skippydiesel

I also have a set of Peltor/3M industrial ear muffs, that I converted into an aviation headset, using parts from an army surplus tank headset (had to purchase the mic). Work very well.

So my arguments are weak/distorted are they? - yours claiming some mystical knowledge are factual then? The fines may be a fact, however they present as the paternalistic statement of a weak system - do as I say without question or you will be punished. No justification, no evidence, just the power of the State demanding compliance.

The flaw in your argument is that only people who believe they will pass a security check, apply for one (assuming they actually want one) the bad people will find other ways to gain access/do the dirty. ASIC will not protect you or the public from a person(s) determined to do a bad thing. The downside to having all sorts of persons, not known to each other, (say at an busy Domestic or International airport) wearing an ASIC, is that a baddy with a forgery will be accepted as one of those "not likely to be a threat". Small Domestic airports (RPT's) are more likely to have ground & flight crew, known to each other, making ASIC, once again, superfluous to requirement, a total fraud. With reference to small commuter aircraft (RPT) - As I have pointed out - rather than go to all the trouble to acquire a small aircraft & the skill to fly it into an ADSCA, the baddy need only purchase a ticket, be ushered on to the RPT aircraft, by ASIC wearing ground/flight crew, along with whatever threat they possess. Small regional airport do not have the sort of security found in International airports and many of the aircraft do not separate the flight deck from the cabine.

Seems to me that, despite the "muddy waters" of the various documents referred to , as yet, no one has demonstrated, that an ASIC is a prerequisite to holding a valid GA private pilots license.

So it may be however proof of ID does not require an ASIC - it could be any number of other documents.

61.335 Identity checks (1) CASA may, by written notice given to the holder of a flight crew licence or certificate of validation, require the holder to provide evidence of his or her identity in accordance with paragraph 6.57(1)(a) of the Aviation Transport Security Regulations 2005. The word may implies that the requirement to provide proof of identity is at CASA's discretion ie- might happen / may not. Where does it say that pilot must have an ASIC to hold a valid GA license?

I have had a quick browse through your references - unable to find anything that supports your statement above - please refer to specific document, chapter(s) & page(s). Did notice that if you are a foreign crew member & in uniform no ASIC is required - go figure that one.

Do you have any further information to support this statement?

Turbs; Your generosity knows no bounds🙃 Okay quick browse of the regs: Starts by making the statement ; "Under these regulations, all current pilots must have an aviation security status check. You will also need an aviation security status check if you're applying for a flight crew licence." Followed by; "You need an ASIC if you're flight crew flying at a security controlled airport, or a pilot under the age of 18." After the first catch all statement, goes on to qualify that, by limiting the need for an ASIC to "flight crew flying at a security controlled airport, or a pilot under the age of 18" - seems that if not at a ADSCA or under 18, you don't have to have an ASIC to train for or hold a pilots' license. After the above - no further mention of pilots needing an ASIC, for training or continued holding of a pilot's license. All further references seem to relate only to accessing restricted/security areas of designated airfields. One again mixed messages - I would be truly amazed that an ASIC is required for training or continued use of a pilots' license. As I said my fairly recent GA BFR at a busy non security metropolitan airfield - no mention of ASIC.

Be a pal, help us out Turbs - what does it say about "needing one to do your flight review (GA)."?

Unless this rule has come in the last 18 months (since I did my last GA BFR) my instructor did not, at any time, make any reference to ASIC. It may be an individual flight school requirement but its not law.

"The GPS might be used for flying in a triangle to check the ASI." I always thought you had to do a triangle tp calibrate an ASI, but recently discovered you can just fly back & forth on a straight track & time yourself between set points.

Since when?

Leaving aside the conversational first two paragraphs. Why you should be concerned about ASIC? - as it pertains to minor domestic airports: Try making a safe cross country flight plan, of a good distance (say Sydney Basin to Perth area) which includes fuel stops (I use ULP), the need to sleep (motel or similar) without the need to land at a ADSCA/ASIC airport. It may be just doable, but risks might you have to take (low fuel/pilot exhaustion)? You land at your ADSCA/ASIC airport, only to find there is no one there/intersted in your presence, security is non exist ant. You just might wonder why you went to all that trouble to fill out an intrusive form and pay some dosh for what you don't apparently need. Before ASIC, we had about the same level of security around RPT aircraft, when I took a few business flights, as we do now (Note: around the RPT aircraft not the whole airfield). Why reinvent the wheel? I presume you are a citizen/resident of Australia - why would you not be concerned about a requirement (of any sort) that has been placed on you, that appears to be positively Orwellian? ASIC was "hatched" at a time of hysterical security concerns, in the West, due to the Twin Towers incident (strange that we did not have a similar response to the earlier bombings in Africa, Middle East, etc). I have sympathy for the sentiment of the time and still support the need for good security at International ports and the busier Dometic ports. That the Gov has not pulled back from their initial comprehensive ASIC role out, beggars belief. That we (private pilots) are subject to an unreasonable curtailment of our liberty (access to public airports) is unconscionable. Possessing an ASIC has no aircraft operational function ie it does not have any effect on your conduct of a safe flight to/from a given destination (other than my first point). It will not make you or I a better pilot or the public safe from a bad pilot. It is just about as useful as having an attainment note from your holy person. At best its a flyboy/girl accessory, akin to bling. I have long since had my fill of international flight but for those who still aspir, the banana might just be an attractive but expensive perk.

