Kites in restricted airspace?
Sprucegoose
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Kites in restricted airspace?
Have just been watching the news, where some hippy has been arrested for flying his kite in restricted airspace associated with Baxter Detention Centre.
It got me thinking and I have been looking through the regulations to find justification for this action.
My first instinct would have been that it would have been OK to fly a kite provided it was'nt above 360 ft.(from the depths of my memory)
The best justification I could find in the regs is this one.
I think that is fairly straight forward, does anyone have anything else to add that may justify it either way?
Cheers, HH.
It got me thinking and I have been looking through the regulations to find justification for this action.
My first instinct would have been that it would have been OK to fly a kite provided it was'nt above 360 ft.(from the depths of my memory)
The best justification I could find in the regs is this one.
101.065 Operation in prohibited or restricted area
(1) A person may operate an unmanned aircraft in or over
a prohibited area, or in or over a restricted area, only
with the permission of, and in accordance with any
conditions imposed by, the authority controlling the
area.
Penalty: 25 penalty units.
(1) A person may operate an unmanned aircraft in or over
a prohibited area, or in or over a restricted area, only
with the permission of, and in accordance with any
conditions imposed by, the authority controlling the
area.
Penalty: 25 penalty units.
Cheers, HH.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
260 Manned fixed balloons and kites
(1) Despite regulation 157, a person may fly a fixed balloon or kite at a
height not exceeding 300 feet.
(2) A person must not fly a fixed balloon or kite within 4 000 metres of an
aerodrome or at a height of more than 300 feet if the following
requirements are not satisfied:
(a) the person has CASA’s permission to fly the balloon or kite at
that height;
(b) the flight is in accordance with the terms of that permission.
Penalty: 10 penalty units.
(3) A person flying a fixed balloon or kite must fly it in V.M.C.
Penalty: 10 penalty units.
(4) An offence against subregulation (2) or (3) is an offence of strict
liability.
Note For strict liability, see section 6.1 of the Criminal Code.
(5) This regulation does not apply to an unmanned fixed balloon or kite to
which Part 101 of CASR applies.
(1) Despite regulation 157, a person may fly a fixed balloon or kite at a
height not exceeding 300 feet.
(2) A person must not fly a fixed balloon or kite within 4 000 metres of an
aerodrome or at a height of more than 300 feet if the following
requirements are not satisfied:
(a) the person has CASA’s permission to fly the balloon or kite at
that height;
(b) the flight is in accordance with the terms of that permission.
Penalty: 10 penalty units.
(3) A person flying a fixed balloon or kite must fly it in V.M.C.
Penalty: 10 penalty units.
(4) An offence against subregulation (2) or (3) is an offence of strict
liability.
Note For strict liability, see section 6.1 of the Criminal Code.
(5) This regulation does not apply to an unmanned fixed balloon or kite to
which Part 101 of CASR applies.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Oztrailier
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the intention of flying the kites was to endanger the aircraft used for surveillance of the protesters, then the charging of these loonies was probably quite in order and the issue is none different than any other individual who intentionally endangers the safety of aircraft or aircrew. A kite has the ability to bring a helicopter down in the right circumstances!
I have no doubt that they were to be used for this purpose and this purpose alone........unless they had a real big sucker capable of lifting the detainees out one by one
I have no doubt that they were to be used for this purpose and this purpose alone........unless they had a real big sucker capable of lifting the detainees out one by one
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Malfunction Junction - Spot on !
Just look at these individuals and tell me what job they would be suited for in the real world?
If you guys owned businesses would you employ them?
They are the very reason that there is a small percentage of the workforce that will never be gainfully employed.
Without their government handouts they would cease to function.
Also the kite things were a diversion from the fact that certain members were trying to enter the detention camp or bust people out as they did on a previous occasion.
The cops even had there rapelling gear with grapelling hooks attached as proof.
Great to see the cops standing up to these dregs of society.
These are also the same people from the loony fringe that insist that anyone coming to Australia should be given unfettered rights to live/reside in this country.
