CDG-french speaking

[alexban]

HY! One question: Why do you ,at CDG airport,and not only ,insist on speaking french,not only on the ground but also in the air? It is very
difficult sometime to try and listen all the french and english mixture,without getting a headeache.I understand french ,but all this french ,english,french ,english ...I tell you,it's not safe!
Everybody can make mistakes,and by making sure that all the pilots and atc's speak the same language you can avoid many of this mistakes.Don't have the wrong impression that pilots listen on the freq only when they hear their callsign.We are listening all the time ,especially on TMA and ground,all com.I think it's a safety issue.Finally ,our life it's on the line.
I can give you one ex ,from the ground.Smart french pilot,instructed in french to give way to us.We received taxi clearance,in english,but ,as I understand some french,I waited for few seconds to see what the other plane,coming from behind ,will do.He just came in sight,and passed like a bullet ! No appologies,just some harsh discussion in french between the controller and the speeding pilot.If I wouldn't have understood french ,I would've start taxiing,not seeing the oncoming plane,and maybe got into some mess.It's a busy international airport,not a domestic one.
Don't get me wrong.French is a beautifull language,but it's not the aviation language.
And it's not only in France that this happen.Also Greece,Turkey ,maybe some other.
ps . I was amazed to hear some 'american' callsign ,requesting clearance in a perfect,fluent french. I think they have translators now,like the chinese
:D

Brgds
Alex

[Jerricho]

Don't know if you have checked out this thread here (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=103933) Alex. Could be worth a look.

[av8boy]

Whachudoin J? Thought you were over that thread!

Anyway... aren't you supposed to be frozen by now or somthin?

:D Dave

[Sonnendec]

In Spain we also use spanish for communications with spanish-speaking pilots. And we think it´s safer than using only english.

Regards.

[Barnaby the Bear]

Without going over old ground, but surely the incident at CDG with the Spanish charter flight and the British cargo shorts, where a pilot was tragically killed spoke volumes.

[M609]

And we think it´s safer than using only english.

Funny, since only controlers/pilots in non english speaking countries that still cling to their national language in aviation think that.... ;)

(ICAO, Eurocontrol etc etc think english is the way to go)

Nice to have so "few" speaking our native language, made the choice to use english easy.

It's allso fairly easy to spot pilots that comes from nations that still use native language at home........ :8

[Sonnendec]

You are right there, but we use only english when its really necessary, not as often as we should sometimes, but thats another story.

Everybody think the safest way to give control is THEIR way, so its not a matter of speaking or not your own language.

There are five ICAO languages as long as i can remember. You want english to be the only ICAO language... well, i disagree, its as easy as that. But this is a bizantine no end-discussion, i dont want to convince you and you are not going to convince me.

Best regards,

Eduardo Carrasco
GCCC

[wlatc]

Perhaps the greatest threat to aviation - after gravity - is language. There’s not much we can do about gravity, but there is something we can do about language to improve aviation safety. The short-term solution is rather simple: we must all agree on a common aviation language, then, we must enforce its use.

Right now, English is favored but not mandated. There’s no law preventing a controller from speaking French in Montreal or Finnish in Helsinki. It’s perfectly legal, although not necessarily wise, for a pilot to speak Spanish in Miami or English in Havana. It’s a polyglot world we live in and aviation is no exception. Globalization is, after all, both the parent and child of aviation. If we fly, we shrink the world and make borders less relevant. Politically, we may oppose globalization; practically, we in aviation have no choice but to embrace it.

So, which language shall we use? The obvious first answer is English. It is currently “hot” as the world’s second language; although Chinese and Arabic – neither attractive aviation choices for a number of reasons - are starting to make inroads. English has problems, though, which make it a less-than-perfect choice. (see: http://members.aol.com/kentjones9/myhomepage/business.html) Esperanto, Latin or a relatively simple Romance language like Spanish might make nice choices, or perhaps we could come up with an entirely new “aviation-exclusive” tongue. The fact is, however, that to change to another language now would require training almost the entire aviation community in the new language, thus insuring an even lower level of proficiency than is presently the case with English. So for now, I suggest we agree with ICAO (see: http://www.icao.int/icao/en/res/a32_16.htm) and accept English as the lingua franca of the skies.

This leaves us with the issue of enforcement. There are no legal penalties for poor phraseology. There is no world body capable of issuing corrective orders to pilots or controllers who use poor English aviation phraseology . . . or use no English at all.

There should be, and it ought to be ICAO.

