• Journal of the Korean Society for Aviation and Aeronautics
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.25-30
• /
• 2016

Obstacle defines all fixed and mobile objects, or parts thereof, that are located on an area intended for the surface movement of aircraft or extend above a defined surface intended to protect aircraft in flight or stand outside those defined surfaces and that have been assessed as being a hazard to air navigation. The airspace around airports are maintained free from obstacles so as to permit the intended aeroplane operations at the airports to be conducted safely and to prevent the airports from becoming unusable by the growth of obstacles around the airports. This is achieved by establishing a series of obstacle limitation surfaces or airspace imaginary surfaces that define the limits to which objects may project into the airspace. This is a case study that shows an application of obstacle limitation criteria, which must be maintained free from an critical obstacle, for specific conditions of two airports. For the purpose of the application, aeronautical studies/flight safety influence assessments were used to identify possible solutions and select a solution that is acceptable without degrading aviation safety.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.34 no.1
• /
• pp.159-201
• /
• 2019

Along with Annex 14 Volume I establishment in 1951 and the set-up of restriction surface around the runway, aeronautical technique and navigation performance achieved dazzling growth, and the safety and precision of navigation greatly improved. However, restrictions on surrounding obstacles are still valid for safe operation of an aircraft. Standards and criteria for securing safety of aircraft operating around and on airport is stated in Annex 11 Air Traffic Services and Annex 14 Aerodrome etc. In particular, Annex 14 Volume I presents the criteria for limiting obstacles around an airport, such as natural obstacles such as trees, mountains and hills to prevent collisions between aircraft and ground obstacles, and artificial obstacles such as buildings and structures. On the other hand, Annex 14 Volume I, in the application of the obstacles limitation surfaces, apply the exception criteria, as it may not be possible to remove obstacles that violate the criteria if the aeronautical study determines that they do not impair the safety and regularity of aircraft operation. Aeronautical study has been applied and implemented in various countries including United States, Canada and Europe etc. accordingly, Korea established and amended some provisions of the Enforcement rules of the Aviation Act and established the Aeronautical study guidelines to approve exceptions. However, because ICAO does not provide specific guidelines on procedures and methods of Aeronautical study, countries conducting aeronautical study have established and applied their own procedures and methods. Reflecting this realistic situation, at the 12th World Navigation Conference and at the 38th General Assembly, the contracting States demanded a reexamination of the criteria for current obstacle limitation surfaces and methods of aeronautical study, and the ICAO dedicated a team of experts to prepare new standard. This study, in line with the movement of international change in obstacle limitation surface and aeronautical study, aims to compare and analyze current domestic and external standards on obstacle limitation and height limits, while looking at methods, procedure and systems for aeronautical study. In addition, expecting that aeronautical study will be used realistically and universally in assessing the impact of obstacles, we would recommend the institutional improvement of the aeronautical study along with the development of quantitative analysis methods using the navigation data in the current aeronautical study.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Aviation and Aeronautics
• /
• v.31 no.1
• /
• pp.18-25
• /
• 2023

In recent years, UAM (Urban Air Mobility) has emerged as a solution to these urbanization problems, and many related reports and diverse prospects have been reported. UAM flights are planned to take off and land at a Vertiport located in the city center and fly along a pre-established corridor. In order for UAM to operate safely in the city center, it must ensure a safe flight path that avoids the buildings in the city center and many surrounding obstacles. Therefore, in this study, we compared and examined the installation standards of the obstacle limitation surface necessary for UAM to take off and land safely at the Vertiport. First, we analyzed the helicopter obstacle limitation surfaces in Japan and overseas, and the UAM Vertiport installation standards and obstacle limitation surface application standards recently announced at the FAA and EASA. It identified differences and similarities between heliport and Vertiport, and considered improvements to domestic helicopter obstacle limitation surfaces and criteria that could meet FAA and EASA standards.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Aviation and Aeronautics
• /
• v.30 no.3
• /
• pp.28-37
• /
• 2022