Greens senators Kerry Nettle and Senator Bob Brown have argued this case also.
The greens own web site said something along the lines of "anyone coming to Australia 'illegally' should be released after 2 weeks and allowed to join society in Australia with all government assistance" (ie: social security benefits, public housing etc).
So great then Kerry and Bob, why have federal Police or Customs/Immigration at all then guys?
Dont forget, Senator Kerry Nettle got up in the Senate last year and argued the case that Medicare should pay for sex change operations!
Now there's the sort of responsible government we all want!
We dont always like our incumbent govt but imagine if these twits ever got to run the show!!
Talk about the lunatics running the assylum.
Just look at these individuals and tell me what job they would be suited for in the real world?
If you guys owned businesses would you employ them?
They are the very reason that there is a small percentage of the workforce that will never be gainfully employed.
Without their government handouts they would cease to function.
Also the kite things were a diversion from the fact that certain members were trying to enter the detention camp or bust people out as they did on a previous occasion.
The cops even had there rapelling gear with grapelling hooks attached as proof.
Great to see the cops standing up to these dregs of society.
These are also the same people from the loony fringe that insist that anyone coming to Australia should be given unfettered rights to live/reside in this country.
Greens senators Kerry Nettle and Senator Bob Brown have argued this case also.
The greens own web site said something along the lines of "anyone coming to Australia 'illegally' should be released after 2 weeks and allowed to join society in Australia with all government assistance" (ie: social security benefits, public housing etc).
So great then Kerry and Bob, why have federal Police or Customs/Immigration at all then guys?
Dont forget, Senator Kerry Nettle got up in the Senate last year and argued the case that Medicare should pay for sex change operations!
Now there's the sort of responsible government we all want!
We dont always like our incumbent govt but imagine if these twits ever got to run the show!!
Talk about the lunatics running the assylum.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just for information, I believe the Germans were flying kites in the early 1900s to elevations in excess of 30K ft. They'd link many kites at regular intervals along a very long wire.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Granite Belt, Australia
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TIMMEE the government isn't paying them diddley-squat, WE, THE TAXPAYERS OF AUSTRALIA are paying. I agree with you on the rest.
It burns me up when I hear talks of "rights". No one has rights - except the right to persue a goal whether it be good health, a job, hapiness, release refugees, education, etc. That right ceases as soon as it infringes on someone else's "right" to persue something or it breaks the law.
To have a "right" means that someone has to give it. And I'm sick of giving to people who are no use to society.
It burns me up when I hear talks of "rights". No one has rights - except the right to persue a goal whether it be good health, a job, hapiness, release refugees, education, etc. That right ceases as soon as it infringes on someone else's "right" to persue something or it breaks the law.
To have a "right" means that someone has to give it. And I'm sick of giving to people who are no use to society.
What amazes me with these activists is they will generally be the same core group and organisers which will next week campaign in Sydney about ie abortions, then go to Brisbane and protest about trees and then to cap it off 'have a go' in Perth on 'right to die' issues. If you actually went up to most of them and ask them their thoughts on the matter they are protesting you will probably get a very hazy, blank, stupid look.
Next time Woomera or likewise has and INTER period for Storms let them fly their kites.
Next time Woomera or likewise has and INTER period for Storms let them fly their kites.
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking forward to returning to Japan soon but in the meantime continuing the never ending search for a bad bottle of Red!
Age: 69
Posts: 2,971
Received 96 Likes
on
55 Posts
Animalclub; Also, what a lot of the bleaters about 'rights' forget to mention or refuse to acknowledge is that these rights come with responsibilities!
On the subject of the thread; the regs seem to be fairly clear in this regard.....surprisingly.
You only live twice. Once when
you're born. Once when
you've looked death in the face.
On the subject of the thread; the regs seem to be fairly clear in this regard.....surprisingly.
You only live twice. Once when
you're born. Once when
you've looked death in the face.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 760
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.........offensive party ballons
Anybody see any wind in the video clip? how do you fly a kite without wind? What traffic were the party ballons going to disrupt in the restricted zone? 
