As for Air France and their manuals, I suspect a move from the union to avoid KLM pilots to replace AFR pilots in the French fleet. (Just a guess.)
Exactly the same as English speaking pilots wanting everyone to speak English : for safety reasons...
BrATCO, the companies KLM and AF still have the requirements to speak English
and the national language. Like Iberia, LH, Swiss etc. The court ruling and its implication on KLM are still unclear to me, as they are two different airlines operating under two different regulatory authorities.
For those who claim that a national language with its abbreviations other than English don't work or cause greater risk, I cannot really share this point of view. I had looked into this and Latin America which is mainly Spanish speaking seems to have no problem with it. There are a few instances where English speakers get amused, and usually the characters are shuffled around; the General Operating Manual (GOM) is abbreviated MGO in Spanish. If I remember correctly COPA has a dual set of manuals, English and Spanish.
I see this thread derail in typical pprune tradition. Usually, when languages
other than English are being discussed, fingers get pointed at France, due to the almost hostile tradition and history of relations between France and the UK.
Bad translations from manuals result from poor proof-reading. Embraer has had its moments, too. Why cannot translated parts be proof-read by engineers or pilots, who are fluent or native speakers?
After all they do really struggle on the radio when flying in foreign, English speaking countries.
Never heard Luftwaffe pilots struggle in English. You may find the accent amusing and certain pronunciation. I have heard more LH pilots with rather poor English skills, but I guess I am not competent enough to question the mighty DLR test
