turboplanner

Plenty on it including this:

Fujita flew north across Bass Strait headed for Cape Otway where he banked to the north east and followed the coastline to the Point Lonsdale lighthouse near the narrow entrance to Port Phillip Bay. He then headed north east towards the city of Melbourne. Fujita struck a few heavy banks of cloud. He flew across the Bellarine Peninsula towards Portarlington. The city of Geelong was 16 kms away to the left of his aircraft on the other side of Lake Connewarre.

He was flying NNE as he flew over Portarlington. He then flew another 24 km along the western edge of Port Phillip Bay. He continued to encounter heavy cloud and was unsure of his position. They eventually dropped down from 1,500 metres into a gap in the clouds. At about 6.45 a.m. Fujita cleared the base of the clouds when he reached 300 metres. They had exited the clouds directly above the RAAF's Laverton airfield. There were about 12 Wirraways based at Laverton along with some Lockheed Hudsons and some Avro Ansons.

About nine RAAF personnel at Laverton reported sighting the Japanese aircraft. Two RAAF aircraft were scrambled to try to locate the intruder. They found nothing. Three Wirraways were sent to Bairnsdale.

Fujita climbed back into the relative safety of the clouds and headed for Melbourne. He passed over Altona. He used a tactic of dropping down out of the clouds every now and then to make some observations and then climbing back into the clouds for safety. His unexpected descent above RAAF Laverton had made him very nervous about the rest of their flight.

The crews of the 4 ack ack guns at Williamstown beside the rifle range were in the middle of a routine inspection of their guns when the telescope person spotted the aircraft identifying it as a Japanese aircraft. Aubrey Auton from Melbourne, spotted the prominent red roundel. The roundel was easy to spot as the aircraft was flying so slow and was very low.

The Lieutenant in charge of the gun battery unfortunately did not give the order to open fire. Instead he got on the phone to headquarters to obtain permission. By that time it was too late. Fujita turned right and headed across the rifle range butts towards Port Phillip Bay.

Fujita continued his charmed journey across Melbourne at a height of 300 metres obtaining a birds eye view of the Yarra River, the central business district of Melbourne and the docks at the mouth of the Yarra River. He spotted a number of docks along the river used to repair ships. The other thing that struck him was the red, green and yellow roof tiles on all the houses and the beautiful countryside and the large flocks of sheep.

Fujita continued southwards over St. Kilda, Brighton and Sandringham. He then turned towards Frankstown. Okuda, with the canopy back, spotted 19 vessels anchored in the harbour through his binoculars. He also spotted 6 warships headed in single file towards the Port Melbourne dock area. Fujita confirmed through his binoculars that the leading ship was a light cruiser, and the others were all destroyers.

Fujita crossed the shore again near Dromona and continued on towards Cape Schanck where he was able to re-establish his position via the Cape Schanck lighthouse. He then set a direct 175 km course for the Cape Wickham lighthouse. He spotted the submarine only 6 nautical miles east of the lighthouse. It had drifted 4 nautical miles closer to the lighthouse since they first took off.

Fujita and the crew of the submarine were concerned that the large submarine would be sighted by the lighthouse keepers at the Cape Wickham lighthouse. Little did they know that "downsizing" was alive and well in the 1940's. The superintendent and his 3 assistants had been withdrawn from the island when the original kerosene wick lamps were replaced by an acetylene flasher way back in 1918. Despite this, Fujita reported sighting 3 or 4 men dressed in white running around the lighthouse. He was sure they had been spotted. The aircraft was disassembled and as it was being stowed I-25 speed away from the area doing 14 knots.

Tagami set a course back down the west coast of Tasmania. He travelled on the surface.

I've seen the story on this somewhere; maybe at the AWM.

They weren't used to bomb; they were reconnaisance aircraft and from memory there were several of them and they were seen flying over Australian cities.

