today, a heap of redundant secrecy laws have been/will be struck off the books.

Governments do this on a regular basis, e.g. as penalties change, they get out of line with older laws they apply to, so a decision has to be made on which way to go.

 

It usually starts with bipartison (members from both government and opposition) committees.

In the 47th Parliament which started July 26, 2020 369 Committee Reports have been presented to the Parliament.

 

From those, Bills are developed and voted on in both Houses of Parliament. They are not passed until both the House of Representatives and the Senate votes agree on the suject matter.

 

There are 151 Members of the House of Representatives and 76 Senators.

 

They are fed by 2000 people on the Parliamentary precinct in Canberra when Parliament is not sitting, and 4,000 when Parliament is sitting.

 

Old laws have to be searched and analyised against new bills.

 

Hundreds of thousands of documents are involved.

 

The government of Australia is a Commonwealth combined from six Sovereign State Governments and while it controls two Territories it can't control States, so bills have to be checked against State Legislations before the debate starts.

 

In the period 2013 - 2022 the Australian Parliament has passed 139 bills into law each year. Where necessary old legislation my be superseded.

 

The current government, with a majority in the House of Representatives, but a minority in the Senate has managed to get 154 bills passed since it started; a very good record given the minority in the Senate, and that means a lot of bipartisan support.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[onetrack]

That may be all very well, but what is needed is regular examination of how effective, cost-effective, and functional, various tight controls of the population are - especially long after the situation that led to those (often excessively) tight controls, has changed greatly.

 

One could draw a comparison between the COVID-19 strict controls and the ASIC card controls. Both were introduced when current events were in need of serious action to curb an outbreak that threatened the fabric of our civil society.

 

With regard to COVID-19, it was a rampant spread of a disease that needed serious action taken to limit population movement and thus try to control major outbreaks of disease.

 

With regard to the ASIC card, it was in response to an outbreak of extremist Islamic terrorism that caused the 9/11 event, and which terrorist actions threatened all aviation activity worldwide, where security was non-existent.

 

Now that Islamic terrorism and the groups that promoted it have largely been neutered by both war actions, and the killing and jailing of the vast majority of its promoters, it must to time to re-assess the threats posed to aviation, and to wider society, from that Islamic terrorism threat - due to a massive change in circumstances surrounding the size of the current threat, as compared to 20+ years ago.

[turboplanner]

1 hour ago, onetrack said:

That may be all very well, but what is needed is regular examination of how effective, cost-effective, and functional, various tight controls of the population are - especially long after the situation that led to those (often excessively) tight controls, has changed greatly.

 

One could draw a comparison between the COVID-19 strict controls and the ASIC card controls. Both were introduced when current events were in need of serious action to curb an outbreak that threatened the fabric of our civil society.

 

With regard to COVID-19, it was a rampant spread of a disease that needed serious action taken to limit population movement and thus try to control major outbreaks of disease.

 

With regard to the ASIC card, it was in response to an outbreak of extremist Islamic terrorism that caused the 9/11 event, and which terrorist actions threatened all aviation activity worldwide, where security was non-existent.

 

Now that Islamic terrorism and the groups that promoted it have largely been neutered by both war actions, and the killing and jailing of the vast majority of its promoters, it must to time to re-assess the threats posed to aviation, and to wider society, from that Islamic terrorism threat - due to a massive change in circumstances surrounding the size of the current threat, as compared to 20+ years ago.

I wish you well on that but  5 or 6 people unhappy about security are probably not going to carry a lot of weight in the workloads of those 4,000 workers in Canberra compared with the 1993 petition from 513,445 people for more health care funding or the 2000 petition from 792,985 over taxation and beer prices, or the record 2014 petition from 1,210,471 petition for funding for community pharmacies. Right now the millions of potholes in our roads is generating a bigger and bigger following as people damage their cars.

[skippydiesel]

29 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

I wish you well on that but  5 or 6 people unhappy about security are probably not going to carry a lot of weight in the workloads of those 4,000 workers in Canberra compared with the 1993 petition from 513,445 people for more health care funding or the 2000 petition from 792,985 over taxation and beer prices, or the record 2014 petition from 1,210,471 petition for funding for community pharmacies. Right now the millions of potholes in our roads is generating a bigger and bigger following as people damage their cars.

I take your point about lobbying power (number of votes $$) ie  relative few private pilots have very little. Despite this, I think you are grossly down playing  ("5 or 6") the unpopularity of ASIC amongst private pilots - stick  a few "0" on and you are in the ballpark.

 

Further "5 or 6 people unhappy about security" is just plain wrong. No one participating in this conversation/thread has spoken against security, where & when appropriate. 

 

I and most others understand that even bad legislation, like ASIC, does not have the profile of "potholes" so our chances of getting the legislation removed (as it pertains to small domestic airports) is "Buckley's & none". This should not stop us, our representative bodies & related media (Sport Pilot etc) from taking every opportunity to demand its removal. 

