ASIC or AVID

[turboplanner]

3 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

Probably 50 plus years since I last flew into a major Victorian airport. 

 

I have always made the point that I support ASIC type security for major airports, both international & doemstic. My "beef" is the application (sort of) to small RPT airports (& even those who no longer have an RPT service).

 

A quick check of ERSA - Essendon does not appear to have any particular rules, other than stating its a Security Controlled Airport, ASIC required. Melbourne/Moorabbin adds words to the effect that All departing passengers will be subject to security screening.😈

The achilles heel in your story Skippy is that the terrorists involved in the light aircraft attacks went out to small fields, did some basic training then launched their attacks.  After that, some Authority,maybe CASA made a requirement for all light aircraft to have secure door locks. I can remember flying for a while with a hole in the door, hole in the fuselage and unlocking a big padlock.

 

The current discovery in Victoria which the Premier and Albo are working on is a timely reminder not to get careless. These people are driven enough to think up new ways, partticularly when people roll out the "easy" signs on social media.

[BurnieM]

In the 18 months I have been going to Shell Harbour, a security controlled field, I have only been asked for my ASIC once.

I did not have one at that stage. Nothing happended; no fine, no leave airside immediately, no report to Police etc etc.

The council officer that asked me knew it was a joke and simply told me to get one.

 

The main point is that ASIC is not a security system.

It is a 'pretend you are doing something about security' psuedo-action to justify a government departments existance.

It literally protects nobody.

 

Edited Sunday at 12:57 AM by BurnieM

[skippydiesel]

30 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

The achilles heel in your story Skippy is that the terrorists involved in the light aircraft attacks went out to small fields, did some basic training then launched their attacks.  After that, some Authority,maybe CASA made a requirement for all light aircraft to have secure door locks. I can remember flying for a while with a hole in the door, hole in the fuselage and unlocking a big padlock.

 

The current discovery in Victoria which the Premier and Albo are working on is a timely reminder not to get careless. These people are driven enough to think up new ways, partticularly when people roll out the "easy" signs on social media.

There is no "achilles heel" - 

 

• If the authorities wanted to make it difficult for an aspiring suicide pilot, to get training , that can be done at the student license stage. I think we all thought ASIC was a reasonable plan, at the time - that time has long passed and yet we continue with this ridiculous system, restricting doemstic pilots access to public airfields - to what practical, beneficial, objective??.
• Australia would have to be very close to the bottom of any terrorist target list, thats if we get onto it at all.  We are just way too insignificant (small fry) on the World stage, too far away and despite are minor involvement in some pretty dodgy Super Power warmongering, have not sufficiently upset the people's likly to be seeking organised revenge. Even if we came up for terrorist discussion, the "bean counters" would dismiss an attack, on the basis of cost & effect.
• As I have repeatedly stated - if a terrorist wanted to attack an RPT aircraft, he/she need only purchase a easily acquired drone. No need to have some compex expensive (in lives, time & money) plan. How would ASIC have any deterrent effect on this type of scenario ???
• By their nature, we  have almost no defence against "Lone Wolf" domestic terror attacks' short of implementing a China type national camera surveillance, ID system. Even then the disaffected will find a way to express their hatred for the system. 
• "These people are driven enough to think up new ways, partticularly when people roll out the "easy" signs on social media." No offence mate but this statement is without a saving grace. You assume, that those who attack the current colonial powers, are without intelligence, innovation & couriage, despite all the evidence to the contrary. Terrorists have demonstrated time & time again, that they are, for the most part, ahead of the authorities with their plans, technology and sheer daring.

 

What "....current discovery in Victoria which the Premier and Albo are working on"  (since when did career politicians work on anything other than getting/maintaining power?) are you referring to the Sydney caravan containing explosives?

😈

[facthunter]

You sound like a "Sky informed" troll. We ELECT our politicians. Most of them are honest hard working people.. as good (or better) than comparable countries.. Nev

[turboplanner]

2 hours ago, skippydiesel said:

 

 

• If the authorities wanted to make it difficult for an aspiring suicide pilot, to get training , that can be done at the student license stage.

The Asic card does that. If someone is noticed wandering around a light airctraft doing a preflight or putting packages into it, the Asic card immediately identifies the person has been checked out by Federal police rather than having to detain the person for hours getting checks made.

