A Study on Single Pilot Resource Management Using Integral Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process

This research aims to help develop aviation safety policies for the general aviation industry, especially for flight training schools. The analytical hierarchy process (AHP), fuzzy AHP, and fuzzy integral methods were used to find variables that impact aviation safety for training pilots in Korea and the United States using survey participants’ experience and perceptions. The results represent the circumstances of aviation safety in the real world where single pilot resource management, especially situational awareness, is crucial. The authors find that integral fuzzy AHP provides more explicit considerations, making up for the ambiguity of the linguistic responses caused by the AHP and fuzzy AHP.

The right of the overflown state to divert or intercept civil aircraft under a bomb threat: an analysis with regard to Ryanair flight 4978

The purpose of this article is to discuss whether a state has a right to divert or intercept a foreign civil aircraft flying above its territory, when the aircraft is under a bomb threat. The analysis stems from the recent incident where a Ryanair passenger jet was diverted to Minsk while flying in Belarusian airspace; however, the article approaches the topic from a general perspective, analyzing the key applicable rules of international aviation safety and security law. The article argues that air sovereignty and national rules on aviation (the latter wherever such exist) provide states acting in good faith the right to divert or intercept foreign aircraft for security reasons. Meanwhile, Article 3 bis of the Chicago Convention does not recognize such a right. The right is also limited by international rules that oblige every state to assist aircraft in distress, as well as rules that emphasize the authority and responsibility of the pilot-in-command. Since mid-air interventions are so rare, the legality of states’ actions must be analyzed case-by-case. Regardless, the legal regime of international aviation does not allow states to respond to security threats in whatever way they please, especially if the threat is a mere pretext for politically motivated action.

Comparative study of civil aviation de-licensing regimes in New Zealand, Australia and Canada

<p>This paper looks at the civil aviation law for New Zealand, Australia, the USA and Canada in regards to the ‘de-licensing’ of participants in the aviation system. The comparative analysis is on each country’s ability to take administrative action against an aviation participant on an ‘on notice’ basis and, in cases where there is an imminent threat to aviation safety, on a ‘without notice’ basis. Issues looked at include: (a) The process the regulator must adhere to in bringing administrative action. (b) The appeal or review rights available to the aviation participant. (c) The availability of a stay to the aviation participant while he or she waits a full hearing. (d) The availability of a specialist tribunal with aviation expertise to hear an appeal. The issues are examined in order to determine what, if any, improvements could be made to the New Zealand system. The paper concludes that the New Zealand system could be improved by providing for a more streamlined appeal or review process; a unified transport tribunal dealing with land transport, maritime and civil cases and an ability, in limited circumstances, for the Director's decision to be stayed pending a full hearing.</p>

Comparative study of civil aviation de-licensing regimes in New Zealand, Australia and Canada

<p>This paper looks at the civil aviation law for New Zealand, Australia, the USA and Canada in regards to the ‘de-licensing’ of participants in the aviation system. The comparative analysis is on each country’s ability to take administrative action against an aviation participant on an ‘on notice’ basis and, in cases where there is an imminent threat to aviation safety, on a ‘without notice’ basis. Issues looked at include: (a) The process the regulator must adhere to in bringing administrative action. (b) The appeal or review rights available to the aviation participant. (c) The availability of a stay to the aviation participant while he or she waits a full hearing. (d) The availability of a specialist tribunal with aviation expertise to hear an appeal. The issues are examined in order to determine what, if any, improvements could be made to the New Zealand system. The paper concludes that the New Zealand system could be improved by providing for a more streamlined appeal or review process; a unified transport tribunal dealing with land transport, maritime and civil cases and an ability, in limited circumstances, for the Director's decision to be stayed pending a full hearing.</p>