• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.27 no.1
• /
• pp.29-73
• /
• 2012

Aviation safety is the State and industry's top priority and more scientific approaches for fatigue management should be needed. There are lately various studies and regulation changes for crew fatigue management with ICAO, FAA and EASA. ICAO issued the provisions of fatigue management for flight crew since 1st edition, 1969, of Annex 6 operation of aircraft as a Standards and Recommended practice(SARPs). Unfortunately, there have been few changes and improvement to fatigue management provisions since the time they were first introduced. However the SARPs have been big changed lately. ICAO published guidance materials for development of prescriptive fatigue regulations through amendment 33A of Annex 6 Part 1 as applicable November 19th 2009. And then ICAO introduced additional amendment for using Fatigue Risk Management System (FRMS) with $35^{th}$ amendment in 2011. According to the Annex 6, the State of the operator shall establish a) regulations for flight time, flight duty period, duty period and rest period limitations and b) FRMS regulations. The Operator shall implement one of following 3 provisions a) flight time, flight duty period, duty period and rest period limitations within the prescriptive fatigue management regulations established by the State of the Operator; or b) a FRMS; or c) a combination of a) and b). U.S. FAA recently published several kinds of Advisory Circular about flightcrew fatigue. U.S. passed "Airline Safety and FAA Extension Act of 2010" into law on August 1st, 2010. This mandates all commercial air carriers to develop a FAA-acceptable Fatigue Risk Management Plan(FRMP) by October 31st, 2010. Also, on May 16, 2012, the FAA published a final rule(correction) entitled 'Flightcrew Member Duty and Rest Requirements; correction to amend its existing prescriptive regulations. The new requirements are required to implement same regulations for domestic, flag and supplemental operations from January 4, 2014. EASA introduced a Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA) 2010-14 entitled "Draft opinion of the European Aviation Safety Agency for a Commission Regulation establishing the implementing rules on Flight and Duty Time Limitations and Rest Requirements for Commercial Air Transport with aeroplanes" on December 10, 2010. The purpose of this NPA is to develop and implement fatigue management for commercial air transport operations. Comparing with Korean and foreign regulations regarding fatigue management, the provisions of ICAO, FAA, EASA are more considering various fatigue factors and conditions. Korea regulations should be needed for some development of insufficiency points. In this thesis, I present the results of the comparative study between domestic and foreign regulations in respect of fatigue management crew member. Also, I suggest legal proposals for amendment of Korea Aviation act and Enforcement Regulations concerning fatigue management for crew members. I hope that this paper is helpful to change korea fatigue regulations, to enhance aviation safety, and to reduce the number of accidents relating to fatigue. Fatigue should be managed at all level such as regulators, experts, operators and pilots. Authority should change surveillance mind-set from regulatory auditor to expert adviser. Operators should identify various fatigue factors and consider to crew scheduling them. Crews should strongly manage both individual and duty-oriented fatigue issues.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.29 no.1
• /
• pp.33-66
• /
• 2014

While the numbers of overseas travelers has been increased rapidly each year, the numbers of passengers in the aircraft also has continued to be increased gradually. In the mist of these increasing numbers, such accidents as threatening an aircraft safety like riot, aircraft hijacking and terrorism have happened constantly. In these circumstances, South Korean government has prescribed "Aviation on Security Act" in accordance with the Convention on International Civil Aviation and other international agreements. This act aims to prevent illegal activities and illegal items on the aircraft to ensure the safety and security of civil aviation. However, this act is not sufficiently regulating all the illegal crimes and illegal items on the flight. For the worse, there is a lack of effective supervisory capacity. Likewise, the inherent problems of the current laws relating to the prevention of the illegal items on the aircraft are appearing on the surface continually. Above all, illegal items on the aircraft are directly connected to the issue of aviation safety and security as well as a safe utilization of the flight service. Thus, when there occurs a serious accident on board, it surely would be led to a huge economic loss not mentioning the loss of lives following the accident. Therefore safety of the flight passengers cannot be guaranteed without ensuring the safety of aircraft facilities and good supervisory mechanism of illegal items on the aircraft. Accordingly, establishing a safe operation order tends to influence economy and tourism of a country in no small measure. Therefore, it is an urgent issue to settle down a reasonable and adequate supervisory regulations regarding the prevention of the illegal items on the aircraft. Consequently, in this article, I studied on a reasonal and effective mechanism to control the prevention of the illegal items and illegal acts on the aircraft in order to ensure a safety and security of civil aircraft.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.3-30
• /
• 2011

