AVID vs ASIC
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 793
Likes: 297
From: sierra village
AVID vs ASIC
This query is with respect to a Private Pilot who will never go into capital city port of entry airport.
I've read the CASA website detailing the differences and its not totally clear to a dummy like me. Mention is made of "secure areas" at security controlled airports. But no mention how such areas are defined. ( https://www.casa.gov.au/licences-and-certification/individual-licensing/asics-and-avids )
So on to the question of practical use, is any private pilot successfully using an AVID just for infrequently going through places like Roma, Thargomindah, etc. i.e security controlled airports with domestic RPT service.
What about regional port of entry airports?
I've read the CASA website detailing the differences and its not totally clear to a dummy like me. Mention is made of "secure areas" at security controlled airports. But no mention how such areas are defined. ( https://www.casa.gov.au/licences-and-certification/individual-licensing/asics-and-avids )
So on to the question of practical use, is any private pilot successfully using an AVID just for infrequently going through places like Roma, Thargomindah, etc. i.e security controlled airports with domestic RPT service.
What about regional port of entry airports?
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 588
Likes: 99
From: Australia
If you’re going to any security controlled airports you legally need an ASIC. The AVID is useless. You might get away without one for years but sooner or later some very important airport person will ping you. It doesn’t matter if you have a PPL, RPL or RAAus.
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 750
Likes: 0
From: Victoria
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 1,137
Likes: 40
From: Abeam Alice Springs
The issue here is what the Dept of whatever have done to outline what is a security area at a regional aerodrome. There is no rule that says a GA pilot cannot land at an aerodrome that has a security requirement. There should be a clear option for a GA pilot that does not have an ASIC to go about his business, obtain fuel or whatever services that he wants that is available - leave the airport and return to his aircraft and fly away. The Dept in charge of this has NOT placed any such requirements in place for the aerodrome operator to follow, nor given any advice/instructions to the industyr or the GA pilots on how to walk thru this minefield. When they do, we will all be better off and not have to deal with security requirements that have nothing to do with the average GA pilot operating his aircraft.
Why it is more difficult to obtain an ASIC than a passport for significantly more money and only for two years and not ten is still a mystery!
Further more there does not appear to be a definition of GA (General Aviation) or non RPT operations within the regs quoted above....... Are we (GA) being discriminated against?
Why it is more difficult to obtain an ASIC than a passport for significantly more money and only for two years and not ten is still a mystery!
Further more there does not appear to be a definition of GA (General Aviation) or non RPT operations within the regs quoted above....... Are we (GA) being discriminated against?
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 793
Likes: 297
From: sierra village
If you say the AVID is useless then why did they implement it?
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 793
Likes: 297
From: sierra village
Interestingly,, the legislation makes no mention of AVIDs. Maybe they’re just ahead of their time?��
Triadic .... To answer your question, I’d like to think that GA is not deliberately being discriminated against, merely forgotten. It’s too easy to be paranoid and read malignant intentions into everything.
I’m getting the feeling that the AVID concept was created with common sense and good intentions, it’s just that the rest of their apparatus has not caught up.
Last edited by lucille; 22nd July 2019 at 21:52.
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 588
Likes: 99
From: Australia
There is a requirement for every new licence holder to have a security check. The AVID fulfills that function but is not accepted as a means of accessing security controlled airports.
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 750
Likes: 0
From: Victoria
Because you are required to have at least an AVID when you exercise the privileges of your pilot licence.
https://www.casa.gov.au/standard-pag...tions-answered
https://www.casa.gov.au/standard-pag...tions-answered
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 793
Likes: 297
From: sierra village
The website (and yes, I agree it’s not the legislation - but someone in a position of authority must have approved the wording on their website) says that an AVID will be ok if one does not intend to frequently use or plan to use Security Controlled airports. And that security controlled areas are always out of bounds.
Looks like no one really knows the answer at this stage. Only one way to find out, land for fuel or an overnight stop and see what happens.
The title of my next thread may may well be “Postcards from Prison”.
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 588
Likes: 99
From: Australia
Your supposed to be able to visit airports without an asic by organising someone to meet you and be there to escort you. Trouble is who wants to do that and who pays for that? In practise, most of the time no one is there and no one cares.
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,290
Likes: 1
From: WA
Lucille,
I think your question has been answered. You cannot use an AVID for unescorted access at a security controlled airport where display of a valid ASIC is required.
One variation, not often exploited under Reg 3.03 is that the display of an ASIC only applies during the operational period at airports where screened services do not operate. Any screened services and it is a 24/7 requirement.