.....Tasmanian and Islands Tigers. What a savage bunch they were with blood flowing even in the weekly practice sessions. They were good looking girls too especially Mick, Jack, Wally and Fred.

It was said that a Tasmanian and Islands Tiger could kick ......................... 

48 minutes ago, BurnieM said:

Seems to me that class 5 is all about removing objections to RPC having controlled aerodrome/airspace endorsements

so CASA would probably be forced to make it more leinent than they want to.

 

I expect a PPL with class 5 will be;

VFR only

10,000 ft only

1 passenger

pretty much the same as a RPC with self declared medical.

 

PS

I also expect RPC controlled endorsements to happen reasonably quickly due to pressure from YWSI restrictions if it does not.

 

PPS
Sort of makes you wonder what will happen in the near future if RPC and PPL (class 5) effectively become the same.

 

Think how a Self Declared Medical will work in the flying environment. The legal onus shifts to ........

.....practised kicking a...................................

CASA is often blamed for Airservices issues, or ATSB issues and I notice quite a few people seem to be trying to drag CASA into this discussion, so I asked this simple question.

Q:        Who is responsible for aviation security in Australia?

A:         The Department of Home Affairs

So there you have the Department and you can find the Minister responsible for that Department.

Next I checked the process, which as we know consists of:

1. A period of Public Consultation where you all would have had an opporunity to make a submission.
2. A Bill which has to go before both Houses of Parliament, and goes backwards and forwards until both Houses approve it, so its contents will vary as it is being processed.
3. An Act
4. Regulations

I have to apologise for not doing this before but I didn't have the hours it usually takes to run down the exact documents. As it turned out I foun these in under five minutes.

Aviation Transport Security Bill 2004

https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r1789

Aviation Transport Security Act 2004

https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdb/au/legis/cth/consol_act/atsa2004348/

Aviation Transport Security Regulations 2005

http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_reg/atsr2005457/

The Act tells you the whats and whys, the Regulations tell you what you are required to do.

5 hours ago, onetrack said:

Well, the backgrounding must be pretty poor, what with the number of ASIC holders - both flight crew and ground staff - who have been arrested and charged with high-level offences, in recent years. 

 

There were 5 ground staff arrested just recently for being involved in the importation of a huge amount of drugs and for being part of a criminal network. 

And there have been multiple numbers of flight crew in recent years arrested and charged and found guilty of a range of offences - and I believe at least one pilot is on trial for a double murder.

 

None of this is to say that all those ASIC holders who are indulging in criminality, have all been caught.

 

So I think your opinion of the quality of the backgrounding is seriously misplaced.

What you are talking about here are routine crimes which are dealt with by State or Commonwealth Police.

In this case the ASIC issue is security. Drug dealers etc tend to be focused on their business which may well include popping off competitors, but in most cases are unlikely to commit a terrorist act and draw attention to their successful business. The information may well be supplied to those issuing ASIC Cards, but civil liberties in Australia are vigorously defended by lawyers.

.......Now that they have come to us we'll have to think up a new name."

The New Person (NP) continued "Perhps they could be called the South Melbourners or the Port Phillip Bayers or maybe the Bass Straighteners" The football community collectively cringed at this and quite a few disparaging remarks were made on both the MSM and SM and X.

The "West Coasters" had all bought phones now they could get coverage and were quietly reading all this; taking it all in.

As a matter of academic interest, these were all axemen with arms the size of Cappy's thighs. Turbo got to know them well when he was racing against them. They were very fair if you didn't get in front of them.

On the way up to an Australian Championship in Newcastle one year, they'd camped under the cars somewhere in NSW and in the morning trooped into the local cafe and orders steaks and eggs. The cafe proprietor had to get the butcher up because their order was for three steaks each and there were twelve of them plus the wives and squeezes.

They'd gone to the back of the cafe because the dim light there felt like home.

While they were waiting, a couple came in and sat down at the front booth. The husband started abusing his wife.