Obstacle Limitation Surface (OLS) is conceptual surface establishing the airspace around aerodromes to be maintained from obstacles to ensure safe aircraft operations. Despite advances in the technologies for aircraft, navigation systems and the development of new flight procedures, the criteria defining OLS have not been amended since its initial establishment, resulting in the overestimation of areas for height restriction. As there were requests to examine OLS at the 12th Air Navigation Conference and the 38th ICAO Assembly, the research on the OLS revision began in earnest and ICAO has proposed Obstacle Free Surface (OFS) and Obstacle Evaluation Surface (OES) as an alternative of the existing OLS. OFS is surfaces where obstacles shall not be permitted, and OES is ones where obstacles be evaluated with an aeronautical study and could be permitted under some conditions. The purpose of this study is to preemptively assess the efficiency and safety of OFS and OES by applying them to the second runway (15L/33R) of Incheon International Airport. The results show that OFS and OES are capable of serving the instrument flight procedure safely with a smaller obstacle clearance area compared to the existing OLS.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.97-133
• /
• 2006

항공기사고는 약 70%가 이 착륙단계에서 일어나는 CFIT사고이다. 그러므로 비행장주위의 장애물 관리는 사고방지에 매우 중요하다. 국내에서도 비행장주위의 장애물제한을 항공법에 규정하고 있고, 최근 개정안으로 제시된 동법 시행규칙에서 ICAO의 차폐기준의 적용을 포함하였으나 이 규정만으로는 비행장 주위의 장애물의 체계적인 관리가 어려우며, 특히 국내 비행장 주위의 차폐이론적용에 필요한 세부기준이 명확하지 않다. 본 연구는 항공장애물과 관련된 ICAO의 규정 및 항공선진국들의 관련 규정을 검토 분석하고 국내 현황과 비교분석한 후 국제기준에 비추어 국내 환경에서도 적용 가능한 비행장 공역에서의 항공장애물관리규정(안)의 방향을 제시하였고 특히 논란의 여지가 많은 차폐이론의 적용의 명확한 기준방안을 제시하였다.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Aviation and Aeronautics
• /
• v.14 no.4
• /
• pp.60-65
• /
• 2006

An aeronautical study is a study of an aeronautical problem to identify possible solutions and select a solution that is acceptable without degrading safety. ICAO and the member states have established the standards regarding the obstacle limitation and regulated the construction of the man-made structures in and beyond the standards. Any obstacles that extend above a standards should as far as practicable be removed except after aeronautical study it is determined that the object would not adversely affect the safety or significantly affect the regularity of operations of airplanes. However ICAO and most member states does not established provisions of the scope and implement procedures of aeronautical study. Recently, Civil Aviation Regulations in Korea specify the provisions relevant to aeronautical study. The Prime objectives of this comparative study are to improve the domestic provisions for aeronautical study caused by obstacle limitation through the investigate the international standards and regulations.

• Journal of Korean Society of Transportation
• /
• v.23 no.3 s.81
• /
• pp.21-34
• /
• 2005

To control the obstacles surrounding aerodrome is significant for preventing air accident and ensuring the long sustaining of aerodromes. On the other hand, within a scope of ensuring safe flight operations, the application of Shielding is one of the issues to be importantly considered to manage efficiently the obstacles limitation around aerodromes, to dissolute the private asset privilege limitation from regulation on aerodrome circumference, and to decrease the pains to manage the obstacles, in terms of not only operating safely but also utilizing efficiently the airspace around aerodromes. The ICAO and other aviation-advanced states mitigate the construction limitation or exempt the obligation of obstacle sign by applying the shielding theory that the obstacles are not regarded as obstacles where are below the shadow surface. The Republic of Korea inserted the new regulation including the applying shielding similar to ICAO on Aviation Act and regulations. It is, however, hard to manage the aviation obstacles around aerodrome efficiently with these new regulation. Particularly, there exists much rooms to dispute because it cannot suggest the specific standard which is necessary to apply shielding theory at airspace of aerodromes. Therefore, in this study, the international standards on aviation obstacles were reviewed, analyzed and compared with those of domestic status. The direction of which guideline for control of aeronautical obstacles applicable within domestic circumstances as well as correspondent with international standard was suggested. Particularly, as far as the disputable application of shielding theory is concerned, the alternatives for aviation safety and efficient airspace operation by suggesting the clear standards alternatives were suggested.