According to the Article 86 of the United Nations on the Law of the Sea(UNCLOS) the provisions of high seas apply to all parts of the sea that are not included in the exclusive economic zone, in the territorial sea or in the internal waters of a State, or in the archipelagic waters of an archipelagic State. Article 87 also stipulates the freedom of the high seas. International laws on the flight over the high seas are found as follows; Firstly, as far as the nationality of the aircraft is concerned, its legal status is quite different from the ship where the flags of convenience can be applied practically. There is no flags of convenience of the aircraft. Secondly, according to the Article 95 of UNCLOS warships on the high seas have complete immunity from the jurisdiction of any State other than the flag State. We can suppose that the military(or state) aircraft over the high seas have also complete immunity from the jurisdiction of any State other than the flag State. Thirdly, according to the Article 101 of UNCLOS piracy consists of any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft. We can conclude that piracy can de done by a pirate aircraft as well as a pirate ship. Fourthly, according to the Article 111 (5) of UNCLOS the right of hot pursuit may be exercised only by warships or military aircraft, or other ships or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service and authorized to that effect. We can conclude that the right of hot pursuit may be exercised only military aircraft, or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service and authorized to that effect. Fifthly, according to the Article 110 of UNCLOS a warship which encounters on the high seas a foreign ship, is not justified in boarding it unless there is reasonable ground for suspecting that: (a) the ship is engaged in piracy, (b) the ship is engaged in the slave trade, (c) the ship is engaged in an authorized broadcasting and the flag State of the warship has jurisdiction under article 109, (d) the ship is without nationality, or (e) though flying a foreign flag or refusing to show its flag, the ship is, in reality, of the same nationality as the warship. These provisions apply mutatis mutandis to military aircraft. Sixthly, according to the Article 1 (5)(dumping), 212(pollution from or through the atmosphere), 222(enforcement with respect to pollution from or through the atmosphere) of UNCLOS aircraft as well as ship is very much related to marine pollution. Seventhly, as far as the crime on board aircraft over the high seas is concerned 1963 Convention on the Offences and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft(Tokyo Convention) will be applied, and as for the hijacking over the high seas 1970 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft(Hague Convention) and as for the sabotage over the high seas 1971 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Civil Aviation(Montreal Convention) will be applied respectively. These three conventions recognize the flag state jurisdiction over the crimes on board aircraft over the high seas. Eightly, as far as reconnaissance by foreign aircraft in the high seas toward the coastal States is concerned it is not illegal in terms of international law because its act is done in the high seas. Ninthly as for Air Defence Identification Zone(ADIZ) there are no articles dealing with it in the 1944 Chicago Convention. The legal status of the foreign aircraft over this sea zone might be restricted to the regulations of the coastal states whether this zone is legitimate or illegal. Lastly, the Arctic Sea is the frozen ocean. So the flight over that ocean is the same over the high seas. Because of the climate change the Arctic Sea is getting melted. If the coastal states of the Arctic Sea will proclaim the Exclusive Economic Zone(EEZ) as the ocean is getting melted, the freedom of flight over that ocean will also be restricted to the regulations of the coastal states.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.345-366
• /
• 2018

Article 37 of the International Convention on Civil Aviation requires that rules should be adopted to keep in compliance with international standards and recommended practices established by ICAO. As SARPs are revised annually, each ICAO Member State needs to reflect the new content in its national aviation Acts in a timely manner. In recent years, data-driven international standards have been developed because of the important roles of aviation safety data and information-based legislation in accident prevention based on human factors. The Safety Management System and crew Fatigue Risk Management Systems were reviewed as examples of the result of data-driven rulemaking. The safety management system was adopted in 2013 with the introduction of Annex 19 and Chapter 5 of the relevant manual describes safety data collection and analysis systems. Through analysis of safety data and information, decision makers can make informed data-driven decisions. The Republic of Korea introduced Safety Management System in accordance with Article 58 of the Aviation Safety Act for all airlines, maintenance companies, and airport corporations. To support the SMS, both mandatory reporting and voluntary safety reporting systems need to be in place. Up until now, the standard of administrative penal dispensation for violations of the safety management system has been very weak. Various regulations have been developed and implemented in the United States and Europe for the proper legislation of the safety management system. In the wake of the crash of the Colgan aircraft, the US Aviation Safety Committee recommended the US Federal Aviation Administration to establish a system that can identify and manage pilot fatigue hazards. In 2010, a notice of proposed rulemaking was issued by the Federal Aviation Administration and in 2011, the final rule was passed. The legislation was applied to help differentiate risk based on flight according to factors such as the pilot's duty starting time, the availability of the auxiliary crew, and the class of the rest facility. Numerous amounts data and information were analyzed during the rulemaking process, and reflected in the resultant regulations. A cost-benefit analysis, based on the data of the previous 10 year period, was conducted before the final legislation was reached and it was concluded that the cost benefits are positive. The Republic of Korea also currently has a clause on aviation safety legislation related to crew fatigue risk, where an airline can choose either to conform to the traditional flight time limitation standard or fatigue risk management system. In the United States, specifically for the purpose of data-driven rulemaking, the Airline Rulemaking Committee was formed, and operates in this capacity. Considering the advantageous results of the ARC in the US, and the D4S in Europe, this is a system that should definitely be introduced in Korea as well. A cost-benefit analysis is necessary, and can serve to strengthen the resulting legislation. In order to improve the effectiveness of data-based legislation, it is necessary to have reinforcement of experts and through them prepare a more detailed checklist of relevant variables.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.30 no.2
• /
• pp.311-336
• /
• 2015

