• Journal of the Korean Society for Aviation and Aeronautics
• /
• v.25 no.2
• /
• pp.69-76
• /
• 2017

고흥 항공센터에 2019년(예정) 신규 활주로가 설치되고, 비행시험 관련 시설, 장비들을 단계적으로 구축하여 국가 비행종합성능시험장으로 운영할 예정이다. 국가 비행종합시험장은 공항이 아닌 비행장으로 운영할 예정이다. 비행장에는 특별히 정하는 운영규정이 없는 실정이다. 그러나 특수한 목적으로 신설되는 국가 비행종합성능시험장을 보다 안전하고 효율적으로 운영할 수 있도록 관련법규와 국내 공항 및 비행장 운영관리 현황 조사, 해외의 비행장 운영관련 법규와 운영실태 조사, 해외 항공 전문가 자문 및 출장을 통하여 향후 국내 관련법규 제정 및 비행종합시험장 운영 시 활용할 수 있도록 지침을 제시하였다.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.29 no.1
• /
• pp.67-95
• /
• 2014

Some Contracting States of the Chicago Convention issue FAOC(Foreign Air Operator Certificate) and conduct various safety assessments for the safety of the foreign operators which operate to their state. These FAOC and safety audits on the foreign operators are being expanded to other parts of the world. While this trend is the strengthening measure of aviation safety resulting in the reduction of aircraft accident. FAOC also burdens the other contracting States to the Chicago Convention due to additional requirements and late permission. EASA(European Aviation Safety Agency) is a body governed by European Basic Regulation. EASA was set up in 2003 and conduct specific regulatory and executive tasks in the field of civil aviation safety and environmental protection. EASA's mission is to promote the highest common standards of safety and environmental protection in civil aviation. The task of the EASA has been expanded from airworthiness to air operations and currently includes the rulemaking and standardization of airworthiness, air crew, air operations, TCO, ATM/ANS safety oversight, aerodromes, etc. According to Implementing Rule, Commission Regulation(EU) No 452/2014, EASA has the mandate to issue safety authorizations to commercial air carriers from outside the EU as from 26 May 2014. Third country operators (TCO) flying to any of the 28 EU Member States and/or to 4 EFTA States (Iceland, Norway, Liechtenstein, Switzerland) must apply to EASA for a so called TCO authorization. EASA will only take over the safety-related part of foreign operator assessment. Operating permits will continue to be issued by the national authorities. A 30-month transition period ensures smooth implementation without interrupting international air operations of foreign air carriers to the EU/EASA. Operators who are currently flying to Europe can continue to do so, but must submit an application for a TCO authorization before 26 November 2014. After the transition period, which lasts until 26 November 2016, a valid TCO authorization will be a mandatory prerequisite, in the absence of which an operating permit cannot be issued by a Member State. The European TCO authorization regime does not differentiate between scheduled and non-scheduled commercial air transport operations in principle. All TCO with commercial air transport need to apply for a TCO authorization. Operators with a potential need of operating to the EU at some time in the near future are advised to apply for a TCO authorization in due course, even when the date of operations is unknown. For all the issue mentioned above, I have studied the function of EASA and EU Regulation including TCO Implementing Rule newly introduced, and suggested some proposals. I hope that this paper is 1) to help preparation of TCO authorization, 2) to help understanding about the international issue, 3) to help the improvement of korean aviation regulations and government organizations, 4) to help compliance with international standards and to contribute to the promotion of aviation safety, in addition.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Aviation and Aeronautics
• /
• v.30 no.3
• /
• pp.132-139
• /
• 2022

