• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.62
• /
• pp.65-86
• /
• 2020

Drones, which were originally developed for military purpose, have expanded rapidly not only in hobbies, leisure, but also in broadcasting, filming, and public sectors, and search and rescue drones have been used to find four Korean teachers who went to Nepal for volunteer work but went missing in the avalanche. The government is encouraging the use of drones in the public sector as a policy to foster the drone industry, and the market is expected to expand in the future. This study presents improvement measures and specific directions for use of drones by public agencies at a time when the use of drones is expanding in the public sector. To that end, this research reviewed the interviews of relevant experts, analysis of drone operation regulations by public agencies, and the cases of operation of drones for searching missing persons by police. First of all, it will have to secure skilled personnel before the introduction of the drones and then determine the specifications of the drones through sufficient review, and then be put into the mission after careful examination of the drones. Next, it is necessary to draw up a base rule for drone operation and draw up a manual accordingly. Finally, drone flight has the risk of a crash, and it is essential to secure dedicated personnel for drone operation, especially since drones in the public sector are specialized in large scale compared to hobby drones to achieve their purpose. This research only conducted a detailed analysis of the National Police Agency's drones for searching for missing persons, and there are limitations to the number of people interviewed. Subsequent studies will require analysis of various public institutions, and in addition to interviews, surveys will require analysis of various data and statistics.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Aviation and Aeronautics
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• pp.94-99
• /
• 2021

UTM is an air traffic management ecosystem under development for autonomously controlled operations of UAS by the FAA, NASA, other federal partner agencies, and industry. They are collaboratively exploring concepts of operation, data exchange requirements, and a supporting framework to enable multiple UAS operations beyond visual line-of-sight at altitudes under AGL 500ft in airspace where air traffic services are not provided. Minimum Safe Altitude is a generic expression, used in various cases to denote an altitude below which it is unsafe to fly owing to presence of terrain or obstacles. The European drone regulation mentions that the UAS is maintained within 120 metres from the closest point of the surface of the earth during flight, except when overflying an obstacle. This study attempted to develop a minimum flight altitude database system. Based on domestic and international rules and regulations on setting the minimum flight altitude it is expected that it can be applied to the operation of aircraft and unmanned aerial system in UTM environments for specific area in Korea.

• 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.