2 hours ago, skippydiesel said:

• I think we all thought ASIC was a reasonable plan, at the time - that time has long passed and yet we continue with this ridiculous system, restricting doemstic pilots access to public airfields - to what practical, beneficial, objective??.

There are current threats, why would we do a Neville Chamberlain?

2 hours ago, skippydiesel said:

• Australia would have to be very close to the bottom of any terrorist target list, thats if we get onto it at all.  We are just way too insignificant (small fry) on the World stage, too far away and despite are minor involvement in some pretty dodgy Super Power warmongering, have not sufficiently upset the people's likly to be seeking organised revenge.

That's your asessment, but how about this: "..... also known as ......returned from .......late last month and is again extolling the virtues of jihad at the  .........  Islamic Information Centre in ................

The location is an innocemt looking suburb in Melbourne with dozens of restaurants, mostly Chinese, Laotian amd Vietnamese.

or

And when they are caught by Fed police: ".........who is serving 15 years jail for planning a terrorist attack in Melbourne."

 

Or the graduate of the learning centre who lured Vic Police to a site and opened fire on them, luckily being shot dead by Police.

 

There's been a steady stream of potential terrorists around Australia for decades.

2 hours ago, skippydiesel said:

• As I have repeatedly stated - if a terrorist wanted to attack an RPT aircraft, he/she need only purchase a easily acquired drone.

They've done that overseas, using shoulder-fire missiles, but they can do that from outside the perimeter of the airport.

2 hours ago, skippydiesel said:

• By their nature, we  have almost no defence against "Lone Wolf" domestic terror attacks

The ASIC process does protect us in lone wolf attacks. Overseas , where ones and twos of terrorist showed up at training airfields and asked for training and no questions were asked even when they said they didn't need to do landings. They were given training no questions asked, they learned how the aircraft could be accessed (the no keys, she's OK, Let's Go! method) they loaded their aircraft and they attacked their targets. .

 

In those cases the instructors either echoed the sentiments we're reading,where people don't think a terrorist would ever come to their airport, or that arabic people saying they didn't need to be taught to land were just a bit of fun or whatever lame excuse they came up with.   If it was Australia, with an ASIC airfield and there was a security protocol being followed by everyone on the field, those terrorists would not have passed the ASIC screening so not allowed to be trained, so the attacks wouldn't have occurred.

2 hours ago, skippydiesel said:

What "....current discovery in Victoria which the Premier and Albo are working on"  (since when did career politicians work on anything other than getting/maintaining power?) are you referring to the Sydney caravan containing explosives?

😈

Yes, it might not tickle your fancy, but Australia is a commonwealth of six sovereign states and two territories, so there are issues to be discussed and arrangements to be made when joint action is needed.

 

I've just answered your series of scenarios, but in reality the threats and reactions might be quite different, but the ASIC card cost is less than an hour's flying for most people.  

[440032]

When I worked (sorry, "was employed") in a "secure facility" we would often have non ASIC wearing suits come through, escorted by managers. No ASIC, No VIC on the visitors. Sometimes Senators, other politicians, etc.

Then at XMAS we'd have some disguised flog in a Santa suit come through carrying his sack of who knows what, ACME dynamite, escorted by managers. No ASIC, No VIC.

Photos can be found online of Santa up in the tower, out on the tarmac, and photos of everyone from the PM down can be found online, inside and outside "secure" hangars, rubbing shoulders with The Leprechaun etc. Not an ASIC or VIC in sight.

Yes security is so important. Except by those tasked with enforcing it. I am actually not eligible for an ASIC because I do not meet the Operational Need criteria by requiring frequent access to all or part of a secure airport.

 

My wife's mandatory photo ID card for her work in a public hospital does not have her surname printed on it - for security reasons! 

Edited Sunday at 04:15 AM by 440032

[skippydiesel]

2 hours ago, turboplanner said:

The Asic card does that. If someone is noticed wandering around a light airctraft doing a preflight or putting packages into it, the Asic card immediately identifies the person has been checked out by Federal police rather than having to detain the person for hours getting checks made.

As I said, a sledgehammer to crack a non existent nut.  Security check, at the point of application for student licence,  would be all that is needed to reduce the chance of an ill intended person,  learning to fly, for the purpose of conducting a terrorist attack- ASIC not required

There are current threats, why would we do a Neville Chamberlain?