In the meantime, each nation ought to pass legislation and their aviation authorities (like the FAA and JAA) ought to pass rules and joint aviation requirements mandating that proper English phraseology be used by all pilots and controllers who participate in their airspace. They should identify and correct communication problems in the same way they do pilot deviations and controller errors. Pilots and controllers who fail to meet standards should be banned from use of the airspace. This is a serious problem and it demands rigorous solutions.

The long-term solution is automation. Pilot/controller Data Link programs will be designed that rely on symbols and simple, easily translatable phraseologies. Pilots and controllers will be able to display clearances in the language of their choice and errors will eventually be eliminated. Once again, as with so many endeavors, the best way to serve humanity is to take humans out of the loop.

Rich
http://atcea.com - the world of ATC training

[Sonnendec]

Well. The other day i saw this documentary where the Boeing and the Airbus Chiefs were talking about the total automation of their planes. Their conclusion was that they were not going to work in that direction, since internal studies had demonstrated that an automated plane would be much less safe than the redundant and man-supervision-ready-to-take-over plans they are working on.

So...

Best regards.

[yellowplane]

..and here is a question which has probably been asked before.. with new JAR ATCO licences, can UK nationals work in places like MAH, PMI, MAD, FRA or CDG without any problem? Can ATCOs from Spain France or Germany work in the UK or do we HAVE to take a language test to work in each others countries? I suspect the native English speakers may be at a disadvantage??!!

[Sonnendec]

... and if english was the unique language to speak, wouldnt you have advantage over all the others that dont have english as their mother language to work ANYWHERE?

As you can see, everything have different points of view.

As in any other job, i think you should do a native language test, if not to speak on the frequency, at least to be able to coordinate with your colleagues. Or do you want us to speak english between us too? I dont think so.

And more, would you want to live in a place where you cant speak a word? Right now people from the EU can come to Spain and apply fon Air Traffic Controller, and yes, we have a language test for them that spanish people dont do (we assume spanish people speak spanish).

If you dont agree with this, maybe you should think that we are over 200 million persons in Europe and more than 30 countries. When you fly over France (if you were a pilot), think that it is YOU the one that does not speak the language, is not the french controller´s fault, for the ATC is easier and safer to be able to do his job in his mother language, but on behalf of safety and the international conventions, that french guy speaks english to you, since a pilot can´t learn every language in the world.

Well, as i said before, this is a no-end discussion, i dont want to convince you and you are not going to convince me.

Best regards, mate.

[alexban]

Sonnendec:
Mate ,did you read my initial post? If so,take a step back,and read again yours.Who was talking about speaking with your coleagues in english? Do you think that we speak in english in the cockpit,if we are not native english ? Except the checklists ,of course,which are done in english.
That was not the problem,mate. I was talking about safety.If you want to become a pilot or a controller ,this days ,you must know english,and yes,you should speak it pretty well.If you think is hard,don't become a professional pilot or controller.It's simple.
There are pilots flying everywhere in the world,not only in their native country.We are not required to speak chinese if we fly for China Eastern,for ex.Or to know arabic if we fly for Emirates.We will speak in english,we are pros.
I don't mind what you speak in the tower between yourself,I won't hear it from the plane,it's important that you understand between yourself.
But what you speak to the pilots must be understand by everybody! On gound or air.

' When you fly over France (if you were a pilot), think that it is YOU the one that does not speak the language, is not the french controller´s fault, for the ATC is easier and safer to be able to do his job in his mother language, but on behalf of safety and the international conventions, that french guy speaks english to you, since a pilot can´t learn every language in the world.'
If you are a pilot? Who else is flying ,mate? Astronauts?
And yes,read again your words.'In interest of safety,as a pilot can't learn every language in the world '.But we all must learn one,english it is now.Maybe in 3000 will be japanese,who knows.We'll learn it then.
And ,don't think for a minute you can't make mistakes.Give yourself a chance,by making sure everybody understands what you are saying.This way ,maybe even a collision may be avoided. Read my example or Barnaby's .


' as i said before, this is a no-end discussion, i dont want to convince you and you are not going to convince me.'
This says all about you mate. I think you have no place in this industry if you think like this.You should be able to listen to arguments and even change your mind if you been proved wrong.

I hope you'll think a minute about all this
Brgds Alex

[WEBLUEIT]

If we were in a bar right now I think 'Sonnedec' would at this point turn away from you and start speaking to someone else in his native tongue. He is not thinking with his head.

As you say 'Alex' it is for "Safety's" sake. I would gladly put my hand up and say that I'd learn French, Spanish or whatever language the authorities say in order to speak one common language.