Eventually the meals arrived and they started wolfing it down. The noise from the front booth increased and the husband threw a punch at his wife.

"Chip" (not his real name) slowly put down his knife and fork and with a resigned shrug got up, walked up to the front booth, picked the husband up by the collar in one hand and gave him a whack with the other that sent him across the footpath. He never came back.

On another occasion Chip had decided axe work was getting too hard, so went and bought himself one of those Chain Saws. He took it back and said "This thing doesn't work, it's useless; slower than an axe!"

The dealer checked the fuel, primed it, pulled the cord and it started with a "RRRRP!...RRRRRP!...RRRRR!" 

"Is that what you have to do" said Chip.

The WCs..................................

58 minutes ago, facthunter said:

AS you were very familiar to them they weren't concerned. It doesn't prove they would just let ANYONE past.  Nev

Yes, a good reason, but that’s a level of relaxation. It might stop there but it might spread. I had another occasion where I walked in to a competitor’s office, sat down at the Sales Manager’s desk and left uninterrupted by anyone.  On another occasion one of our guys received a call from a competitor to come over and steal a car. His job was to get it past Security and take it to. Particular destination. He drove across with a bunch of our paperwork and drove the car out. There were several spectacular catches too.

At one stage I worked within the confines of car manufacturer's styling studio which needed to keep information totally secret. We were issued with a credit card size Security Card with our photo on it and were required to walk a gauntlet passage past the independently employed guards every morning.

We go to know each other, greeted each other asked how the kids were etc.

One morning as I was about to flick the card out I realised I'd forgotten it, and rather than drive 40 minutes home and 40 minutes back  gave a cheerful good morning and was waved through. This got me curious so I decided to see how often I could do it, even though the penalty was instant dismissal. At 13 weeks I lost my nerve and clipped the Security card on again.

It's this sort of slackness that people who are up to no good rely on.

1 hour ago, skippydiesel said:

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. 

Those are straw man arguments.

The bottom line is that incidents which led to prosecutions which led to convictions and prison sentences are not likely to be publicised.

Best to go through the regulations clause by clause and avoid that $15,650.00 fine.

27 minutes ago, Markdun said:

Clearly knowing someone’s ID can have absolutely zero to do with ‘keeping things safe’.

No, but often after a disaster, authorities are blamed because they ought to have known that the disaster was likely to happen, or they ought to have known the perpetrator was a well-known criminal who'd said many time he was goint to do it etc.

My opinion is the ASIC Card says "This person has been thoroughly backgrounded, is known to us and is not likely to be a threat."

33 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

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.

No one has to demonstrate it here; or get involved with the amazing statements we've been reading.

.....metre long and cleverly camouflaged by King Island Seaweed, imported to Victoria by KI TurboKelp Pty Ltd with the barb sticking up at about nut level for anyone turning around and lowering himself from the boat.

There was a second row around Victoria consisting of people in brown shirts and shorts, long brown socks and tan boots and like mermaids, hissing "Come on Nutheads, Try it on!"

2000 Tasmanians died that day, groined by fish hooks as they slid down the gunwhales and were used as bait by the Fishers Party who sold the flake they caught to fish and chip shops up the east coast of Australia. It was the best fundraiser they'd ever had.

Distracted by the screams of pain, the rest of the Tasmanians charged up the beach where they were mowed down by the 50 cals of the snipers sitting in sun lounges on the penthouse decks of the rish and famous Victorians like CT who was popping away with them on his 222 Brno.

It was all over by nightfall and the next day Victorians with their dogs or children walked around the beaches of Tasmania.

"It's SMALL!!" said Mavis who'd driven down from Gumly Gmly in her new Fiat 500 Abarth.

"What were those things roaring out in the middle during the night? asked ...............

2 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

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?

What CASA may do does not change the meaning of what you have to supply.