Moree

Dear Nev, The Donald incites people with lies and hysterical rhetoric. I am amused, that you would seek to "fly of" 😁 on the tangent of such ill founded observations- In short I have answered your charge on this matter - I can say no more.

Yes and supported by real experience and a large number of other commentators. No offence Turbs me old mate but I don't have the benefit of your supposed insider knowledge, that just doesn't seem to reflect pilots experience of ASIC. Just one of several examples: I fly into a north western NSW country ADSCA/ASIC airport, tie my aircraft down in the designated visitor area and then spend 45 minutes failing to find anyone at all, let alone a security person. Exit via unsecured "security" gate - hungry & tired, I get a taxi into town spend the night, taxi back to airport - still not a sole in sight - preflight/depart. Good experience despite the lack of a chat with fellow aviator/security guard/maintenance person/etc.

I regret that you think I may have "recommending people break laws they don't like". To clarify my position on the topic of ASIC; ASIC, as it pertains to small domestic airports is indeed bad legislation/law. How a pilot deals with this reality, is entirely up to them. I am happy to point out the inconsistencies, failures to implement & ridiculousness of this system - how the individual pilot might wish to use this information is, once again, up to them. Culturally, Australians are known to basically ignore bad law - its a feature of our society. Should a pilot wish to express their disdain for ASIC, by vocalising, ignoring, etc, that is their prerogative.

I take the point but a most unfortunate story. On your last sentence "That said everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I have no ill feelings to those that like the ASIC arrangements". I agree wholeheartedly with the "entitled to have their opinion" but "like the ASIC arrangements" - seems to me that "like" is the wrong word - how about acquiesce?

Recommending the breaking of LAWS might attract adverse attention and be on shakey ground for Ian's site Legitimate protest against unreasonable legislation - a cornerstone of a democratic political system. Australians are way too easy going, when it comes to all sorts of legislation that is - unreasonable-without logical foundation-infringements on human rights- infringement on the independence of the court- secrecy - whistle blower -plain stupid, etc etc. I am not sure if its indifference or laziness, that we don't protest the behaviour/direction of our leaders more often and with greater vigour. Those who advocate adherence to a law which has no logical foundation, makes no sense (for small regional airports )is not policed or implemented (in any meaningful way), might want to examine their rationale for such a stand - it would seem to be, the law says "jump", your response - "how high sir" ? a reasonable person would ask "why the order to jump"? We may owe much of our historical wealth to the Merino but there is no need to adopt an ovine view of authority.

Spenaroo- It seems to be there is not so much " fuel injection far easier to work with and repair." as replace the module/part. Repair no longer means what it used to. I have a Ford Ranger - great car BUT the LED lights in the instrument consul are not repairable/replaceable (at least by me). There are about 6 each around the tacho/kph, two have gone crazy, flash all the time - in the past it would have been 10c x 2 incandescent bulbs & 10 minutes max, to replace & good for the next 5-10 years. Now it's about $700 for the whole consul & may be a computer up date (I think I have a way round this bit) no labour $ as will fit myself. The care is coming up to 200,000km - I am advised that I should replace the injectors, not recondition REPLACE!!!! My last diesel - $100/injector for a recondition/recalibrate, Ranger $1K+++/injector & a brain (computer update) on top of that. Technology can be wonderful but it's not always such a big improvement

True however my Dynon has a battery backup that will get me to the nearest airfield (& then some). The big advantage is weight - sooooo much ligter.

I was one - Flew for 10+ years using Speco engine gauges - they were great. In that time I replaced one gauge - no pain in the pocket. Chinese ASI, ALT, Compass, VS - US slip ball (tilt gauge) - all good. US transponder - cost a fortune to replace. Australian transceiver - Great (don't actually know it was made in AU) The reality is that for Day VFR, all the certified stuff is way over specified.

Well I dont - its all glass but there is a degree of "back up" in that I have independent electronic instruments eg iPad, back up GPS, both with own battery supply and transponder, that combined show direction, altitude & ground speed. I am considering the fitting of steam gauge ASI just to be sure.

Terrific BrebdAN - I have always liked the Peltor headsets light, comfortable and good passive noise attenuation. I believe that you can fit any of the cushions, inner foam from the industrial hearing protectors. - I have one set.