skippydiesel

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.😈

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.

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? 😈

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.😈

In a previous ASIC debate, there was a photo of a airport no entry warning sign , If I remember correctly, the posted fine for entry without an ASIC, was $5,000Au. So now we have the fear factor being used to dissuade non ASIC holders from accessing a public airfield, while the authorities fail to sell their ridiculous, ineffectual, pretty much unsupervised/policed, policy to the flying fraternity. It's called using a sledgehammer to crack a non existent nut 😈

Djpaco - There is no law about a PIC of an aircraft, bing unable to land at a public airport. To do so would be a contravention of the authority of PIC, a very long standing convention. From a security point of view, what difference is there in a pilot being escorted to/from his aircraft and his passenger(s)? You are reading into ASIC regulations, things that are not there. As recreational / private pilots, we should be doing everything we can to have this ridiculous, ineffective system disbanded 😈

Ha! Ha Ha! - I do not know of anyone, in my aviation sphere, who has an ASIC - there must be joke in this somewhere😈

This (& its ilk) are the perfect product, bit like an addictive drug, the more you use, the more you need to use it If you must use an abrasive, I strongly recomend extreme moderation😈

A work of art , no doubt! Is it practical? We have metal & composite alternatives, that are usually lighter, a lot more durable, require less maintenance and likly more efficient.😈

Unless the rules have changed - I do not think you are correct. An aircraft , no matter how small, can land/takeoff, at a non towered (most have no tower) public airfield/port - no prior permission is required (most often no one to give/withhold it anyhow). The crew (pilot & passenger(s) do not need an ASIC until they get out of the aircraft. If one of the crew has an ASIC, they can escort the remainder to/from the aircarft. If no one has an ASIC, they can be escorted by any ASIC holder (security/other pilot/etc). In most instances they can alight, go about their business at the leisure, without challenge - as it should be. As for the rules?? It's not about what a person (pilot) can get away with, its the failure of the authorities to promote/police/fund an unworkable system - Have you not noticed how many rules/regulations are not observed/prosecuted/policed in Australia - we are weighed down with obsolete regulation. Obsolete because it has little or no merit/purpose/,meaningful objective or gain. 😈

Maaate! Number points (can expand if you wish): In my limited experience - pre ASIC security, was already being practised by RPT personnel at rural airports. It was good then, no better now. ASIC adherence, by airport owners/managers/staff (non airline), is very poor at best . The few Security Controlled Airfield I have flown into, had no one, let alone a security person on duty. Most had hangers, open to public on one side, walk through to airside on other. Some had security fences that ended within sight of public access. Others have security gates, with the gate code displayed for all to see. I have seen open terminal buildings, without a sole in sight, etc etc A number of very busy airfield around the country, have no significant security, eg Camden, Cowra (not sure about Bankstown) whos aircraft movements per day, likly exceed most regional airfield, for the a month or more. Want to hijack a turboprop - go to a busy non security controlled airport. ASIC does not prevent an ill intentioned person from attacking an aircraft - technological alternatives (drones) are readily available - bad person just needs to be within range (well outside boundary). Despite extraordinary security (military & police) in N Ireland, the IRA was able to lob mortar shells, at one of the major airports, from outside the secure zone - an ASIC type system would have been a joke then and is now. Airport security is not 24/7 at most rural airports ASIC screening is flawed - look at the baggage handler/drug importation debacle at Sydney. ASIC does not prevent a pilot from landing/taking off - only from wandering around IF there happened to be a security person on duty (rare). Its questionable weather ASIC has any significant beneficial security impact on passengers & baggage being loaded at a regional airport. It also questionable that Australian domestic airports & aircraft are of any interest to the bad people - unlike Europe & USA, who don't have ASIC type regulations (for minor airports). I suggest that international (other country) terrorism could not care less about Australia, would not get out of bed for a regional airports/RPT Domestic terrorism is focused on & within our major population areas. It seems clear that a number of regional airport owners (Councils) have sort to abstain from ASIC - this has been blocked by the regional airline threatening to withhold service, if ASIC not maintained. ASIC has increased the cost of operating regional airports. This cost has been passed on to commercial operators - passengers, for no discernable gain. ASIC is just a CROCK of --------! It was a reasonable knee jerk reaction, when commissioned , in response to the Twin Towers attack, but should have been ditched long ago.😈

If this is so, it's a relativly recent (?) requirement 😈

Not as I understand it (from Forum commentary). It would seem that a pilot, without an ASIC, accessing Security Controlled Airport, can make arrangements to be escorted to/from his aircraft by an ASIC holder. Of course this service may not be fortcomming, if available - will involve added communication, reduce flexibility (escort may only be available at set times duration) could incur a fee. As I keep saying ASIC (for small regional Airports) is a waste of money (for the pilot & airport operators), ineffective, a potential safety issue (non ASIC pilots avoiding airfield they would like to use)institutionalised Government bullying without cause and all round vessel of excrement, without a single saving grace.