UAM(Urban Air Mobility)은 가까운 미래에 현실이 되는 항공교통 체계로 미래 첨단 기술의 결정체이다. 비행은 인간의 생명을 절대 보장하는 숭고한 철학에 기반한다. 성공적인 UAM 개발을 위해서는 비행안전에 기초한 개발철학이 필요하며 올바른 방향을 제시해야 한다. UAM 체계와 유사한 항공교통체계는 민간항공 운항체계이며 UAM 체계의 개발을 도모하는 효과적 비교 연구대상이다. 본 연구는 민간항공 운항체계와 민간항공 조종사의 경험을 토대로 안전한 UAM 체계 개발의 방향을 제시하는 데 있다. 그중에서도 UAM 조종사 양성과 교육훈련체계 수립을 위한 방안을 제언하였다. 현존 관련법규를 검토하여 UAM 조종사 양성기준을 제시하였으며 초기 혼란을 방지하기 위한 대안을 포함하였다. 또한 민간항공기의 접근구간 항법성능을 측정하여 UAM 운항환경을 비교 예측하였다. 이를 통해 SMS 기법에 기반하여 UAM 체계의 위해요인(hazard)을 식별하여 미연에 사고를 예방할 수 있는 안전 방법론을 제시하였으며 UAM 로드맵의 올바른 정책 수립을 돕고자 한다.

• Aerospace Industry
• /
• s.91
• /
• pp.30-33
• /
• 2006

어느 나라에서든지 항공기를 운용하려면 그 나라 항공당국의 관리와 감독을 받아야 한다. 이러한 관리와 감독은 공공의 안전을 위하여 국가기관인 항공당국에서 법적으로 위임받아 수행하는 것이다. 우리나라의 경우 건설교통부산하 항공안전본부와 지방항공청에서 그 기능을 담당한다. 이러한 관리와 감독은 주로 항공기, 항공종사자, 운항조직, 정비조직 등을 대상으로 이루어지며 등록, 제증명, 면허 등과 같은 증명활동, 감독활동, 위반 사항에 대한 법적 제재 등과 같은 수단을 통해 이루어진다. 따라서 항공기를 도입하여 운항하려는 자는 사업계획 단계에서부터 우리나라의 항공안전 관리감독과 관련된 제반 법규와 절차를 사전에 충분히 이해하고 대비하여야 시행착오를 줄이고 시간과 금전적인 손실을 예비할 수 있을 것이다. 여기에선 항공기에 국한하여 항공기 도입과 관련된 항공기 인증제도와 그에 따른 법절차에 대해 설명하고자 한다.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.28 no.1
• /
• pp.115-157
• /
• 2013

Some contracting States of the Convention on International Civil Aviation (commonly known as the Chicago Convention) issue FAOC(Foreign AOC and/or Operations Specifications) and conduct various safety audits for the foreign operators. These FAOC and safety audits on the foreign operators are being expanded to other parts of the world. While this trend is the strengthening measure of aviation safety resulting in the reduction of aircraft accident, it is the source of concern from the legal as well as economic perspectives. FAOC of the USA doubly burdens the other contracting States to the Chicago Convention because it is the requirement other than that prescribed by the Chicago Convention of which provisions are faithfully observed by almost all the contracting States. The Chicago Convention in its Article 33 stipulates that each contracting State recognize the validity of the certificates of airworthiness and licenses issued by other contracting States as long as they meet the minimum standards of the ICAO. Consequently, it is submitted that the unilateral action of the USA, China, Mongolia, Australia, and the Philippines issuing the FOAC to the aircraft of other States is against the Convention. It is worry some that this breach of international law is likely to be followed by the European Union which is believed to be in preparation for its own unilateral application. The ICAO established by the Chicago Convention to be in charge of safe and orderly development of the international civil aviation has been in hard work to both upgrade and emphasize the safe operation of aircraft. As the result of these endeavors, it prepared a new Annex 19 to the Chicago Convention with the title of "Safety Management" and with the applicable date 14 November 2013. It is this Annex and other ICAO documents relevant to the safety that the contracting States to the Chicago Convention have to observe. Otherwise, it is the economical burden due to probable delay in issuing the FOAC and bureaucracies combined with many different paperworks and regulations depending on where the aircraft is flown. It is exactly to avoid this type of confusion and waste that the Chicago Convention aimed at when it was adopted in 1944. The State of the operator shall establish a system for both the certification and the continued surveillance of the operator in accordance with ICAO SARPs to ensure that the required standards of operations are maintained. Certainly the operator shall meet and maintain the requirements established by the States in which it operate. The authority of a State stops where the authority of another State intervenes or where the former has yielded its power by an international agreement for the sake of international cooperation. Hence, it is not within the realm of the State to issue FAOC towards foreign operators for the reason that these foreign operators are flying in and out of the State. Furthermore, there are other safety audits such as ICAO USOAP, IATA IOSA, FAA IASA, and EU SAFA that assure the safe operation of the aircraft, but within the limit of their power and in compliance with the ICAO SARPs. If the safety level of any operator is not satisfactory, the operator could be banned to operate in the contracting States with watchful eyes until the ICAO SARPs are met. This time-honoured practice has been applied without any serious problems. Besides, we have the new Annex 19 to strengthen and upgrade with easy reference for contracting States. We don't have no reason to introduce additional burden to the States by unilateral actions of some States. These actions have to be corrected. On the other hand, when it comes to the carriage of the Personal or Pilot Log Book, the Korean regulation requiring it is in contrast with other relevant provisions of USA, USOAP, IOSA, and SAFA. The Chicago Convention requires in its Articles 29 and 34 only the carriage of the Journey Log Book and some other certificates, but do not mention the Personal Log Book at all. Paragraph 5.1.1.1 of Annex 1 to the Chicago Convention even makes it clear that the carriage in the aircraft of the Personal Log Book is not required on international flights. The unique Korean regulation in this regards giving the unnecessary burden to the national flag air carriers has to be lifted at once.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.31-64
• /
• 2015