Neville Chamberlain was trying to placate a proven murderous dictator, who had already invaded another country or two. If he has succeeded, he would be a hero. He tried and failed. History has dealt harshly with him ever since. - I doubt an ASIC of the day, would have had any impact, one way or the other, any more than it does now - very poor analogy.

That's your asessment, but how about this: "..... also known as ......returned from .......late last month and is again extolling the virtues of jihad at the  .........  Islamic Information Centre in ................

The location is an innocemt looking suburb in Melbourne with dozens of restaurants, mostly Chinese, Laotian amd Vietnamese.

or

And when they are caught by Fed police: ".........who is serving 15 years jail for planning a terrorist attack in Melbourne."

Or the graduate of the learning centre who lured Vic Police to a site and opened fire on them, luckily being shot dead by Police.

What is this departure into racial/religious  BS? 

There's been a steady stream of potential terrorists around Australia for decades.

"Terrorism",  the killing of innocents, to make some perverted point, has been with us since the dawn of man - ASIC somehow prevents this? You can not be that naive.

Domestic terror incidents, are primarily a problem of our cities. Most often involving the use of ground based vehicles and/or firearms legitimately or otherwise procured,  not small RPT airports.

They've done that overseas, using shoulder-fire missiles, but they can do that from outside the perimeter of the airport.

Thank you for supporting my contention that a bad person need only use a remotely controlled/launched device, to take down an airliner from outside the insecure ASIC compound.

The ASIC process does protect us in lone wolf attacks. Overseas , where ones and twos of terrorist showed up at training airfields and asked for training and no questions were asked even when they said they didn't need to do landings. They were given training no questions asked, they learned how the aircraft could be accessed (the no keys, she's OK, Let's Go! method) they loaded their aircraft and they attacked their targets. .

Unless you are referring to the Twin Towers etc attack, continued activity of this sort, sounds like Urban Myth and even if remotely true, ASIC is a sledgehammer, to do what a security check, at student license application, would do to reduce the risk of bad people obtaining pilot training, who then go on to commit a suicide attack/hijack an aircraft.

In those cases the instructors either echoed the sentiments we're reading,where people don't think a terrorist would ever come to their airport, or that arabic people saying they didn't need to be taught to land were just a bit of fun or whatever lame excuse they came up with.   If it was Australia, with an ASIC airfield and there was a security protocol being followed by everyone on the field, those terrorists would not have passed the ASIC screening so not allowed to be trained, so the attacks wouldn't have occurred.

You do crap on with your racist mumbo-jumbo. ASIC is not working at any airfield I have visited. Even if it was applied, there are not the trained personnel, money to fund it, so even without a shred of evidence as to its need or efficacy, it would still fail.

Yes, it might not tickle your fancy, but Australia is a commonwealth of six sovereign states and two territories, so there are issues to be discussed and arrangements to be made when joint action is needed.

 Your point??? ASIC is, I believe, a Federal initiative, in line with most aviation policy - this does  legitimise its continued application.

I've just answered your series of scenarios, but in reality the threats and reactions might be quite different, but the ASIC card cost is less than an hour's flying for most people.

You have answered, but not addressed single point. Your tangential  statements, lapsing into racial/religious ramblings, suggest failure to comprehend and or unsubstantiated paranoia .

the ASIC card cost is less than an hour's flying for most people.

Now we come to the point.

You have no ethical objection, that ASIC , a failed policy,  continues to be imposed on AU domestic recreation/private licences holders, for no good reason,  just because you can afford to pay for it ???????. Shame on you 😈

[dlegg]

So a touring RAA pilot needs an asic to land at a sec controlled airstrip to refuel and take off again. When applying for asic an RAA pilot is discouraged from applying as deemed not necessary. What to do, what to do...

[skippydiesel]

29 minutes ago, dlegg said:

So a touring RAA pilot needs an asic to land at a sec controlled airstrip to refuel and take off again. What to do, what to do...

Yes, however it is technically possible to arrange for an escort. Never actually heard of it being done. I would anticipate that such a request may attract a cost, range from zero, if helpful local pilot looks after you, to call out fee, for security (caretaker?) to attend. 

 

Alternative - take the risk that you won't be challenged/get into strife.  It's about 3-4 years since I did any "away trips"  (NSW) - not an official of any description in sight, when I landed at so called Security Controlled Airports. WARNING; This comment is far from a comprehensive survey - I may have just been lucky.