Registered User **
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Animalclub,
Quote
"It burns me up when I hear talks of "rights". No one has rights - except the right to persue a goal whether it be good health, a job, hapiness, release refugees, education, etc. That right ceases as soon as it infringes on someone else's "right" to persue something or it breaks the law."
I have to disagree with you, Australia is a signatory to the International Human Rights Convention 1948, and whilst the practical application of her policy in this regard is self-serving and indeed may be self-preservation at the most extreme end, those people who come to our shores do indeed have rights, unless Australia wishes to refute her position, which leaves us with a difficult proposition to consider, are we worth it or not, are we a signatory of this accord or not.
I do not see where these immigrants are infringing my right as an Australian/Irishman.
A most cursory glance at the following pages will indicate where Australia has contravened her responsibilities in this regard.
http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/
Specific contravention of individual articles:
http://www.hrweb.org/legal/udhr.html
I have no immediate concern nor support for the rent-a-crowd in many ways it is counter productive, however the problems are a little deeper than that, in particular I do not have a problem personally with initial and "reasonable" detention of migrants where they have disposed of all identification, there has to be due process to identify them, however it is in the particular case of children that frankly makes me mad.
Besides, continued pressure in the last two years on Australian Diplomats in the Hague/EU has forced a silent turnaround by the Howard Government, in such that many Detainees being released into society, and don't tell me that you did not realise this.
Quote
"It burns me up when I hear talks of "rights". No one has rights - except the right to persue a goal whether it be good health, a job, hapiness, release refugees, education, etc. That right ceases as soon as it infringes on someone else's "right" to persue something or it breaks the law."
I have to disagree with you, Australia is a signatory to the International Human Rights Convention 1948, and whilst the practical application of her policy in this regard is self-serving and indeed may be self-preservation at the most extreme end, those people who come to our shores do indeed have rights, unless Australia wishes to refute her position, which leaves us with a difficult proposition to consider, are we worth it or not, are we a signatory of this accord or not.
I do not see where these immigrants are infringing my right as an Australian/Irishman.
A most cursory glance at the following pages will indicate where Australia has contravened her responsibilities in this regard.
http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/
Specific contravention of individual articles:
http://www.hrweb.org/legal/udhr.html
I have no immediate concern nor support for the rent-a-crowd in many ways it is counter productive, however the problems are a little deeper than that, in particular I do not have a problem personally with initial and "reasonable" detention of migrants where they have disposed of all identification, there has to be due process to identify them, however it is in the particular case of children that frankly makes me mad.
Besides, continued pressure in the last two years on Australian Diplomats in the Hague/EU has forced a silent turnaround by the Howard Government, in such that many Detainees being released into society, and don't tell me that you did not realise this.
Last edited by 7gcbc; 28th Mar 2005 at 07:20.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Granite Belt, Australia
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
7gbc
I'll bow to your superior knowledge regarding refugees, but none of it argues with what I said. Read what I said again please.
How do we differentiate between illegal immigrants and refugees? Refugees are invited here (my wife was one of them) whereas illegal immigrants get here anyway they can.
Usually refugees have some documents identifying themselves whereas the people that are locked up in Baxter (did that used to be called El Alamein until we went all PC?) had no means of identification when they arrived making it more difficult for decisions to be made for their stay.
I'm a migrant for heaven's sake.
Sorry HH for the diversion.
I'll bow to your superior knowledge regarding refugees, but none of it argues with what I said. Read what I said again please.
How do we differentiate between illegal immigrants and refugees? Refugees are invited here (my wife was one of them) whereas illegal immigrants get here anyway they can.
Usually refugees have some documents identifying themselves whereas the people that are locked up in Baxter (did that used to be called El Alamein until we went all PC?) had no means of identification when they arrived making it more difficult for decisions to be made for their stay.
I'm a migrant for heaven's sake.
Sorry HH for the diversion.
Registered User **
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"How do we differentiate between illegal immigrants and refugees?"
