GA Gate

[youngmic]

Traffic is er was,

Re. ASIC

It only denotes that you have undergone a standardised identity check. (It's what the "I" means). It has no authorisation purpose at all. You are required to demonstrate a need to be in an area requiring identification by ASIC card as well. That is a point that is often misunderstood by ASIC holders.

As an ASIC holding pilot my reason for being airside is largely any reason I deem legitimate and justifiable. This could include, I wanted to pick up that empty chip packet blowing across the apron or I wanted to see what ply tyres the owner of the Mooney parked over yonder has chosen to use.



Airports...places where pilots land and take off in their aircraft, they weren't built so some folks could find something seemingly meaningful to fill in there day guarding. That came along after when we realised it may be of benefit at some airports.

That is a point that is often misunderstood by some airport caretakers.

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

As an ASIC holding pilot my reason for being airside is largely any reason I deem legitimate and justifiable.

It's not actually, it's the airport operator who is required by law to apply and enforce access control, so it is up to them to decide if your reason is legitimate or justifiable. If they don't consider it either, you'll be the one explaining yourself to the higher authorities.
Airports operate under rules and regs just as much as pilots do. Just like you, they may not want to, but they have to. That is a point that is almost always misunderstood by some pilots, who seem to think that they get to pick and choose which rules and regs apply to them.

[Awol57]

The regs actually state Lawful reason. I have no idea what the actual definition of Lawful is, but I am sure there is a definition somewhere.

[Jabawocky]

Beachie spot on mate.

And YSGE now has crap gates and codes.....due hoons on the strip at night. Or some other good reason.

50% pilot decline in 5 years. I may not be a pilot by Friday :-0

[youngmic]

Traffic is er was or someone else able to post the law referred to here?

It's not actually, it's the airport operator who is required by law to apply and enforce access control, so it is up to them to decide if your reason is legitimate or justifiable.

I cannot imagine a police officer removing me from airside as a pilot bearing an ASIC. More likely the airport officer calling the police in to enforce such a law (if it exists) would likely find him or herself looking for a new job in the near future.

Awol57

The regs actually state Lawful reason. I have no idea what the actual definition of Lawful is, but I am sure there is a definition somewhere

.

Law can be complex but I would hazard a guess that it would mean something that in itself is not illegal.

[YPJT]

I also agree with Beech King,
Having the code somewhere where it can only be viewed from airside, is changed regularly and is accessed relatively easily by pilots has proven the best way to go.

Sorry Sunfish, the CTAF is not a code, except for the lasiest of airport operators. Surprised the regulator lets them get away with it.

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

Laws? Have a wade through the Aviation Transport Security Regs.

I cannot imagine a police officer removing me from airside as a pilot bearing an ASIC.

I can, if you don't have a legitimate reason for being there. Just being a pilot (or anyone else) with an ASIC does not make you authorised.

From the Regs:

unauthorised person, in relation to a place or thing, means a person who:
(a) is not authorised by the owner or person in control of the place or thing to have access to the place or thing; and
(b) has no other lawful reason to have access to the place or thing.

So if the "owner or person in control of the place or thing" considers you not authorised, and since they are legally required to

...control access at the airport...

and must

...deter and detect unauthorised access into the airside area by people.....

I guess they could have you removed.

find him or herself looking for a new job in the near future.

Probably standing beside the pilot looking for a new job after his boss fired him for losing his access privileges, or for having his ASIC withdrawn for misuse.

[The name is Porter]

youngmic, don't argue with ex government workers on defined benefits. They have no concept of how the real work functions. They are a big part of the nanny state and love rules and regulations.

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

I take it that that shot was aimed at me, and yes while I have worked for the government, it was 25 years ago. I have not worked for the government for far longer than I ever did. I have, however, worked in aviation all my life and it is an industry that is defined by rules and regulations. I'm not saying that I like all of them, or that I think some are ridiculous or not, but I don't get to pick and choose which ones apply to whatever task is at hand, so if I choose to ignore one and get nailed for it, the problem is mine. Some posters can whinge all they want, but all they come across as is petulant and self-entitled.

[youngmic]

youngmic, don't argue with ex government workers on defined benefits. They have no concept of how the real work functions. They are a big part of the nanny state and love rules and regulations.

Can't argue with that.

Probably standing beside the pilot looking for a new job after his boss fired him for losing his access privileges, or for having his ASIC withdrawn for misuse.

The only person that I know to ever have an ASIC pulled (for not wearing/displaying) had a temporary ASIC issued by the same office within a few hours to cover the period his ASIC was suspended.