 

In the 5 years I held an ASIC - not once was I asked for it (I understand this is a common experience). After initial wearing phase had worn off, due to lack of interest, carried it in aircraft, never wore it again.

 

"When applying for asic an RAA pilot is discouraged from applying as deemed not necessary."

By whom?

When applying, you must demonstrate your need for an ASIC - Intent to tour, need for fuel access & rout safety, it seem to me you have a persuasive reason.

[tillmanr]

You need one if you require frequent unescorted access. Emphasise which part is you. 

[spacesailor]

Above the law people .

He is the " Kings " representative..

spacesailor

[Arron25]

4 hours ago, dlegg said:

So a touring RAA pilot needs an asic to land at a sec controlled airstrip to refuel and take off again. When applying for asic an RAA pilot is discouraged from applying as deemed not necessary. What to do, what to do...

I was led to believe , that AS LONG as you did not leave AIRSIDE, you did not need an ASIC... Ie Land.. refuel.. leave  (no toilet break etc.) was perfectly acceptable

[skippydiesel]

8 hours ago, Arron25 said:

I was led to believe , that AS LONG as you did not leave AIRSIDE, you did not need an ASIC... Ie Land.. refuel.. leave  (no toilet break etc.) was perfectly acceptable

This is a new slant for me.

The constant, in this discussing, is confusion and multiple interpretation. This likly continues to the airport staff (if any can be found). 

To some extent can be explained by the apathy/disinterest of the authorities to actually enforce this ridiculous policy.

I would like to think that ASIC is sliding from its current semi conscious state,  to its  death. Unfortunatly thats not the way this sort of legislation disappears - it just takes one incident at home /aboard and a keen politician, lusting for the limelight, for the whole unfortunate program thing to be resurrected.😈

[BurnieM]

I believe that the primary justification for the ASIC was to stop unauthorised persons from being airside in any capacity at a security controlled field.

 

Yet you can land, taxi and walk from the apron to the toilet with almost no chance (once in 18 months) of being intercepted.

We have fences but limited checks there are no holes. Manual locks on gates with no recording of who used them. Almost no patrols of apron areas.

 

All because nobody, not Home Affairs, not airfield owners (mainly councils) and certainly not CASA wants to fund it.

But lets hit users for $300 every 2 years for something we know is ineffective.

 

 

[skippydiesel]

"I believe that the primary justification for the ASIC was to stop unauthorised persons from being airside in any capacity at a security controlled field."

Agreed & seemed reasonable at the time (2011/12)

Ill-conceived , from the start, the main criteria,  RPT airports,  were  the only ones considered. These could have as little as one or two flights a day (possibly less). While non RPT airfields like Bankstown/Sydney may have hundreds/day were not included - make any sense???

"All because nobody, not Home Affairs, not airfield owners (mainly councils) and certainly not CASA wants to fund it."

No rational person or authority wants to fund an ineffectual program - The "crime" here is not the initial good intent of the legislation but that it continues long after everyone  has realised its without merit.

"But lets hit users for $300 every 2 years for something we know is ineffective."

Seems rational to me - If you don't want to fund it or get rid of it, get someone else to pay, at least for the basic running cost of the life support system😈

[turboplanner]

Enough amazing stories here to write a book.

 

If you want to find out exact details, contact Department of Home Affairs, Cyber & Infrastructure Security Centre.

 

 

[skippydiesel]

18 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

Enough amazing stories here to write a book.

 

If you want to find out exact details, contact Department of Home Affairs, Cyber & Infrastructure Security Centre.

 

 

Something that seems to elude you Turbs -

 

All bureaucracies have a vested interest in inflating their own importance. They are effectively in competition with every other department for funding. Our security services are no diffrent in this regard. For this reason alone their commentary, on something like ASIC is suspect (thats if they even care to comment on such an insignificant failed policy.)

Unlike you  ( all knowing person), I can only speculate from a recreational pilots view and an retired employee, of almost 30 years service in a bureaucracy;

• Safety & Security are wonderful vote/funding vehicles, for both politicians and bureaucracies. Unfortunatly they have a significant downside - very hard to pull back/rescind, once enacted, no matter how hysterical, inaccurate, wrong, the initial reason (possibly the best large scale example, in recent history, would be the Iraq War/Weapons of Mass Destruction - killed many thousands, destabilised the Middle East and incentivised  a whole new generation of radicals against the West - top job! ).