The Chicago Convention and Annexes have become the basis of aviation safety regulations for every contracting state. Generally, aviation safety regulations refer to the 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. Treaties duly concluded and promulgated under the Constitution and the generally recognized rules of international law shall have the same effect as the domestic laws of the Republic of Korea. Each contracting state to the Chicago Convention should meet ICAO SARPs about AOC and FAOC. According to ICAO SARPs, Civil Aviation Authorities shall issue AOC to air carriers of the state, but don't require to issue for foreign air carrier. However some contracting states of the Chicago Convention issue FAOC and/or Operations Specifications for the foreign operators. This FAOC is being expanded from USA to the other contracting states. Foreign operators have doubly burden to implement AOC of the ICAO SARPs because FAOC is an additional requirement other than that prescribed by the ICAO SARPs In Article 33, the Chicago Convention stipulates that each contracting state shall recognize the validity of the certificates of airworthiness and licenses issued by other contracting states as long as they are equal to or above the minimum standards of the ICAO. In ICAO Annex 6, each contracting state shall recognize as valid an air operator certificate issued by another contracting state, provided that the requirements under which the certificate was issued are at least equal to the applicable Standards specified in this Annex. States shall establish a programme with procedures for the surveillance of operations in their territory by a foreign operator and for taking appropriate action when necessary to preserve safety. Consequently, it is submitted that the unilateral action of the states issuing the FAOC to the foreign air carriers of other states is against the Convention. Hence, I make some proposals on the FAOC as an example of comprehensive problem solving after comparative study with ICAO SARPs and the contracting state's regulations. Some issues must be improved and I have made amendment proposals to meet ICAO SARPs and to strengthen aviation development. Operators should be approved by FAOC at most 190 if all states require FAOC. Hence, it is highly recommended to eliminate the FAOC or reduce the restrictions it imposes. In certain compliance-related issues, delayed process shall not be permitted to flight operations. In addition, it is necessary for the ICAO to provide more unified and standardized guidelines in order to avoid confusion or bias regarding the arbitrary expansion of the FAOC. For all the issue mentioned above, I have studied the ICAO SARPs and some state's regulation regarding FAOC, and suggested some proposals on the FAOC 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.28 no.1
• /
• pp.73-96
• /
• 2013

