• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.9
• /
• pp.85-143
• /
• 1997

The main purpose of the investigation of an accident caused by aircraft is to be prevented the sudden and casual accidents caused by wilful misconduct and fault from pilots, air traffic controllers, hijack, trouble of engine and machinery of aircraft, turbulence during the bad weather, collision between birds and aircraft, near miss flight by aircrafts etc. It is not the purpose of this activity to apportion blame or liability for offender of aircraft accidents. Accidents to aircraft, especially those involving the general public and their property, are a matter of great concern to the aviation community. The system of international regulation exists to improve safety and minimize, as far as possible, the risk of accidents but when they do occur there is a web of systems and procedures to investigate and respond to them. I would like to trace the general line of regulation from an international source in the Chicago Convention of 1944. Article 26 of the Convention lays down the basic principle for the investigation of the aircraft accident. Where there has been an accident to an aircraft of a contracting state which occurs in the territory of another contracting state and which involves death or serious injury or indicates serious technical defect in the aircraft or air navigation facilities, the state in which the accident occurs must institute an inquiry into the circumstances of the accident. That inquiry will be in accordance, in so far as its law permits, with the procedure which may be recommended from time to time by the International Civil Aviation Organization ICAO). There are very general provisions but they state two essential principles: first, in certain circumstances there must be an investigation, and second, who is to be responsible for undertaking that investigation. The latter is an important point to establish otherwise there could be at least two states claiming jurisdiction on the inquiry. The Chicago Convention also provides that the state where the aircraft is registered is to be given the opportunity to appoint observers to be present at the inquiry and the state holding the inquiry must communicate the report and findings in the matter to that other state. It is worth noting that the Chicago Convention (Article 25) also makes provision for assisting aircraft in distress. Each contracting state undertakes to provide such measures of assistance to aircraft in distress in its territory as it may find practicable and to permit (subject to control by its own authorities) the owner of the aircraft or authorities of the state in which the aircraft is registered, to provide such measures of assistance as may be necessitated by circumstances. Significantly, the undertaking can only be given by contracting state but the duty to provide assistance is not limited to aircraft registered in another contracting state, but presumably any aircraft in distress in the territory of the contracting state. Finally, the Convention envisages further regulations (normally to be produced under the auspices of ICAO). In this case the Convention provides that each contracting state, when undertaking a search for missing aircraft, will collaborate in co-ordinated measures which may be recommended from time to time pursuant to the Convention. Since 1944 further international regulations relating to safety and investigation of accidents have been made, both pursuant to Chicago Convention and, in particular, through the vehicle of the ICAO which has, for example, set up an accident and reporting system. By requiring the reporting of certain accidents and incidents it is building up an information service for the benefit of member states. However, Chicago Convention provides that each contracting state undertakes collaborate in securing the highest practicable degree of uniformity in regulations, standards, procedures and organization in relation to aircraft, personnel, airways and auxiliary services in all matters in which such uniformity will facilitate and improve air navigation. To this end, ICAO is to adopt and amend from time to time, as may be necessary, international standards and recommended practices and procedures dealing with, among other things, aircraft in distress and investigation of accidents. Standards and Recommended Practices for Aircraft Accident Injuries were first adopted by the ICAO Council on 11 April 1951 pursuant to Article 37 of the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation and were designated as Annex 13 to the Convention. The Standards Recommended Practices were based on Recommendations of the Accident Investigation Division at its first Session in February 1946 which were further developed at the Second Session of the Division in February 1947. The 2nd Edition (1966), 3rd Edition, (1973), 4th Edition (1976), 5th Edition (1979), 6th Edition (1981), 7th Edition (1988), 8th Edition (1992) of the Annex 13 (Aircraft Accident and Incident Investigation) of the Chicago Convention was amended eight times by the ICAO Council since 1966. Annex 13 sets out in detail the international standards and recommended practices to be adopted by contracting states in dealing with a serious accident to an aircraft of a contracting state occurring in the territory of another contracting state, known as the state of occurrence. It provides, principally, that the state in which the aircraft is registered is to be given the opportunity to appoint an accredited representative to be present at the inquiry conducted by the state in which the serious aircraft accident occurs. Article 26 of the Chicago Convention does not indicate what the accredited representative is to do but Annex 13 amplifies his rights and duties. In particular, the accredited representative participates in the inquiry by visiting the scene of the accident, examining the wreckage, questioning witnesses, having full access to all relevant evidence, receiving copies of all pertinent documents and making submissions in respect of the various elements of the inquiry. The main shortcomings of the present system for aircraft accident investigation are that some contracting sates are not applying Annex 13 within its express terms, although they are contracting states. Further, and much more important in practice, there are many countries which apply the letter of Annex 13 in such a way as to sterilise its spirit. This appears to be due to a number of causes often found in combination. Firstly, the requirements of the local law and of the local procedures are interpreted and applied so as preclude a more efficient investigation under Annex 13 in favour of a legalistic and sterile interpretation of its terms. Sometimes this results from a distrust of the motives of persons and bodies wishing to participate or from commercial or related to matters of liability and bodies. These may be political, commercial or related to matters of liability and insurance. Secondly, there is said to be a conscious desire to conduct the investigation in some contracting states in such a way as to absolve from any possibility of blame the authorities or nationals, whether manufacturers, operators or air traffic controllers, of the country in which the inquiry is held. The EEC has also had an input into accidents and investigations. In particular, a directive was issued in December 1980 encouraging the uniformity of standards within the EEC by means of joint co-operation of accident investigation. The sharing of and assisting with technical facilities and information was considered an important means of achieving these goals. It has since been proposed that a European accident investigation committee should be set up by the EEC (Council Directive 80/1266 of 1 December 1980). After I would like to introduce the summary of the legislation examples and system for aircraft accidents investigation of the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, The Netherlands, Sweden, Swiss, New Zealand and Japan, and I am going to mention the present system, regulations and aviation act for the aircraft accident investigation in Korea. Furthermore I would like to point out the shortcomings of the present system and regulations and aviation act for the aircraft accident investigation and then I will suggest my personal opinion on the new and dramatic innovation on the system for aircraft accident investigation in Korea. I propose that it is necessary and desirable for us to make a new legislation or to revise the existing aviation act in order to establish the standing and independent Committee of Aircraft Accident Investigation under the Korean Government.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.32
• /
• pp.123-159
• /
• 2013