 

When it comes to ASIC, AS APPLIED TO SMALL REGIONAL RPT AIRFIELDS, the evidence is well and truly there, for any pilot/ intersted person to see - its complete failure, BUT it continues for the above reasons - its in the too hard basket.😈

 

 

 

[gareth lacey]

In 12 years of having an asic card never asked by anyone except the dickhead at ballina flew into bunderberg,dalby,toowoomba mackay,lismore,coffs,cessnock, many times also flew into ballina many more times abd never encounted the dxxxxhead again,its a poorly policed and its just revenue for a private co

[turboplanner]

1 hour ago, skippydiesel said:

Something that seems to elude you Turbs -

 

All bureaucracies have a vested interest in inflating their own importance. They are effectively in competition with every other department for funding. Our security services are no diffrent in this regard. For this reason alone their commentary, on something like ASIC is suspect (thats if they even care to comment on such an insignificant failed policy.)

Unlike you  ( all knowing person), I can only speculate from a recreational pilots view and an retired employee, of almost 30 years service in a bureaucracy;

• Safety & Security are wonderful vote/funding vehicles, for both politicians and bureaucracies. Unfortunatly they have a significant downside - very hard to pull back/rescind, once enacted, no matter how hysterical, inaccurate, wrong, the initial reason (possibly the best large scale example, in recent history, would be the Iraq War/Weapons of Mass Destruction - killed many thousands, destabilised the Middle East and incentivised  a whole new generation of radicals against the West - top job! ).

 

When it comes to ASIC, AS APPLIED TO SMALL REGIONAL RPT AIRFIELDS, the evidence is well and truly there, for any pilot/ intersted person to see - its complete failure, BUT it continues for the above reasons - its in the too hard basket.😈

 

 

 

I just knew you had to be a bureaucrat Skippy.

Problem is they are not going to tell you what they do or how they do it.

As and example an official rocked up to work one day and asked if I could identify a white truck from a witness description. A crie had been committed and they would normally know which truck they were after but a crucial piece of infrastructure was out of order that day. I mentioned that was looking for a "White Male" but that didn't get me anywhere. As I asked question after question it was clear he wasn't going to give up. I asked to talk to the witness and he told me the witness would likely be killed if that happened. Around the fourth hour I'd whittled it down from 560,000 to about 40,000 and asked him if he was prepared tp have people speak to each person. He said Yes, it was that important. After another couple of hours we got it down to ten and a person to talk to. A couple of weeks later he made the newsmedia standing in front of the truck in a major multi-State arrest.   No one in the area had any idea any of this was happening.

[skippydiesel]

If , ""they are not going to tell you what they do or how they do it." how on earth do YOU know????

 

Forgive me Turbs , this is your paranoid "Achilles heel" at least I am working from experince, & logical argument.

 

I think I will leave the debate, for the moment, even I get tired of repetition and circular argument😈

[facthunter]

You are like a stuck record skip. Rather than keep going on about it  here, why don't you direct your attention to rectifying the FAULTS in the current application (REVIEW). You'd likely get support for that sort of approach .  Nev

[onetrack]

What Skip is better off doing is approaching his Federal MP and asking if a review of the ASIC system is overdue, and whether the ASIC system is still RELEVANT to todays world.

 

All security systems need a regular re-assessment to determine whether they have developed security holes, or whether new threats have emerged that aren't being addressed, and how much of previously-identified threats still exist.

 

There's little to stop a determined evildoer acquiring a fake ASIC card and presenting himself airside to do damage. That's probably the weakest part of the whole ASIC system.

 

The secret to security is having people around who are alert to new people appearing, who shouldn't be in critical locations, and those alert people acting on their suspicions. 

 

90% of crimes are solved by some member of the public becoming suspicious of unusual activity, and alerting authorities or providing vital evidence.

[Moneybox]

6 hours ago, skippydiesel said:

( all knowing person),

 

 

 

 

The most striking thing I got from this whole conversation was the lack of an acronym for the above comment. 🤣

[facthunter]

O P Omniscient Person. GOD is omniscient.  Nev

[BurnieM]

https://www.australianflying.com.au/the-last-minute-hitch/the-last-minute-hitch-31-january-2025

 

Lets get those submissions in !