 

There is a principal here - I would ask, why are you, rolling over for an unprovoked (unproven/unnecessary) kicking by the powers that be? 

[turboplanner]

11 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

There is a principal here - I would ask, why are you, rolling over for an unprovoked (unproven/unnecessary) kicking by the powers that be?

I'm not rolling over for it; I'm agreeing with it and I'm agreeing with it for the reasons I've already partially alluded to. I can't say any more publicly and nor can anyone else without putting people's lives at risk. 

[kgwilson]

It seems to me that a lot of decisions by government agencies are made based on a perceived possibility rather than any evidence to suggest the decision is necessary. For example the need for an ASIC card at regional aerodromes. No other country has considered this necessary, not even the US where 911 happened.

 

It's part of the bureaucratic mentality we have here in our public service, more particularly CASA. In the UK a survey of pilots and evidence based information gathering found that a class 2 medical for private pilots was a scam & provided no benefits to safety at all. It just increased bureaucracy and costs so it was scrapped in 2015 with no adverse effects since.

[Markdun]

Yes there is a lot of BBB (bullshit baffles brains) that’s for sure.  But one of the biggest problems is that politicians have this idea that you can never oppose ‘more security’.  However in doing so over the last couple of decades the States and Federal Parliaments have unwittingly put in place the legal infrastructure to destroy our liberal democracy with things like detention without conviction, police powers on ‘prevention’’ (recent convictions of climate activities for refusing to give police access to the phones & computers desire to ground they had committed an offence) secret ‘Star Chamber’ trials, whistleblower convictions, allowing malfeasance in public office and misconduct in public office go without consequence (Robodebt, Hurley/Morrison’s secret ministries), authorising short detention and search without warrant by officers of Home Affairs with the officers in balaclavas and with no requirement to identify themselves etc etc etc etc.

 The one common thing with all these laws is that they are generally ineffective against terrorists or insurrectionists albeit they appear ‘tough’ in appearance, but more importantly they are then used improperly against whistleblowers like Collaery, animal and climate activists or journalists (like the Ffriendlyjordie) etc.

 

 So I agree that we are pissing into the wind if we think the stupid ASIC arrangements. For my sins I once reviewed the Federsl Radcoms Act and the one success I had was abolishing the reqt for pilots and bodies to have a radio operators licence to operate a vhf radio and for each aircraft or boat to have an ‘apparstus licence) to install a vhf radio. At the time compliance with the legislation was less than 2% for aviation and about 40% for marine.  When it was abolished we got heaps of complaints from State govts because volunteer marine rescue organisations lost income training radio operators. No complaints from aviation because they just never complied with the law in the first place.

 

I also mention that the States and Federal govt have ‘Law Reform Commissions’ whose job is to make recommendations to parliament about reforming current legislation (as well as parliamentary committees).  Most Depts/Ministers proposing new legislation or regulations usually have to offer up legislation to abolish (itsits badged  as red tape removal but is bullshit really).  There is no convention about the Opposition not blocking supply. The Constitution prohibits the Senate initiating or amending a money bill.  If there is a convention, it would be that the Senate cannot block a money bill; but if that was the case why has the Constitution given the Senate the power to do so. Related to this, each member of the HoR or the Senate has one vote. So they would only have power if they have a majority if they can negotiate with enough other Senators to form a consensus of a majority of Senators.

[Area-51]

People complaining about potholes should stop complaining, learn to fly and buy an aeroplane, and an ASIC card.

 

Terrorists will not go to any airport with their Office Works box cutter if the airport has a security fence and ASIC airside protection regime installed.

 

We should be grateful for the safety ASIC has provided the community. It obviously works. There have been no terrorist hijackings in Australia since ASIC arrived. So it has proven itself 100% effective.

 

 

[facthunter]

There's many more "Unruly" passenger events these days than there used to be. There's more mental illness about. I'm glad I don't have to fly the big stuff anymore. While in a lot of ways it's safer than it used to be when engines stopped and deicing did little, but the "atmosphere and friendliness is long gone, never to return, I'd expect in a general sense.  Nev

[coljones]

23 minutes ago, Area-51 said:

People complaining about potholes should stop complaining, learn to fly and buy an aeroplane, and an ASIC card.

 

Terrorists will not go to any airport with their Office Works box cutter if the airport has a security fence and ASIC airside protection regime installed.

 

We should be grateful for the safety ASIC has provided the community. It obviously works. There have been no terrorist hijackings in Australia since ASIC arrived. So it has proven itself 100% effective.

 

 

Are you sure that you're not confusing causation and coincidence?

[skippydiesel]

1 minute ago, coljones said:

Are you sure that you're not confusing causation and coincidence?

There was me thinking he was being sarcastic/"tongue in cheek"🙃