• Journal of the Korean Society of Clothing and Textiles
• /
• v.40 no.4
• /
• pp.669-684
• /
• 2016

This study investigates Korean fighter pilot's usage and satisfaction of a flight duty uniform (FDU). The survey was conducted from October 2014 to March 2015 using Focus Group Interview (FGI) and questionnaires. FGI collected qualitative data about duty and requirements; subsequently, surveys were performed to collect quantitative data about wearing conditions and satisfaction with FDU. The results of the FGI and the questionnaire were as follows. Type of pilot duty was divided into two parts, flight duty and ground duty. It is important to consider duties as well as factors related to survival when developing FDU. According to anthropometric data and wearing size, the basic size for apparel grading should be changed from actual size, 'M95XL' to 'M100L'. It is also necessary to improve the whole sizing system. Further studies about body form changes in pilot's movement are needed to improve mobility because the respondents perceived some restrictions at several body parts in movement with the coverall uniform. Summer FDU had a low satisfaction level in vent hole function and appearance. Furthermore, protection problems in the vent hole were also an issue. Making a seasonal classification of FDU fabric will be more effective than a vent hole to increase a pilot's thermal satisfaction. Respondents had a passive stance towards FDU reform (including pocket change); therefore, a new FDU design strategy should concentrate on improving current FDU functions like mobility (or comfort) rather than dramatic changes. Pilots complained about the quality stability of FDU; therefore, quality control by military administration as well as concrete and clear design instructions by the developer should be attained together. The results obtained in this study are expected to be used as an important basis for the further development of FDU.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.1
• /
• pp.47-85
• /
• 1989

The Fundamental purpose of the Warsaw Convention was to establish uniform rules applicable to international air transportation. The emphasis on the benefits of uniformity was considered important in the beginning and continues to be important to the present. If the desire for uniformity is indeed the mortar which holds the Warsaw system together then it should be possible to agree on a worldwide liability limit. This liability limit would not be so unreasonable, that it would be impossible for nations to adhere to it. It would preclude any national supplemental compensation plan or Montreal Agreement type of requirement in any jurisdiction. The differentiation of liability limits by national requirement seems to be what is occurring. There is a plethora of mandated limits and Montreal Agreement type 'voluntary' limits. It is becoming difficult to find more than a few major States where an unmodified Warsaw Convention or Hague Protocol limitation is still in effect. If this is the real world in the 1980's, then let the treaty so reflect it. Upon reviewing the Warsaw Convention, its history and the several attempts to amend it, strengths become apparent. Hijackings of international flights have given rise to a number of lawsuits by passengers to recover damages for injuries suffered. This comment is concerned with the liability of an airline for injuries to its passengers resulting from aviation terrorism. In addition, analysis is focused on current airline security measures, particularly the pre-boarding screening system, and the duty of air carriers to prevent weapons from penetrating that system. An airline has a duty to exercise a high degree of care to protect its passengers from the threat of aviation terrorism. This duty would seemingly require the airline to exercise a high degree of care to prevent any passenger from smuggling a weapon or explosive device aboard its aircraft. In the case an unarmed hijacker who boards having no instrument in his possession with which to promote the hoax, a plaintiff-passenger would be hard-pressed to show that the airline was negligent in screening the hijacker prior to boarding. In light of the airline's duty to exercise a high degree of care to provide for the safety of all the passengers on board, an acquiescene to a hijacker's demands on the part of the air carrier could constitute a breach of duty only when it is clearly shown that the carrier's employees knew or plainly should have known that the hijacker was unarmed. A finding of willful misconduct on the part of an air carrier, which is a prerequisite to imposing unlimited liability, remains a question to be determined by a jury using the definition or standard of willful misconduct prevailing in the jurisdiction of the forum court. Through the willful misconduct provision of the Warsaw Convention, air carrier face the possibility of unlimited liability for failure to implement proper preventive precautions against terrorist. Courts, therefore, should broadly construe the willful misconduct provision of the Warsaw Convention in order to find unlimited liability for passenger injuries whenever air carrier security precautions are lacking. In this way, the courts can help ensure air carrier safety and prevention against terrorist attack. Air carriers, therefore, would have an incentive to increase, impose and maintain security precautions designed to thwart such potential terrorist attacks as in the case of Korean Air Lines Flight No.858 incident having a tremendous impact on the civil aviation community. The crash of a commercial airliner, with the attending tragic loss of life and massive destruction of property, always gives rise to shock and indignation. The general opinion is that the legal system could be sufficient, provided that the political will is there to use and apply it effectively. All agreed that the main responsibility for security has to be borne by the governments. I would like to remind all passengers that every discovery of the human spirit may be used for opposite ends; thus, aircraft can be used for air travel but also as targets of terrorism. A state that supports aviation terrorism is responsible for violation of International Aviation Law. Generally speaking, terrorism is a violation of international law. It violates the soverign rights of the states, and the human rights of the individuals. I think that aviation terrorism as becoming an ever more serious issue, has to be solved by internationally agreed and closely co-ordinated measures. We have to contribute more to the creation of a general consensus amongst all states about the need to combat the threat of aviation terrorism.

• 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.