I have had a number of instances where language has caused problems and I have sent in a number of ASR's because of it. I do hope that others do the same and that someone somewhere will come to the conclusion that we have been 'reasonably' fortunate with the number of catastrophies so far (respect to those who have not been 'reasonably' fortunate RIP). The problem is that we have all had instances where we have come close to a potential incident through other languages being used instead of English.

It is also inefficient. The number of times that I have called for 'push & start' when a plane next to me or behind me is about to push is incredible. Had they called in 'English' I would not have called myself as I would know what is happening around me. It must waste the controllers time to have to tell me to 'hold position as there is another pushing back behind me'. So where is the merit in speaking another language?

[M609]

WEBLUEIT: I think you summed it up nicely. Situational awareness is becoming more and more important both for controllers and pilots. Having accidents like the one in Paris and to some extent Linate because of use of 2 languages on the air is silly. It's one of the things that is cheapest and easiest to fix.

I have worked as a controller in Sweden, where the military and GA used to use Swedish on the air. The military started transition to english in 1999, and have completed it now I think (They still used swedish in basic training in 2002). The GA might take longer, but the percentage of swedish speakers on the air have decreased.

I found it a big pain in the ass to keep track of who spoke what, and offcourse had the problems as stated by others regarding SA.

Cheers

[EuroATC]

Alexban, well said

I am an air traffic controller from Canada who has worked in Europe. When I arrived in Geneva centre, both french and english was used on the frequency. After the introduction of RVSM they made the upper airspace english only. There were no problems. IF you wanna work in the aviation industry you must speak english.. I didn't decide this, it's just the most commonly used language in developed countries. All pilots do, all controllers do. So what is the problem if we use 1 language.. it's alot safer... ever heard of situational awareness?

IT's a whole pride thing, I am allowed to speak spanish, french etc so I will and the reason.. "we think it's safer to speak to spanish/french speaking pilots/controllers in their mother tongue.." So what are we saying here? If I fly into a spanish/french airport speaking english.. am i not provided as safe a service? Is the controller not able to communicate effectively?

I don't buy that, it's not a question of ability when it comes to language it's a question of will. They DON'T want to speak the one language.

[ATC Watcher]

Ah the famous language issue ! coming back like clockwork every year or so .

So My usal anwers : fisrt ICAO still says that the language to be spoken on R/T is the language of the country overflown, but in absence of a common International language, a phraseology based on English shall be used.,
So what happens in Spain and CDG is according ICAO.
You do not like it, lobby your politicians to make a change , The Russians , The wole South and central American continent and Chinese would love it.
So forget that and we have to work in the real world.

Second : the well know example of the collision in CDG between the shorts and the MD83 ( as mentionned by B.the bear ) is unfortunately not a very good one
( it is only often used as such because there are in fact extremely few accidents occurs where language was the direct cause )

If you read the report ( avail on line at www.bea-fr.org ) you will find that everyone was in the wrong there. The main cause was the controller lining up the shorts ( number 2 After take off that did not occur, but the shorts pilot said he mistook a 737 landing for the take off ) at an intersection the controller thought was behind the MD 83, . who also tought the Shorts was behind him.
The fact that the take off cearance to the MD83 was in French did not help , we all agree on that , but that was not the cause of the accident. Merely a factor that could have avoided it possibly.
.
But that said, I fully agree and support that English phraseology ( not Shakespeare English or Texan American ) should be used at all international airports and Centres...and that includes CDG of course.

[Sonnendec]

Ok.

Alexban, my last post was not answering to you at all. So i dont understand why you attack me like that. Oh well.

You havent understood anything i said , so i´ll just turn around and speak with a colleague in ENGLISH, so everyone of you can understand. If you want to talk about what i wrote and not about what you think i wrote, let me know.

It´s sad that some people think their way is the ONLY way. I just said my opinion about what i and a lot others think is safer, but dont worry you all, i´ll just shut up and let you all agree with each other. You´ll feel much better.

I´m an air traffic controller and i am used to calm down under stressed situations, dont think you will offend me anymore.

Best regards and goodbye.

[labello]

I suppose it's more confortable for only-english speaking people, to be able to understand everything.
But for example in cdg, the aircraft behind you may be on the same frequency, but the one just 1000ft above you or at 3 Nm on your right will be on another frequency. So it doesn't matter I speak french, english or chinese, you won't hear it.

and the traffic is really too complicated to have an idea on what's going on just by listening.
As a controller, what I want, and what is the safer, is that all pilots understand me at first. the safest would be that every pilot and every controller would speak all languages. of course it's impossible, so we use english when there is no other way.
It's not to be pride that we don't want to use english, it's because we really feel it's the safest.

