Originally Posted by
Eutychus
Can you spell out for me exactly how your comment relates to the incident mentioned in the OP?
The "standard phraseology" didn't prevent the wrong value from being given. In English. The only difference I can see had English been the only ATC language is that the incorrect value (which is the root problem here, isn't it?) would very likely have been passed on to *everyone*.
Surely you're missing the point that the incorrect value was given to just this one aircraft.
I would strongly suggest that if the CDG controllers used only English language phraseology at all times this incident would not have happened. If they weren't continually flipping between the standard language and French they would probably not have made the error to begin with. Even if they had had a momentary lapse and confused 1011 and 1001 in one transmission, the error would likely have been detected quickly when the correct QNH was transmitted to all other aircraft IN ENGLISH. The fact that the majority of these other transmissions were in a language foreign to the incident crew reduced their opportunity to catch the error.
As to the reasons for the Gallic refusal to adhere to the language stipulated as standard by ICAO (behaviour stubbornly echoed in China, I might add), who can say. It may be that domestic aviation in France would be drastically hindered by deficiencies in English language proficiency amongst the pilot population (it would certainly be in China), it may be national pride. But it's more fun to consider that it's sour grapes. Just be thankful the standard language isn't Esperanto.