The Editor of Sport Pilot, is (to my mind) delivering his usual inaccurate reporting; THE FLOATPLANE THAT SAVED A NATION In the second paragraph, of this otherwise entertaining retrospective, he defines the descriptive terms for aircraft that can land/takeoff on water; "Just for the record, a floatplane is, well, a plane with floats attached instead of a normal undercarriage. A seaplane has a boat-like hull that floats ......" I have always understood, that an aircraft specifically designed for marine landings/takeoffs, with a boat like hull, is a 'FLYING BOAT". The term "seaplane" describes an aircraft modified, by attaching floats, to what would otherwise be a land based aircraft, to enable it to land on water "Floatplane" is an American term for a seaplane. Semantics for sure but just one more example of our media adopting (without much thought) American terminology, for no good purpose other than to deepen the cultural undermining of the Australian way of life😈

Hi Turbs, I am impressed by the durability of your FRP examples. I am now more curious; Does the type of "damage" suggest the type/quality of the composite? eg Jabs out in the weather look a little dull, but seem to be structurally sound. Can the surface damage be categorised into surface only - indication of deeper problems? With Ninja - I understand that the fuselage is made up of composite panels over an alloy frame, so it's likly that any composite deterioration, is more of an esthetic than a safety issue?

I back your guess - It may be that the Australian flying world could be divided; CPL- All active CPL holders likly to have an ASIC (tax deductible?) GA Student Pilots - most have ASIC GA - Depends on if they regularly fly from/ to a Security Controlled Airport and if those Airports actually enforce the ridiculous ASIC regulations RAA - For the most part neither students or Pilots will have ASIC (similar to above)😈

I am curious about the term Oxidised as used in " Oxidised Fiberglass" Does this really mean that the surface of the composite/gelcoat? has reacted/combined with O2? OR Is it just a descriptor, meaning the surface is dull, may have a powdery texture , some yellowing, all of which may have been caused by some other factor eg UV exposure ?😈

Thanks All, Air inlet/box/filter & new cuffs all installed. Test fly at earliest opportunity. Thanks Thruster - Gap between air box & carburettor flange less than 5mm. I don't anticipate any negative impact from hose being "sucket in" a little. I have left a small fold in the cuff, at/in the above gap to facilitate relative movement. Static testing (moving carb or airbox ) seems to indicate idea is working. The previous cuff was 2" ID fuel hose, relatively (to the SCAT, less wire) stiff/unyielding.😈

Hi Underwood, Assuming that you have no reason to suspect structural damage due to weathering, it seems to me that you have a couple of choice; Just keep it clean, as appearance will likly have little impact on performance. When sale time comes around, use a renovating (abrasive) polish to restore good looks for best presentation/price. Use renovating polish now, followed by regular (non abrasive) polishing, to keep aircraft looking "spiffy" Use renovating polish on a regular basis (as some have advised) and put $$ away in a saving account for a full respray/re gel coat in a few years time. All the best 😈

I would like to see a test of the BM, using a propeller, operating from idle to say 3000 rpm (to accommodate Jabs). 😈

For stock work, riding a horse is safer. The horse is watch where it is going, while the rider watches the stock - teamwork!😈

Disclosure - I could not view the whole video, dreadfully slow/dreary delivery and several factual errors, near the start, put me off. The video confirms that MOGAS is just one more US derived name for automotive petrol. Would seem to be quite generic ie is not limited to a particular type/blend/standard, other than having an AKI of 91 - speculation; may have been invented/created by a fuel company marketing department. For the most part the video is not applicable to Australia, its climate/terrain and fuel types.😈

True! Oh Lord of the Vibe. I have a Dynavibe - good for minimising the ips & calibrating the tacho. Still I would revert to Rotax speak, when commenting on engine operating Are you suggesting, referring to Dynavibe, that you have used this device to prove & measure the effectiveness of a Balance Master. ?😈

Fair comment. Hower it is customary, when talking Rotax, to quote engine rpm. The prop & gear box, being driven by the engine, will do their thing, as long as the engine delivers the rpm's🤪 I do not know of an aircraft, fitted with a Rotax, that reports/shows prop rpm - may exist somewhere but why? Direct drive engined can be quoted in prop or engine rpm - there being no (discernible 🤣) difference.😈