In cdg there have been tries to do it all in english , and it creates a chaos perhaps for lack of preparation. I know there still have studies to use it on tower frequency, because it's simpler, and here, the pilots may really have an idea on what's going on.

what you would like, is that every people on earth, or at least, every people working in aviation would speak english as a native speaker. it's as realistic as saying that we should speak all languages on earth.

;)

[EuroATC]

labello

It's chaos because you all want it to be chaos. There is absolutely no reason why CDG cannot operate in 100% english. I also know many of your collegues who do not agree with you, it is they who have told that it's very possible to run CDG in english... In Geneva where I used to work, we stopped using french on the frequency from one day to the next. We had AFR, BZH, DAH, RGI etc. They were not "confused" and there was no "chaos" . Even these regional pilots were very capable in english.

[ILS 119.5]

In my view, one language only for all transmissions around the world. I don't care what language but one only. If you are against using one language then why don't you use your local times for take off and then let the pilots have the confusion of correcting the time difference for landing. This would really screw the whole aviation industry world wide. We (professional aviation personnel) are working in this industry as professionals and should ensure any safety issues, such as the use of different languages, are dealt with to ensure ambiguities do not arise. To me the use of other languages over the R/T is an unsafe practice and should be stopped. I have been to CDG many times, and as said earlier, awareness of the departure/arrival sequence gives the pilot a better picture of what is going on. Without this awareness, safety becomes more of an issue. We should stop unsafe practices now before an accident stops them. Could you, as a pilot or a controller, having caused the death of a person due to an unsafe practice which has been talked about for many years be able to handle it knowing that you could have stopped it by having a universal language. I could not. Think about it. I do not want to be attacked on my doorstep because of unsafe practices which could have been stopped.

ILS 119.5

[Phoenix_X]

and the traffic is really too complicated to have an idea on what's going on just by listening

Labello,
It's actually sad to hear a controller say that. Listening to the radio and what goes on around you (even if it's not all aircraft in a 10nm radius as you explained) may not let us know *all* that is going on, but certainly does expand our situational awareness. I do understand French, and have been at CDG many times. I found I did actually have an idea about what's going on. More so than the guy/gal besides me who doesn't understand French. Sometimes the advantage was very, very clear.
It's remarks like these that make me think more ATCO famil flights and more pilot visits to ATC are required.

[Sonnendec]

I think famliarization flights and pilots visiting the control centers and towers are the best way to understand the enemy´s work (it´s a joke, dont attack me again). The fact is that i always ask to travel in the cockpit when i fly (and usually do) and by now i´ve seen no ONE pilot come to see what we do at the ACC. This is a fact, i dont think pilots are not interested in air traffic control (of course they are), but for some reason they dont act like they did. I´ve had a lot of conversations with very experienced pilots where i have come to the conclusion that they didnt have the slightest idea of what our work was. Many of them have changed their mind about a lot of things just talking to some of us. So have us, don get me wrong.

And let me give you an example of the other part of your post: Canarias ACC, december 2003 (very busy): three arrivals to Tenerife Sur (GCTS), one german and two british traffics. The first one had no restrictions (since its the number one), the second one was 8.5 miles behind (i need 8 at least), and the third one was 14 miles behind the second one. Ok. I tell the first one to maintain high speed for secuence, which he does, increasing to 300 knots on descent; i doublecheck the secuence and finally i get a steady 10 miles separation between the two first ones and 12 miles between the second and the third. Great, i adjust the speed of the second and the third and mark it as a solved problem on my mind and take my attention to the other bunch of traffics departing and arriving the seven airports we have at Canarias (most of them conflict with each other, so imagine -vectors, climbings, descents, etc...-). Then i look again to the secuence to Tenerife Sur just to transfer the three traffics to approach. Surprise! the second one had made an espectacular speed reduction and was only 6 (six!) miles from the traffic behind, although 16 miles from the traffic ahead. More workload! expedite, reduce IAS, increase IAS... i finally ask the second traffic what his IAS was and he answers: Oh yes, Control, we have reduced to 250 (two fifty!!) knots to get separation with the preceeding traffic. In that moment, i was tempted to say: ok, why dont you come down here and sit down while i fly your plane? (of course i didnt say any of this, i just did my work... for the second time). The pilot was obviously wrong from an atc point of view, he had more than enough separation with the preceeding, and didnt realize the traffic behind was going to the same airport. I know he did it on his best intention, but his situational awareness made him take a bad decision. Of course, all the comunications were in english.