The purpose of this research paper is to re-valuate the factors that affected the Royal Navy's rearmament and preparation for war by conducting analysis on the discussion held in the Britain on the strategic priorities and Navy's coping measures adopted during the interwar period. After the end of the WWI, each of the military arms of the Britain faced significant difficulty in securing budget and increasing their military power all throughout the interwar period, and the Navy was not an exception. The WWII that got started on September 1939 was the turning point in which this difficulty led to full-fledged crisis. Immensely many criticisms followed after the war and problems were identified when it comes to the Royal Navy's performance during the war. This type of effort to identify problem led to the attempt to analyze whether Royal Navy's preparation for war and rearmament policy during interwar period were adequate, and to identify the root causes of failure. Existing studies sought to find the root cause of failed rearmament from external factors such as the deterioration of the Britain itself or pressure from the Treasury Department to cut the budget for national defense, or sought to detect problems from the development of wrong strategies by the Navy. However, Royal Navy's failed preparation for the war during interwar period is not the result of one or two separate factors. Instead, it resulted due to the diverse factors and situations that the Britain was facing at the time, and due to intricate and complex interaction of these factors. Meanwhile, this research paper focused on the context characterized by 'strategic selection and setting up of priorities' among the various factors to conduct analysis on the Navy's rearmament by linking it with the discussion held at the time on setting up strategic priorities, and sought to demonstrate that the Navy Department's inadequate counter-measures developed during this process waned Royal Navy's position. After the end of WWI, each of the military arms continued to compete for the limited resources and budget all throughout the interwar period, and this type of competition amidst the situation in which the economic situation of Britain was still unstable, made prioritization when it comes to the allocation of resources and setting up of the priorities when it comes to the military power build-up, inevitable. Amidst this situation, the RAF was able to secure resources first and foremost, encouraged by the conviction of some politicians who were affected by the 'theory of aerial threat' and who believed that curtailing potential attack with the Air Force would be means to secure national security at comparatively lower cost. In response, Navy successfully defended the need for the existence of Navy despite the advancement of the aerial power, by emphasizing that the Britain's livelihood depends on trade and on the maintenance of maritime traffic. Despite this counter-measuring logic, however, Navy's role was still limited to the defense of overseas territory and to the fleet run-off instead of sea traffic route production when it comes to the specific power build-up plan, and did not understand the situation in which financial and economic factors gained greater importance when it comes to the setting up of strategic priorities. As a result, Navy's plan to build its powers was met with continual resistance of the Treasury Department, and lost the opportunity to re-gain the status of 'senior service' that it had enjoyed in the past during the competition for strategic prioritization. Given that the strategic and economic situation that Korea faces today is not very different from that of the Britain during the interwar period, our Navy too should leverage the lessons learned from the Royal Navy to make the effort to secure viable position when it comes to the setting of priorities in case of national defense strategy by presenting the basis on why maritime coping should be prioritized among the numerous other threats, and by developing the measures for securing the powers needed effectively amidst the limited resources.

• Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology
• /
• v.33 no.6
• /
• pp.624-635
• /
• 2019

Bird strike accidents, a collision between aircraft and birds, have been increasing annually due to an increasing number of aircraft operating each year to meet heavier demand for air traffic. As such, many airports have conducted studies to assess and manage bird strike risks effectively by identifying and ranking bird species that can damage aircraft based on the bird strike records. This study was intended to investigate the bird species that were likely to threaten aircraft and compare and discuss the risk of each species estimated by the single-matrix and multi-matrix risk assessment models based on the Integrated Flight Information Service (IFIS) data collected in Gimpo, Gimhae and Jeju Airports in South Korea from 2005 to 2013. We found that there was a difference in the assessment results between the two models. The single-matrix model estimated 2 species and 6 taxa in Gimpo and Gimhae Airports and 2 species and 5 taxa in Jeju Airport to have the risk score above "high," whereas the multi-matrix model estimated 3 species and 5 taxa in Gimpo Airport, 4 species and 5 taxa in Gimhae Airport, and 2 species and 3 taxa in Jeju Airport to have the risk score above "very high." Although both models estimated the similar high-risk species in Gimpo and Gimhae Airports, there was a significant difference in Jeju Airport. Gimpo and Gimhae Airports are near the estuary of a river, which is an excellent habitat for large and heavy waterbirds. On the other hand, Jeju Airport is near the coast and the city center, and small and light bird species are mostly observed. Since collisions with such species have little effect on aircraft fuselage, the impact of common variables between the two models was small, and the additional variables caused a significant difference between the estimation by the two models.

• Korean Business Review
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.137-170
• /
• 2008

This study is presenting the logistics strategy in the international logistics markets which makes competition and corporation among north-east Asian countries to establishing the multi-pass Eurasian railroads. The countries located in north-east area of Eurasia like China, Japan, Russia and Korea are paying higher costs and disutility to the transportations and communications due to repeated conflicts and confrontations causes from the politic problems. They are being used surface transportation for most of all logistics between Europe and Asia except special merchandises because of characteristic of cargo to be air, the Silk Road remains vestige only which was main logistic passage to this area since BC. So far the Trans-Siberian Railway is being used by Russia mostly as north of Eurasian transport because of difficulties of service. The Trans-China Railway built in 1992 is not accomplishing as a international logistic passages. It is expected to take a long lead time because of characteristic of resource development and poor logistic infrastructure to the countries like Uzbekistan, double landlocked country, Mongolia and Azerbaijan, the countries do not be adjacent to the sea, even they have great economic jump-up plans through the development of their own resources. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization(SCO) start to sail officially in 2001 is constructed with China, Russia, Tadzhikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan as regular members of 6 countries and Mongolia, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran as observers 5 countries. It is started as a military alliance to protect terror, but now, it is expended to cooperate with the traffic, transportation, trade and share of energies. The Russia is doing their best to activate TSR as a government target to developnorth area equivalently, and economic develop of far-east Siberia. And also it is agreed provisionally to improve and repair of rail road between Nahjin and Hassan to connect TSR and TKR( Trans-Korea Railroad) by Russia, North Korea and South Korea with Russian's aggressive efforts. The development plan of this area is over lapped with GTI(Greater Tumen Initiative) promoted by UNDP, and is a cooperated project by 5 countries of South Korea, Mongolia, China, Russia and North Korea, subject to review the appropriation of energy, tour, environment, rail road connection between Mongolia and China and establishing a ferry route to north-east Asia. It is Japanese situation to pay attention to Russia and China even they have been supplying large-scope of infrastructure in Mongol area without any charges, target to get East Asia Main Rail Road to connect Mongolia and Zalubino of Russia. In case of the program for the Denuclearization of North Korea is not creeping, it will be accelerated to connect the TKR and TSR, TKR and TCR by somehow attending United States, including developing program promoted by UN ESCAP. As the result, Korean peninsular will continue the central role of competition and cooperation as in the past, now and future of north-east Asia, as of geographical-economics and geographical-politics whether it is requested or not wanted by neighbor countries.