However you will always get the local airport staff demanding you wear an ASIC regardless, because their TSP says so. Which raises an interesting dilemma, does the TSP trump the legislation? How can a pilot be expected to know the contents of and airports TSP when it is not made available? But then the airport operator could simply deny you access which is their right to do also. And around and around we go.
Looks like no one really knows the answer at this stage
One variation, not often exploited under Reg 3.03 is that the display of an ASIC only applies during the operational period at airports where screened services do not operate. Any screened services and it is a 24/7 requirement.
However you will always get the local airport staff demanding you wear an ASIC regardless, because their TSP says so. Which raises an interesting dilemma, does the TSP trump the legislation? How can a pilot be expected to know the contents of and airports TSP when it is not made available? But then the airport operator could simply deny you access which is their right to do also. And around and around we go.
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 1,137
Likes: 40
From: Abeam Alice Springs
Let's face it, the whole thing is a big mess, because GA was not considered when the rules were drafted. The rules that currently exist do not make any provision for GA operators or pilots that do not hold an ASIC. The problem is that the rules and instructions to aerodrome operators should make a provision for pilots to come and go etc. Fix that and the problem for GA pilots landing at such aerodromes will go away. Or an alternative would be to formalise the AVID in some way and have it recognised as a ID for GA areas of such aerodromes. To solve this problem we firstly have to have it demonstrated that it is a problem and then come up with some workable solution/s. Something that AOPA, RAAus and the other groups should get together on.
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 107
Likes: 1
From: Perth
Easier still: Zero cost ASIC for all pilots, nation-wide. Cost: peanuts. Simplification: immense.
Renewals: Automatic.
Small questionnaire sent out a few months prior to each pilot to update their circumstances.
Renewals: Automatic.
Small questionnaire sent out a few months prior to each pilot to update their circumstances.
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
Joined: Apr 2002
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 3,065
Likes: 222
From: Back home again after another fantastic time in Japan; once again back to the 'real world' and continuing the seemingly never ending search for a bad bottle of Red.
AbsoluteFokker; Now you should know better than to suggest something sensible like that!!
Besides, how many Bureaucrats and make-work jobsworths would have to be made redundant if such a things as you suggest was actually implemented?
Besides, how many Bureaucrats and make-work jobsworths would have to be made redundant if such a things as you suggest was actually implemented?
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,290
Likes: 1
From: WA
Easier still: Zero cost ASIC for all pilots, nation-wide. Cost: peanuts. Simplification: immense.
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 145
Likes: 1
From: skullzone
I really don't understand the need for a 'security' check for ASIC/AVID renewals.
The checking is basically a request from AusCheck (or whoever) for info from the other agencies (ASIO, AFP, police, et al) and I'm convinced that most of the replies will be negative
ie. 'no information held', 'no conviction(s)' or suchlike, which means that the 'security check' will be OK and the cost ($ & time) is minuscule.
Because the cost of that automated process is so low it then means that checking can be on a more frequent basis to keep the status of their 'customers' up-to-date.
Sure., some checks will come back with black-marks on them and a human will then need to make a decision, but that's what happens now.
AVID/ASIC are a photo_ID, but a 10 year validity period (similar to the passport system) would be workable because agencies have the right/ability to cancel an ID.
The checking is basically a request from AusCheck (or whoever) for info from the other agencies (ASIO, AFP, police, et al) and I'm convinced that most of the replies will be negative
ie. 'no information held', 'no conviction(s)' or suchlike, which means that the 'security check' will be OK and the cost ($ & time) is minuscule.
Because the cost of that automated process is so low it then means that checking can be on a more frequent basis to keep the status of their 'customers' up-to-date.
Sure., some checks will come back with black-marks on them and a human will then need to make a decision, but that's what happens now.
AVID/ASIC are a photo_ID, but a 10 year validity period (similar to the passport system) would be workable because agencies have the right/ability to cancel an ID.
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 1
From: sydney
9/11 is blamed for the ASIC, but I wonder if money is the real reason.
There is a rumour, just a rumour that one or two ex DOTARS/CASA people make a mint out of ASIC's.
Why would a terrorist go to all the trouble to crash a plane into people when a bus or truck or car does just as well
and you don't need an ASIC for those........YET.
There is a rumour, just a rumour that one or two ex DOTARS/CASA people make a mint out of ASIC's.
Why would a terrorist go to all the trouble to crash a plane into people when a bus or truck or car does just as well
and you don't need an ASIC for those........YET.
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 315
Likes: 4
From: Australia
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 315
Likes: 4
From: Australia
A Baseline security clearance (the bottom level clearance for federal public servants, contractors etc) is good for 15 years, and the vetting process is about as stringent as that for an ASIC.