The point is that too many times pilots suffer the "ATC" syndrome (which is absolutely normal, since it´s their job to try to be aware of whats going on in case we -the controllers- make a mistake) and they make wrong decisions based on what they think it´s happening, not thinking that the only ones that KNOW whats going on are us, the controllers. A part of all that interest in using one only language implies for the pilots to have a "safety sensation", a waranty, that many times is ficticious.

I assure you that at least where i work, using spanish language with spanish pilots is safer for the whole system, although you are very free to fight for that "safety sensation" and, if it gets imposed to us, it wont make our work easier, but we will still do our job, which is to serve you with safety as good as possible and get the minimun average delay.

Best regards and greetings to the pilots and colleagues on this topic.

Oh! and one last thing. In a secuence with a spanish pilot and a foreign pilot, we should use english for everybody, in that i totally agree. We do it, but very few times, and we should do it always. The same with a separation between a spanish and a foreigner.

A little autocriticism is never bad, let´s all use it sometimes.

Best regards from the sunny Spain.

[HarryBucket]

Sonnendec,

If, as you say, you speak in english when there is a "mixed language" traffic sequence including Spanish pilots, why then is it, if all the pilots are Spanish it is safer to speak in their native tongue, as they obviously understand English perfectly well? :confused:

In my limited experience it does seem to be the same 2/3 countries which persist in switching between native tongue and English on the R/T. Does this situation occur at Schipol, Berlin or Copenhagen or only in the previously posted areas?????
:cool:

[Sonnendec]

Hello Harry.

Interesting point. I did not say that it is safer to speak only english in a secuence with spanish-speaking and not speaking pilots. I only said we should do it, because i understand it is on busy approach and departure where the pilots should have that "safety sensation" i talked about in my last mail. To say the truth, i only speak the same language for both kind of pilots where there is a separation going on, or for visual information. It is easier for me to get both pilots informed at once than having to repeat the information.

Best regards from the Heizzy Canarias.

[Phoenix_X]

Sonnendec, I agree with your point about pilots not visiting ATC enough (I do it regularly, and I'm also told I seem to be the only one), and I also agree with you about pilots 'playing ATC.'

However, in your example, even if he couldn't have heard the other traffic (ahead and behind) he'd probably done thesame thing, as he could see traffic on TCAS. Now there's a problem, pilots playing ATC using their very, very limited TCAS displays.

Now the advantage if hearing everybody around (in english for sake of argument) is that he *could* have used it to understand he was in a perfect sequence and that he shouldn't slow down. Unfortunately he didn't get this picture, but sometimes we do get it, and then you wouldn't have had this problem. So your example seems to me to be a good argument for one-language comms, however is also shows it's not a 100% solver.

[alexban]

Sonnendec:
First ,about this 'safety sensation',you're talking about. Every pilot I know of,considers this sensation to be very important.It's a key factor,and we are taught from the begining,as airline pilots,If you don't feel safe about something ,don't do it.If you don't feel safe landing,even if the plane ahead of you did it,go around.So,I must feel safe about the space I'm flying in.
second,your example is maybe not so fortunate,regarding that pilot's conception on separation.
Using TCAS ,I can see trafic around me,and I can say I feel a lot safer now.I can check the separation now.What I do,I always check where the plane ahead of me is (as distance).From RT (if in English) I sometimes know if it's a heavy,what speed must he fly.Also ,I know what speed the traffic behind me has.If necessary I do some minor adjustments as to mantain distance from the traffic ahead of me,and also I know how fast to exit the rwy to help the other behind me.Maybe sometimes I have to hurry a bit to exit.
There could be many situations ,when pilots will do their calculations ,that will differ from ATC just a bit.For example,if you have a tail wind ,your speed will decrease slower than normal,so you have to keep this in mind.Also ,sometimes,due to many reasons ,the atc will keep you high,then instruct you to descend,come short and decrease speed.Tricky,I can say.(for ex VIE) .Here comes that 'safe sensation 'you are talking about.Maybe I feel ,due to wind ,weight...,I wont't be able to keep the high speed you want ,for that long.There is a must though.You should always tell ATC you start reducing speed.They usually are ok with this.
So ,anyone can make mistakes.I think speaking the same language will prevent this more.
Brgds Alex

[Sonnendec]

Phoenix:

The point of my example was exactly that: speaking a common language does not solve any of the problems that we have now, if we use english when we have to. Misunderstanding can be a problem, but in my airspace i feel and think that using both english and spanish make it safer. But its only an opinion, lets wait for the smart people to make the studies about it. Until then, i will do what i think is safer and better for the traffics under my responsability. I am here to serve you, over all. And thats something we cannot forget.

