Interesting thread, especially being CDG-based and having operated in and out of it 865 times over the past 15 years. Language
is a contributing factor here, if only for the ATCO mis-translating
"mille un" by
"one zero one one". I remember from Human Performance and R/T lessons that mixing up figures including only ones and zeros is fairly common in English (such as FL100 for FL110, which is why we are supposed to say
"Flight Level One Hundred" instead of
"Flight Level One Zero Zero", for instance).
However, for those who believe that using a single language would mean that everyone is on the same hymn sheet and that as a result no confusion could occur, check out this past accident:
https://aviation-safety.net/database...?id=19890219-0 (Sorry, can't find the official report now!)
I cannot comment on technical specifics as I am not A320 type-rated, but as mentioned in previous posts, I cannot figure out why the crew would accept (and read back) a QNH 10Hp
higher than the one broadcast on ATIS. Even with rainshowers going through, a 10Hp difference between the time the ATIS was picked up and the approach time is at best improbable in temperate climes such as CDG's. (I sometimes question on frequency a difference of 1-2Hp). Getting the QNH right is simply paramount on 2-D non-precision approaches.
Oh, and btw... whatever happened to going around at MDA (+50 ft) if not visual?
Cheers 