ICAO's Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme (USOAP) was initially launched in January 1995, in response to widespread concerns about the adequacy of aviation safety oversight around the world. The recent reduction in aircraft accidents and effective role that is evaluated on the basis of these results, and in 2013 the existing 'snapshot approach' to 'regular monitoring system (USOAP-Continuous Monitoring Approach)' was converted to. ICAO aviation safety assessment of the state in today's international community 'aviation safety credibility' as objective indicators to judge the enormous impact on the aviation industry, the state is not satisfactory, especially if the results of the evaluation and expansion of code-share airline ban, reduced international air transit passengers, including premium increases business and economic penalties should. In addition, ICAO implementation of the existing laws and regulations(Prescriptive Approach), but based on the Risk-based prevention model, Proactive Approach introduced the concept of aviation safety system, including international aviation safety policy has been to switch paradigms. This new ICAO international aviation safety policy also applies to the Government of the Republic of Korea in line with the aviation safey policies have changed. In particular, the systematic implementation of safety management for the existing laws and regulations in the center of the safety oversight system of risk-based introduction of the concept of proactive safety management, and According to international standards ICAO aviation service providers operate their own Safety Management System was set out in Aviation Law ever. In addition, the aviation safety is at the center of the field of the safety of aircraft operations and maintenance for the promotion is promoting various safety policies. This new paradigm shift in the international aviation safety policy in line with our state in the international community with the most exemplary aviation safety system firmly established itself as a model, the Government will strengthen the competitiveness of our aviation plans to support. To do this, the government, airlines, aviation officials try all the practical effect would be expected.

• 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.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Aviation and Aeronautics
• /
• v.23 no.4
• /
• pp.125-132
• /
• 2015

항공기 추락 시 충돌충격단계에서 사상자가 가장 많이 발생하는 것으로 나타나고 있다. 대부분의 경우, 승객들은 두부손상으로 의식을 잃게 되어 비상탈출에 실패하여 사망에 이르게 된다. 이에 대한 대응책으로 항공기 제작사들은 내구성이 강화된 항공기 좌석을 설계 및 제작하여 설치하고 있다. 객실에서는 승객들이 충격방지자세를 취함으로써 부상을 최소화할 수 있다. 승객들에 대한 충격방지자세 안내는 모든 항공사가 시간적 여유가 있는 비상상황에서만 객실승무원이 안내방송과 함께 시범을 보이도록 절차가 수립되어 있다. 그러나 갑작스런 사고의 경우 승객들은 충격방지자세에 대한 정보를 전달받지 못한 상태에서 사상의 위험에 직면하게 된다. 본 논문은 SHEL 모델을 적용하여 승객과 사상자발생 환경, 승객과 충격방지를 위한 안전절차, 승객과 승객안전정보 전달매체, 승객과 객실승무원등의 상호작용에 내재된 위해요소를 체계적으로 규명하고 객실안전에 대한 법규 및 절차 등의 개정을 제시함으써, 항공기사고로 인한 사상자 발생에 대한 근본적인 대안을 제시하여 항공안전 증진에 기여하고자 한다.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.29 no.1
• /
• pp.3-32
• /
• 2014

Safety Management System is the aviation industry policy for while operating the aircraft, to ensure the safety crew, aircraft and passengers. For operating a safe aircraft, in order to establish the international technical standards, the International Civil Aviation Organization has established the Annex 19 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation. As a result, member country was supposed to be in accordance with the policy of the International Civil Aviation Organization, to accept the international standard of domestic air law. The South Korean government announced that it would promote active safety management strategy in primary aviation policy master plan of 2012. And, by integrating and state safety programmes(ssp) and safety management system(sms) for the safe management of Annex 19 is to enforce the policy on aviation safety standards. State safety programmes(ssp) is a system of activities for the aim of strengthening the safety and integrated management of the activities of government. State safety programmes(ssp) is important on the basis of the data of the risk information. Collecting aviation hazard information is necessary for efficient operation of the state safety programmes(ssp) Korean government must implement the strategy required to comply with aviation methods and standards of the International Civil Aviation Organization. Airlines, must strive to safety features for safety culture construction and improvement of safety management is realized. It is necessary to make regulations on the basis of the aviation practice, for aviation safety regulatory requirements, aviation safety should reflect the opinion of the aviation industry.