The ESL areas are RA1s for the most part - you can plan though them and expect a clearance. They are usually released above FL200 to the civil sectors anyway. Hornets can go that high, but you usually don't see them down at Sale. I think they did a simplification a few years ago so there wasn't a heap of vertically spliced areas that made NOTAM lists hard to read. So hence we have 'just in case' airspace - we will activate the lot as it's easier to read, and then release what we don't need and you can flight plan though them. Reasonable compromise I'd say.

Don't you know about the bird?

There a re 3 kinds of bird..two-legged pneumatic front bumper ones, feathery ones that fly, and the finger one as in "giving the ...

And lots of them feathery ones around the cay that is the subject of the thread.

The Q remains..for a Licence issue for the perp. What did he/she do exactly?
Whats the get...?
Penalty notice and fine. (Max, of course) ? 3 Licence demerit points..or more,?
Licence suspended, and/or prosecution pending.?

I am aware there are some hairy -chested and heavy on the punitive side in the CNS CAsA office...bash folk and it makes it much safer.

I think Dicks point was that you may be breaking the law, but you aren't breaking the aviation regulations. My understanding is that if you fly lower than the specified altitude over a wildlife refuge, it's the US fish and Wildlife Service which prosecutes you for a violation of their laws ie: disturbing wildlife. Vs the FAA prosecuting you for flying low.

Ornithological designation for migratory ones "Red headed double breasted mattress thrashers":E

Well aroa, rutan... looks like you two know that the bird is the word!

A2- ok I understand, but why is it considered, by Dick, to be such a big deal about "who" does the prosecuting? With different rules should we have parks and wildlife, or whatever they are in QLD, prosecute the pilot instead? At the end of the day what is the REAL difference?

You’ll have to ask Dick. For what it’s worth he’s on a crusade that Australia should do things the way the US does them, at least in terms of Aviation.

A2, yes I'm well aware of the crusade. Personal agendas seem to be at play too, take the token dig at ADSB in the opening post, it just had to be slipped in there, when, on the current face value, it has absolutely nothing to do with the topic.

Just because the Americans do aviation one way doesn't necessarily mean it's "the best" way. Granted they do do many things better, but not all.

In my first reply to the topic I asked for more facts. None have been forthcoming.

Well, if CAsA are going to prosecute, and EPA are going to prosecute,..why not get the QPS to prosecute as well, and the AFP ???

Might as well shoot the poor fellow.

He /she infringed an area /restricted zone...for ENVIRONMENTAL reasons...birds flying, nesting and etc. Keep clear, keep it quiet.

So where is the safety implication that CAsA gets so frothy about. Killed a gull, caused the a/c to crash land?? Pray tell.

Not sure if Soft breasted Pushovers are migratory, but in the movie house Intermission Pee Wees move about a lot.

Ramrod,
Quite true, but the way US do it is way ahead of Australia, with Australia vying for the title of "How not to do aviation, but how just to do it over".
Which planet do you actually live on?? Can you read the relative statistics??
Tootle pip!!

One can imagine any pilot flying an aircraft with a current and signed maintenance release has access to an accurate and functioning device for measuring height. What such device does National Parks or CAsA have when relying upon witness or complainants at ground level to determine if indeed the aircraft is below that allowed.

Checked with Airservices or RAAF SSR or ADS-B?

and
So you since found out more?

"Checked with Airservices or RAAF SSR or ADS-B?"


Thanks Captain. A predictable reply which vindicates my objections to mandatory ADSB as a surveillance tool and not a traffic separation/ safety device. The fraud is exposed again. SSR likewise if used as a prosecution tool.


I'm off next week to Canberra to get my identity specific forehead implant. Doesn't hurt a bit so I'm told.

One event versus the thousands of times a day that ADS-B and SSR are used for separation, traffic and safety purposes, including prevention of penetration of controlled airspace and RAs :ugh:

Same planet as you buddy. I think, that is unless you aren't on this one.
As to the statistics, is that just a general question on the US vs Aus flying or what relative ones are you specifically referring to? And yes I can read.
Meow!!


Frank- ADSB, radar or not, if one doesn't do the wrong thing, especially intentionally, then one has nothing to worry about.


Aroa- are you suggesting that the restricted areas (and I suppose prohibited areas too) should be controlled by different bodies (Geosience Australia, Navy, Army, Air Force, CSIRO etc)? Why? Why not one central place (CASA)? Once again what is the REAL problem here, other than an anti-CASA rant?

Nope...just posing the Q...what was the 'crime'...and against whom, for what????

Maybe I'll have to just read about it in the papers or AAT or someplace.

We actually do not know. Dick has not been forthcoming with any details. As I said in my initial reply, I highly doubt that an accidental flight through an RA would result in license action. There's either more to the story, or Dick is just on yet another anti-CASA, anti-ADSB (it had nothing to do with the supposed incident), sensationalism-filled rant.

Come on. This is a rumour network.

It appears the licence suspension may have been for a series of problems.

I was mainly concerned about restricted areas being created for environmental purposes. Now I see it’s not new and it appears CASA has resisted rolling out 100’s

Thanks CASA!

Car Ramrod you seem to suffer the same difficulty with understanding the separation of powers as Joh Bjelke Petersen and look how he ended up.

How far would you want to separate the power though rutan?

For example hoon up and down the coastline at 10ft. Do you just want casa or a bunch of local city councils or coppers from different states (because you crossed the border) after you?
The way some councils work, I'd rather it be casa!

I see it as if you fly a plane in a manner or in a location you shouldn't, answer to the aviation side of things rather than some other department who has even less of a clue when it comes to operation of an aircraft. Mostly because that's simplicity; and I'm not afraid of casa like many others are.


Dick, thanks for your addition clearing the license action matter up a bit. I knew there would be more to it.