Thats the crux, The UN is sorely pressed to process these people through authorized refugee camps, and these camps give credence to the people that come from there (valid attendence at one of these camps validates you as a bona fide refugee), however, I agree how do we identify them if they've tossed all their ID overboard on journey here ?
Long Term detention is not an option, a balance must be found between maintaining the family unit, education of the immigrants (remember most of them come from absolute despotic regiemes, so losing the id was not negotiable - their perception of us must at least be better than that ?)
The thing is, irrespective of whether we actually know who they are, we should minimise the detention as a matter of policy, and therein lies another problem, most of the countries these people come from have broken infrastructure, it would require superhuman diplomatic efforts to assess and identify each one, therefore we're back to education, tossing id = bad
There is much hoo-haa in the tabloids (chan 7 9 & 10 - I'm sure most aviation people would agree these media outlets are not so much news as sensationilist) regarding this issue, when in fact , refugee numbers in the last few years are a fraction of what they were in the 70's and 80's, as soon as it becomes a political potatoe, we all lose, the refugees lose because they become impotent and vulnerable pawns, and we lose our world esteem.
Honest answer, is I don't know, but we are signatories, and that makes it incumbent for us to do something.
Its not just a piece of paper.
[edit: and in truth, if they are illegal economic migrants then detention is hugely damaging to them, but these are unlikely to have "lost" their id]
Thats the crux, The UN is sorely pressed to process these people through authorized refugee camps, and these camps give credence to the people that come from there (valid attendence at one of these camps validates you as a bona fide refugee), however, I agree how do we identify them if they've tossed all their ID overboard on journey here ?
Long Term detention is not an option, a balance must be found between maintaining the family unit, education of the immigrants (remember most of them come from absolute despotic regiemes, so losing the id was not negotiable - their perception of us must at least be better than that ?)
The thing is, irrespective of whether we actually know who they are, we should minimise the detention as a matter of policy, and therein lies another problem, most of the countries these people come from have broken infrastructure, it would require superhuman diplomatic efforts to assess and identify each one, therefore we're back to education, tossing id = bad
There is much hoo-haa in the tabloids (chan 7 9 & 10 - I'm sure most aviation people would agree these media outlets are not so much news as sensationilist) regarding this issue, when in fact , refugee numbers in the last few years are a fraction of what they were in the 70's and 80's, as soon as it becomes a political potatoe, we all lose, the refugees lose because they become impotent and vulnerable pawns, and we lose our world esteem.
Honest answer, is I don't know, but we are signatories, and that makes it incumbent for us to do something.
Its not just a piece of paper.
[edit: and in truth, if they are illegal economic migrants then detention is hugely damaging to them, but these are unlikely to have "lost" their id]
Last edited by 7gcbc; 28th Mar 2005 at 07:55.
Just to get back on the topic, the height for kites is 400 ft ( not 300 or 360) and if the airspace was restricted then you would need the approval of the controlling authority for any aviation activity. I don't have access to charts or NOTAMS right now but I do recall that there is a restricted area nearby due to Australian Army activity at Cultana and Pt Lowly. The police (SAPOL or FEDPOL) may have requested a TRA (Temporary Restricted Area) and it would have prevented any aviation activity (including media helicopters and the flying of kites and balloons) unless approved by the controlling authority. Does any one have a current NOTAM?
It appears that the protesters used this knowledge and attempted to fly both balloons and kites in order to divert the attention of the police force while they conducted some mischief elsewhere.
As far as the rights and wrongs of the protesters go, I think that the many thousands of refugees who have gained visas or whatever it is that they require, far outweighs the few that are in Baxter because the authorities cannot establish where they came from. The senator has said that most are awaiting deportation but she can't establish where they belong. Sounds reasonable to me.
It appears that the protesters used this knowledge and attempted to fly both balloons and kites in order to divert the attention of the police force while they conducted some mischief elsewhere.
As far as the rights and wrongs of the protesters go, I think that the many thousands of refugees who have gained visas or whatever it is that they require, far outweighs the few that are in Baxter because the authorities cannot establish where they came from. The senator has said that most are awaiting deportation but she can't establish where they belong. Sounds reasonable to me.