This article surveys the current international law with respect to RPAS from both the public air law and private air law perspectives. It then reviews current and proposed Australian domestic RPAS regulation while emphasizing the peculiar risks in operation of RPAS; and how they affect concepts of liability, safety and privacy. While RPAS operations still constitute only a small portion of total operations within commercial aviation, international pilotless flight for commercial air transport remains a future reality. As the industry is developing so quickly the earlier the pursuit of the right policy solutions begins, the better the law will be able to cope with the technological realities when the inevitable risks manifest in accidents. The paper acknowledges that a domestic or regional approach to RPAS, typified by the legislative success of the Australian experience, is and continues to be the principal measure to deal with RPAS issues globally. Furthermore, safety remains the foremost factor in present and revised Australian RPAS regulation. This has an analogue to the international situation. Creating safety-related rules is imperative and must precede the creation or adoption of liability rules because the former mitigates the risk of accidents which trigger the application of the latter. The flipside of a lack of binding airworthiness standards for RPAS operators is potentially a strong argument that the liability regime (and particularly strict liability of operators) is unfair and unsuited to pilotless flight. The potential solutions the authors raise include the need for revised ICAO guidance and, in particular, SARPs with respect to RPAS air safety, airworthiness, and potentially liability issues for participants/passengers, and those on the ground. Such guidance could then be adapted swiftly for appropriate incorporation into domestic laws bypassing the need for or administrative burden and time it would take to activate the treaty process to deal with an arm of aviation that states know all too well is in need of safety regulation and monitoring.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.30 no.2
• /
• pp.403-425
• /
• 2015

The Chicago Convention and Annexes have become the basis of aviation safety regulations for every contracting state. Generally, the State's aviation safety regulations refer to the Standards and Recommended Practices(SARPs) provided in the Annexes of the Chicago Convention. In order to properly reflect international aviation safety regulations, constant studies of the aviation fields are of paramount importance. This Paper is intended to identify the main differences between korean and foreign regulation and suggest a few amendment proposals on Mixed-fleet Flying(at or more two aircraft type operation) of flight crew. Comparing with these regulations, the korean regulations and implementations have some insufficiency points. I suggest some amendment proposals of korean regulations concerning Mixed-fleet Flying that flight crew operate aircraft of different types. Basically an operator shall not assign a pilot-in-command or a co-pilot to operate at the flight controls of a type of airplane during take-off and landing unless that pilot has operated the flight controls during at least three take-offs and landings within the preceding 90 days on the same type of airplane or in a flight simulator. Also, flight crew members are familiarized with the significant differences in equipment and/or procedures between concurrently operated types. An operator shall ensure that piloting technique and the ability to execute emergency procedures is checked in such a way as to demonstrate the pilot's competence on each type or variant of a type of airplane. Proficiency check shall be performed periodically. When an operator schedules flight crew on different types of airplanes with similar characteristics in terms of operating procedures, systems and handling, the State shall decide the requirements for each type of airplane can be combined. In conclusion, it is necessary for flight crew members to remain concurrently qualified to operate multiple types. The operator shall have a program to include, as a minimum, required differences training between types and qualification to maintain currency on each type. If the Operator utilizes flight crew members to concurrently operate aircraft of different types, the operator shall have qualification processes approved or accepted by the State. If applicable, the qualification curriculum as defined in the operator's Advanced Qualification Program could be applied. Flight crew members are familiarized with the significant differences in equipment and/or procedures between concurrently operated types. The difference among different types of airpcrafts decrease and standards for these airpcrafts can be applied increasingly because function and performance have been improved by aircraft manufacture company in accordance to basic aircraft system in terms of developing new aircrafts for flight standard procedure and safety of flight. Also, it becomes more necessary for flight crews to control multi aircraft types due to various aviation business and activation of leisure business. Nevertheless, in terms of flight crew training and qualification program, there are no regulations in Korea to be applied to new aircraft types differently in accordance with different levels. In addition, it has no choice different programs based on different levels because there are not provisions to restrict or limit and specific standards to operate at or more than two aircraft types for flight safety. Therefore the aviation authority introduce Flight Standardization and/or Operational Evaluation Board in order to analysis differences among aircraft types. In addition to that, the aviation authority should also improve standard flight evaluation and qualification system among different aircraft types for flight crews to apply reasonable training and qualification efficiently. For all the issue mentioned above, I have studied the ICAO SARPs and some state's regulation concerning operating aircraft of different types(Mixed-fleet flying), and suggested some proposals on the different aircraft type operation as an example of comprehensive problem solving. I hope that this paper is 1) to help understanding about the international issue, 2) to help the improvement of korean aviation regulations, 3) to help compliance with international standards and to contribute to the promotion of aviation safety, in addition.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.35 no.1
• /
• pp.181-202
• /
• 2020