• Journal of Korean Society of Transportation
• /
• v.23 no.6 s.84
• /
• pp.41-53
• /
• 2005

The effective utilization of an airport is considerably influenced by natural features and man-made structures inside and outside its boundary. These obstacles affect the airspace available for approaches and departures and the weather minima which dictates the necessary weather conditions for aircraft to be allowed to take-off or land. Certain areas of the airspace near airports must be regarded as the integral parts of the airport system. The availability of the required airspace is as important as are the runway and their associated strips to the safe and efficient use of the airport. For these reasons, ICAO and the member states have established the standards regarding the obstacle limitation surfaces and regulated the construction of the man-made structures in and beyond the surfaces. Existing objects that extend above a obstacle limitation surfaces should as for as practicable be removed except when, in the opinion of the appropriate authority, an objects is shielded an existing immovable objects, or after aeronautical study it is determined that the object would not adversely affect the safety or significantly affect the regularity of operations of airplanes. However, Korea's aviation law does not specified the outer horizontal surface in the obstacle limitation surfaces, while ICAO and most member states do. The absence of the outer horizontal surface regulation has created legal disputes between regulating agencies and private parties. The case study in this paper found that a skyscraper planned beyond Korea's obstacle limitation surfaces does affect the flight safety and the efficient use of an airport. Therefore, in areas beyond the obstacle limitation surfaces. those objects which extend to a height of 150m or more above ground elevation should be regarded as obstacle, unless a special aeronautical study indicates that they do not constitute a hazard to airplanes. We proposed low alternative regulatory schemes for resolving the issues raised in this paper, and we recommended to adopt ICAO's standards and recommended practices.

• 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.31 no.2
• /
• pp.145-176
• /
• 2016

Aviation safety can be secured through regulations and policies of various areas and thorough execution of them on the field. Recently, for aviation safety management Korea is making efforts to prevent aviation accidents by taking various measures: such as selecting and promoting major strategic goals for each sector; establishing National Aviation Safety Program, including the Second Basic Plan for Aviation Policy; and improving aviation related legislations. Obstacle limitation surface is to be established and publicly notified to ensure safe take-off and landing as well as aviation safety during the circling of aircraft around airports. This study intends to review current aviation obstacle management system which was designed to make sure that buildings and structures do not exceed the height of obstacle limitation surface and identify its operating problems based on my field experience. Also, in this study, I would like to propose ways to improve the system in legal and regulatory aspects. Nowadays, due to the request of residents in the vicinity of airports, discussions and studies on aviational review are being actively carried out. Also, related ordinance and specific procedures will be established soon. However, in addition to this, I would like to propose the ways to improve shortcomings of current system caused by the lack of regulations and legislations for obstacle management. In order to execute obstacle limitation surface regulation, there has to be limits on constructing new buildings, causing real restriction for the residents living in the vicinity of airports on exercising their property rights. In this sense, it is regarded as a sensitive issue since a number of related civil complaints are filed and swift but accurate decision making is required. According to Aviation Act, currently airport operators are handling this task under the cooperation with local governments. Thus, administrative activities of local governments that have the authority to give permits for installation of buildings and structures are critically important. The law requires to carry out precise surveying of vast area and to report the outcome to the government every five years. However, there can be many problems, such as changes in the number of obstacles due to the error in the survey, or failure to apply for consultation with local governments on the exercise of construction permission. However, there is neither standards for allowable errors, preventive measures, nor penalty for the violation of appropriate procedures. As such, only follow-up measures can be taken. Nevertheless, once construction of a building is completed violating the obstacle limitation surface, practically it is difficult to take any measures, including the elimination of the building, because the owner of the building would have been following legal process for the construction by getting permit from the government. In order to address this problem, I believe penalty provision for the violation of Aviation Act needs to be added. Also, it is required to apply the same standards of allowable error stipulated in Building Act to precise surveying in the aviation field. Hence, I would like to propose the ways to improve current system in an effective manner.