Alex:

I agree with you, as i said in one of my posts, i use english when two pilots (one spanish and one not) are involved in a separation or a secuence that affects both of them, in order to give the foreign pilot the confidence enough to make the approach without having to guess what the other traffic is doing, and to be sure that he is not going to have any problem in a separation. But this doesnt imply that it is safer to do it in all situations.

As i also said, this is an opinion from an ATC professional, i can be wrong. But by now, that is how things are.

I also agree with you that sometimes we instruct the pilots to do some things that are, at least, quite difficult (your example of descend and reduce is very good), but there you are to tell me that i am making you have a bad time to follow my instructions. Sometimes we have a lot of little dots with a lot of information at the same time, and we obviously pay more attention to keep safety than to the traffics comfort, so you will have to tell me if you want me to do something about it.

Best regards, mates.

[EuroATC]

Sonnendec

As it's unfortunate to hear your sequence was ruined by a pilot who thought he had the whole picture it is 100% your fault for not giving a speed restriction. That is basic ATC.. if you need a speed you assign it. I never "assume" a pilot is going to maintain a certain speed.

Sorry but you cannot blame anyone but yourself. Aircraft will reduce or increase all the time if not assigned speeds.

[Sonnendec]

Hello, euroATC:

Obviously he had a restriction, mate, the three of them had it, if they didnt there would be no way to get a steady separation. The point is that he took his own decision and reduced much more.

Best regards.

[Jerricho]

*Sigh* Here we go again.

Having spoken to pilots and controllers, there is a very high level of situational awareness on the flight deck that is gleaned from listening to R/T going on around them. If you add the element of more than one language, this can detract from this. The mere concept of "standard phraseology" logically leads to "standard language". Without falling into the all too easy xenophobic "it should be our language", IMHO they should be a universal standard SINGLE language that is adhered to. ICAO should pull their finger out on this one.

[EuroATC]

Well if the pilot did not comply with an ATC instruction then a report should have been files which would be sent to his company. I do not see how this has anything to do with the topic. The pilot thought he knew what was going on and took action which was completely inapropriate.

[Sonnendec]

"The pilot thought he knew what was going on and took action which was completely inapropriate"

Well... bingo, that is exactly the point.

[Goldfish Jack]

Sonnendec

Dont tell me you trust pilots. Manage them in such a way that they enjoy being stuffed around and thank you when you send them to hell and back.
Even better if you can do it in a language that we can all understand and speak!!

You got 1 that does not listen to you - my word you are lucky.

[Sonnendec]

:D :cool: :) :p :O

[Guy D'ageradar]

Euro (sic) ATC

Little bit idealist, don't you think?

It may be simple enough to declare a UIR to be anglophone, as all tend to be highly experienced CPL's with a decent grasp of the language. Now lets come back down to earth - literally. Where's the cutoff point? Do you expect Pierre on his solo cross country, entirely within his own (non anglophone) country to speak english - which is likely to be at least the second language of most of those on the freq.?

How about the ppl, striving to accomplish his IMC/IFR rating? Should he have to learn english to your (or any other declared) standard, just to fly from LSGG to LFLB at FL80?

Now let's return to the TMA (OK, I'm biased!) where aforesaid Pierre returns home among other IFR traffic. At what stage of training is he required to be capable of ALL comms in english. More importantly, if it's doubtfull, which is the safer option? A pilot who understands completely the instruction given to the detriment of other's situational awareness or a pilot who THINKS he understands the instruction given in his non-mother tongue, just so that the rest of the world THINKS they know what the other pilot THINKS he has to do?

You know as well as I do that many pilots tend to think that their situational awareness is considerably better than it actually is ( no disrespect but TCAS is NOT horizontally accurate). Which do you trust more?

Enter cat among pigeons!!!!