The Non-Appropriation Principle was stipulated in the OST and the MA. However the MA, creating CHM in international law for the first time, attempted to further limit the prohibitions to include ownership of resources extracted from celestial bodies, its rejection by the U.S. and most of the international spacefaring community prevented it from serving as a binding international treaty. Individuals or private enterprises intending to perform space exploitation must receive approval from the nation and may not appropriate outer space or celestial bodies. In the course of this space activity, each party will be liable. Articles 6 and 7 of the OST and the Liability Convention of 1972 deal with matters concerning those problems. The CSLCA of 2015 and Luxembourg Space Resources Law of 2017 allows States to provide commercial exploration and use of space resources to their own nationals and to companies operated by other countries within their territory. These laws do not violate Article 2 of the OST. In the case of the CSLCA of 2015, the law clearly states that it cannot claim ownership, sovereignty or jurisdiction over certain celestial bodies. Even if scholars claim that the U.S. CSLCA and Luxembourg Space Resources Law violate the non-appropriation principle of the OST, they cannot prevent these two countries from extracting the space resources on "the first come, first served" basis. The legal status of outer space including the moon and other celestial bodies is res extra commercium, like the high seas, where the fishing vessels from each country catch and sell fish without occupying the sea. Major space-faring nations must push for the adoption of an international regulatory committee which will oversee applications and issue permits based on a set of robust, modern, and forward-thinking ideals that are best equipped to govern and protect outer space as individuals, businesses, and nations compete to commercialize space through mining and the extraction of space-based resources. The new Corpus Juris Spatialis on the development of space resources, whether it is a treaty or a soft law such as recommendation and declaration, in the case of the Moon and Mars, will cover a certain amount of area to develop, and the development period by the states should be specified.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.215-239
• /
• 2011

We are now entering the era of Commercial Space Transportation with the rapid commercialization of space. Commercial Space Tourism will be realized first of all in the commercial space transportation and the spacecraft is developing for it led by private enterprise such as Virgin Galatic and XCOR Aerospace. The spacecraft for space tourism is developed as Reusable Launch Vehicle(RLV). RLV Spaceship I & II manufactured by the Scaled Composites for Virgin Galatic had completed experimental flight successfully and is going to put to the operation for space travel around the year 2012. In our country, Yecheon Astro-Space Center located in Yecheon, Kyungbuk Province, signed a binding-MOU with XCOR Aerospace and going to start space travel in the year 2013 with the spacecraft LYNX MARK-II. Thus, now space travel has become a reality to us. But it is also reality that there's no study by legal basis preparing for the space tourism domestically and internationally. In this regards, this thesis dealt with legal issues related to space tourism. These are as follows : (1) the applicabe law issue that is which law between air law and space law will apply, (2) the status of space tourist issue that is space tourist can be considered as personnel of a spacecraft and/or space flight participant and has the duty to obey the order of the captain of spacecraft, (3) the responsibility of the government for the non-governmental entities such as private enterprise which involved in space tourism in case space accident occurs during the space travel, (4) license permit and supervision issue by the government (In this point, for activating the market of the space tourism, I think it is essential to guarantee the safety of the spacecraft by the government authority, though U. S. government declared that it has not certified the launch vehicle as safe for carrying crew or space flight participants), (5) registration issue, (6) space insurance issue. For all the issues mentioned above, I have studied the existing international treaties and several country's domestic law to the space by referring U.S's Commercial Space Launch Amendment Act of 2004 and New IGA of 1998 and concluded that uniform legal regime to govern these issues should be established domestically and internationally in the near future.