A quick browse of 61.335 (2) (b), with the Commonwealth Penalty Unit at $313.00 indicates a fine of $15,650.00

If you go back and read what Col posted:

" (3)  For subregulation (2), CASA is taken to have told the holder that he or she has complied with the requirement if CASA issues a new licence document or certificate of validation to the holder after giving the holder the notice."

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2023/report/ao-2023-057

3 hours ago, coljones said:

A bit of light reading can be found by searching for

 

AVIATION TRANSPORT SECURITY REGULATIONS 2005 - REG 6.57

Flight crew licences etc--requirements in relation to issue

Looks like you might be on the way to getting the Meat Tray Col.

........the Royal Brahton Golf Club Inc. Est. 1896 which was so exclusive that the address was never published. Turbine Entertainments Inc had capitalised on this by prominently advertising the address of their "Royal Brahton!", a nightclub built on three blocks incorporating two triple fronts, a Granny Flat and an old Scout Hall. They never had to pay for food or liquor supplies because so much was delivered there by mistake. 

When Tasmania finally bumped into the Great State of Victoria, which was now Danless, Clueless, and running up a debt the size of Cappy's Gin account, The Shooters Party (I shoot and I vote), the Fishers Party (I Fish and I Vote) and the Extreme Right Hitler Youth (I don't vote) formed a Militia to defend Victoria from all the heads bobbing up and down as Tasmanians surveyed what they thought was their new territory.

Armed only with fish hooks, The Fisher Party could only ...............

57 minutes ago, Thruster88 said:

Perhaps  turboplanner could  send a carefully  worded question  to casa regarding the requirements  for pilots to have a current security  check. AVID or ASIC or nothing required, which  is it?

. 

I'd suggest the CASA people would be rolling in the aisles by now.

....that every one of my cats is perfectly comfortable tonight. I read stories from the Bible to them, and show cat cage fights on video and put a teaspoon of sugar in their milk before they go to bed."

He didn't have to say any more; Tasmanians have a memory that rewinds every 20 seconds and their thoughts had now turned to ..................

.......too many ash trays when everyone had given up smoking.

”Everyone wants to go to heaven, but nobody wants to die” said Cappy reaching out to OneTrack whose bulldozer business had been claimed by the kanji kaja tribe. OT hade reached out to his lawyer who reached out to the Judge who gave the tribe OT’s stock of Golden Fleece motor oil as well. OT reached out for the Judge’s  throat but CT had reached out for bull’s..........

20 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

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.

You were doing well up to the last paragraph. Maybe the Instructor had read that the ASIC requirement had been dropped, maybe HE hadn’t read the refs, maybe he had just overlooked that thinking that you had one. Spin the bottle but it’s cheaper to read the lot in the long run.

1 hour ago, skippydiesel said:

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

If people can't read the documents for themselves, its an indication that they aren't ready for cross country flying. 

35 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

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.

Before you start telling us what's law and what's not, I'd suggest you actually read ALL the ASIC details slowly.

.....curtained immediately. (Turbo is continuing the "free spelling spirit and invention of new words convention (fssinwc)).

In any case Turbo's priviledges had not been changed by his Tasmanian brothers (and sometimes fathers).

As the Challenger zipped across Bass Strait as if it was a puddle, he should do a full switch of the Aurora, which would take Tasmania back to the Ice Age and allow Queenslanders to wear shorts, or put it into flash mode which would give both States some variety and confuse the global warmists who were starting to go cold as they realised they might be about to pay for the things they forecast without doing their research. Greta has had plastic surgery and is unrecognisable as a transgender cage fighter, and Albert Gore as he likes to be called now is telling the world he has a switch he can flip to fix things.

Turbo reached out #1 to Albert to see if he could hire the switch, or ...........................

#1

For the benefit of Generation X people, reach out doesn't mean reach out any more; it's a new substitute for spoke, wrote, emailed, phoned, messaged, X'd, posted, and saves time working out what you actually did which would then lead to your boss asking for a copy, or a Court asking for the evidence.