Gold!!

[mostlytossas]

Agree with Sunfish entirely. If introduced it would be yet another cost borne by the user (pilots). In any case it is totally unnecessary and like purchasing a hammer to crack an egg. Simply putting the gate code airside as is done at many country airports is all that is required.In fact with a bit of imagination it could even be on the public side too in case you forget to write it down.eg "for access enter the local PAL freq" or area,ctaf,NDB etc and even rotate them often.Any pilot will know what it is but the general public not a clue.

[Cloudee]

Ceduna had a good system for visiting pilots last time I was there. You put in any four numbers to get out and then those same four numbers will work again just once to let you back in.

[Capt Fathom]

It is just so typical of the over-regulation we suffer in this country. Everyone wants a piece of us, and everyone else wants to put us in our place.

We are no longer the lucky country! It is appalling.

[ICDIT]

Originally Posted by neville_nobody

Surely the cheapest and easiest solution would be to RFID ASIC cards with a scanner at the GA gate. If needs be you just activate your card prior to departure and it has 24 hours access. To go write an App then to put it on a phone to then charge people to use seems a bit excessive.

neville_nobody you're correct and if that was possible then the situation would fix itself. However due to bureaucracy, which appears to be the center of most comments, there are at last count 46 issuing authorities plus 9 issuing airports and each have their own issuing requirements.Hence the challenge.

[youngmic]

Originally Posted by Cloudee

Ceduna had a good system for visiting pilots last time I was there. You put in any four numbers to get out and then those same four numbers will work again just once to let you back in.

Such a shame they went and locked the terminal to all but REX. Sometime after doing that they demolished the old but functioning toilet block out the back. Sometime after this they realised there was now no toilet out side the locked terminal. So they quickly slapped 3 sheets of old colour bond to the back of the shiny new terminal to tap into its plumbing. The bare concrete floor runs wet from the hastily plumbed in plastic basin, there is no light as there is no power and not even a door handle. Picture a tin long drop with a single flushing loo.

This is what greets you at either the start or finish of a long Nullarbor crossing.

[mostlytossas]

Facilities provided by airport owners is another issue all together. In my view if the airport is free to use then they do not need to provide any although many do. My gripe is where they charge a landing fee (sometimes quite a hefty fee) and provide nothing for it. As a minimum I would expect fixed tiedowns in a cleared parking area,clean toilets,a crew room with at least a few chairs to sit out bad weather,a pay phone especially if out of mobile range.Phone numbers for local cabs,accomadation etc.I know there are publications showing all this but if you did not expect to have to drop in may not have taken it along.

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

and provide nothing for it

Except for the runway/s you landed and took off from, the taxiways you used arriving and departing, the apron/parking area you occupied while on the ground, the runway lights you may have used, the windsock, the fence to keep the wildlife at bay, the beepback unit if provided, the line marking, apron markers, strip markers, the grass mowing, wages for maintenance, the costs of meeting the airports regulatory requirements, etc etc... no, nothing. The aviation fairies provide all of those.

[mostlytossas]

Actually the tax payer (you and me)pays most of it in the way of council grants. The remainder being picked up by the rate payer. And why? So the town can enjoy the benefits of a modern 1st world society such as access to air ambulance etc.If they dont want this then close the airport. I have no issue with the fee just if they impose one then provide some basic facilities.

[no_one]

We are no longer the lucky country! It is appalling.

Captian Fathom,

Australia is very much still the lucky country, its just that most people don't read beyond the headline. Have a read of the original quote from Donald Horne who came up with the lucky country phrase. Does it sound like the rule makers who dream up aviation/security regulations in OZ?

Australia is a lucky country run mainly by second rate people who share its luck. It lives on other people's ideas, and, although its ordinary people are adaptable, most of its leaders (in all fields) so lack curiosity about the events that surround them that they are often taken by surprise.

[Dexta]

Originally Posted by mostlytossas

Actually the tax payer (you and me)pays most of it in the way of council grants. The remainder being picked up by the rate payer. And why? So the town can enjoy the benefits of a modern 1st world society such as access to air ambulance etc.If they dont want this then close the airport. I have no issue with the fee just if they impose one then provide some basic facilities.

Please don't make the mistake of believing every country airfield is owned and operated by the council. We have TO PAY the council many thousands of dollars for the privilege of running an airport. We provide a sealed strip, two grass strips, PAL, lounge, good clean toilets, snacks etc and we still get people who bitch about a $10 landing fee!
Remember that there are private airfields all over the country that get no government or council grants and have to recoup the cost of maintenance somehow.