:ok:

[alexban]

Guy:
I think I never saw a PPL pilot on CDG, don't tell me all the french you hear there everyday are dozens of PPL pilots :)
Maybe you also have a german pilot ,in TMA,going home in his Beechcraft D55 (more than 1000 km range).Do you also speak german ? :) I can tell you he'll speak a damn good english.
I visited once an airfield ,north of Paris,near Senlis.All pilots there knew english pretty well.
Why don't you say it's easier for you to speak your native language,not for 'Pierre"?
Pierre ,as a PPL pilot,will also have to pass his radiotelephony exams,which means English tests.But maybe it's diferent where you live,I don't know.
Which do we trust more? you say. The TCAS (for a RA),my friend.I don't want to give you some sad examples of mistrust.
Brgds
Alex

you consider yourself the cat? Pussycat.

:ok:

[EuroATC]

Guy

Sorry I don't agree and nothing you say can convince me.

Your comparaison is a little off. Please compare apples with apples. Should there be a certain level of french for a french pilot at low levels. Sure, the controller should be able to understand it but the default should be that everyone uses english as a first language.

When we are talking about a place like CDG, one language is safer, it's been proven that incidents have happened due to 2 languages being used.

In Canada this happened as well in a bilingual airport. Someone was in position for take off in fog... instructed in english. aircraft 1 mile final cleared to land in french. how safe is that? Yeah the controller missed it but if the RT would have been the same language there is a huge chance that the pilots would have saved the day a little sooner. (the aircraft on final eventually saw the guy in position and went around)

I have worked the UIR when it was bilingual and when it was english only. There was absolutely no difference in the understanding of pilots over the frequency. The french guys spoke english just fine.

You have been in the TMA a little too long, they have corrupted your mind!

p.s. you should stick to english too.. easier to understand :)

[EuroATC]

Alexban,

For the record, Guy's mother tongue is English.. he only learned french a few years ago.

Not sure why he's defending this cause so much!! :)

[Guy D'ageradar]

Euro ATC,

Firstly, I suggest that you read Danny's rules regarding anonymous forums and their purpose. Perhaps you are not aware of the recent consequences of Identities being divulged over here.......

Secondly, as EA says, my mother tongue is English. The reason that I have stated my opinion here is not to "defend the cause" as he puts it - I would be more than happy to use english only on freq - simpler for me and as generally agreed, better for flight safety. Call it playing devil's advocate if you like but I am trying to point out the fact that there are quite a few sides here. Also to show that not all anglophones are as xenophobic as many on this thread appear to be.

I work in Geneva so cannot speak firsthand of CDG but I can speak for here. We do not have many VFRs on approach - they are forced to avoid the TMA - but the tower does. They have to be integrated with IFR traffic. We also have a lot of arriving/departing/overflying GA IFR traffic - much of it from/to France and much of it consisting of light twin/single prop aircraft.
This is the crux of the message that I am trying to put across. Where do you draw the line? At some point, this traffic has to mix with the big boys. Does that mean that the average ppl is to be banned from flying into a large number of airports in his own country NOT because of traffic considerations but because he cannot speak another's language?

The implications go further than this. As a tower controller, you regularly have to communicate with all sorts of vehicles on the airfield for a variety of reasons. Are you suggesting that they, too should speak english?


Euro ATC you say "Your comparaison is a little off. Please compare apples with apples. Should there be a certain level of french for a french pilot at low levels. Sure, the controller should be able to understand it but the default should be that everyone uses english as a first language." Sounds like a bit of a contradiction to me. As you know, in Geneva, we only respond in French when the pilot makes the initial call in French. Ie, the default language IS english. So I repeat, Where do you draw the line?

[alexban]

Sorry to say this,but the 'average ppl' will have to stop flying at big international airports -actually they did at most airports.They cannot mix with the "big guys",it's not so safe.It's not a question of language.
There are different types of planes,with different characteristics,equipments on board,etc.I used to be an 'average ppl' pilot,flying a small single engine a/c,not allowed into 'big airports' with my 60kts landing speed :) ,and it's a huge difference from the 737's of today.
If you hapen to see GA on some ,not so big airports,this are not "average ppl' pilots ,they have to know more than that,and the planes are into a higher class (better equipment,higher speed,etc.)And they also are not mixing with the 'big guys' too much,I think.The twr will see about this.You know better though.
One ex : some time ago,at a middle east airport,I was on GS,at about 2500',and I saw a TCAS target,maybe at 1000' or less,on a intercepting course with the LOC.I informed the TWR two times,in english,abou this plane.No answer from the plane (maybe no english speaking pilot),the twr said it is a GA plane,not to worry. :confused: >But he doesn't change course ,so soon a very strong conversation occured in their language,and finally he changed course.I was about to go around at that point ,already having that plane in sight.
He should have speak english,or he shouldn't have been there.That's my point,sorry if I offend anybody. :ok:
Brgds Alex

ps.. Guy,don't be so worried about EuroATC giving out your name,there are many Stuart's,including even Stuart Little .But you got a point,though .Have a nice break! Brgds

[PPRuNe Radar]

Sorry to say this,but the 'average ppl' will have to stop flying at big international airports -actually they did at most airports.They cannot mix with the "big guys",it's not so safe.It's not a question of language.

I think that those with experience in the USA, which has the biggest airports and the highest traffic flows, yet can still cope with GA, might disagree. ;)

[alexban]

Radar ,don't get me wrong,I think every ATC can cope with GA ,we are all professionals,or we should be.(no matter if in that big,and high..US or that small,low ...rest of the world :;)
But I think I saw no GA on DFW International,although are more than 20 small arirports for Ga in the area.But no GA plane on this airport,as I know.(first thing they teach you at a small GA airfield is the Dallas area and the forbidden zones -like DFW airport) Then again,I maybe wrong. And DFW is one of the ' biggest airports and the highest traffic flows' .Or JFK,or ....
:}
Anyway,the native language in USA is english,at least for the FAA?So,check the topic.please.
By the way,have you ever been to Heathrow,CDG,FRA...? Quite big,you know?
Brgds
Alex

[Guy D'ageradar]

Alexban ,

Glad to hear that you don't have to mix it with the little guys - maybe that's why we get them?!!! Unfortunately I'm in no position to make policy decisions on what traffic will or will not be accepted here - I just have to make it work.

Please don't get me wrong - I've got nothing against GA aircraft or their pilots but it can be a hell of a lot of work. Try building a sequence out of a pa34, a319, pc12, 777, a319, pa46... any order you like. We do it on a daily basis. Also many IFR departures / joining flights from surrounding airfields - anything from a baron to a citation excel. A good number of these departing from inside France, destination in France, some training, some normal GA. Point is, around 50 to 60 percent speak French (and only french??). My local instructions REQUIRE me to respond in French. Maybe it's good for the little guys. Maybe it's bad for situational awareness. Not my decision. I'm paid to provide the best possible service TO ALL USERS (oh, and also to be friendly!!).

Anyway, you still haven't answered my question - where's the cutoff point? No-one learns to fly in any language other than English - even if they live in deepest, darkest, Alsace - or Thuringen - or Catalunya? Maybe the restriction comes in at the IMC rating. Twin rating? You tell me.

Awaiting your reply,

Regards,

Guy (or any other name you care to mention!!):ok:

[Jerricho]

Just a little question,

Could somebody from CDG tell me if airspace charts/terminal charts are printed in French or English or both (legit question...I don't know)?

[Scott Voigt]

Hi Alexban;

We get quite a few GA types here at DFW. We have a GA ramp for mainly biz jets and turbo props but we also get the single engine prop type from time to time. We only have a $25 landing fee for the little guys <G>. We also get a LOT of BE55/58's as well as C206's on the cargo side.

The main reason that you don't find a lot more GA coming into here is not the intimidation factor or other issues. It is mainly due to enough GA airports closer to where the folks want to go than DFW...

regards

Scott

[ATC Watcher]

Jerricho:

All French IFR APP and VAC ( visual ) charts are printed in both English and French. They are even avail since short on internet (free) check the SIA Olivia web site .

For info CDG is closed for VFR flights ( Class A)

And last info : any call in English on the R/T in France will be answered in English , except in some small AFIS fields where the note : Fr only is mentioned after the frequency.

[pepere]

And please, do remember that in France, on non controlled airfield, A/A information is in french only (mandatory).

cheers :D

[Jerricho]

ATC Watcher - Thank you! Just curious.

[A7700]

Just a reminder for those who hurl strongly wrong statements:
In the CDG accident related in the posts, It is absolutely not assumed that the Short360 was on the airport frequency at the time the take off clearance was given to the MD80..( No ATCO in the NTSB personel...) what about the "so called" situational awareness...due to "common language"...
Then, if you want to speak about Linate accident, move on a little bit the record of the ground frequency: just before the collision another corporate jet request to taxi from the same parking to the same holding point than the previous Citation involved in the wrong taxiway usage leading to the collision. But for that new aircraft no problem occured and it takes the right way and stop at the right position: All transmissions were done in italian!
So what you want : Safety or an arrogant prerogative of a remaining colonialist empire ?
Can you give me a real safety case about that subject ? (The Canadian minister of transport have done the only professionnal study on the subject which lead to the conclusion that the use of two languages do not decrease safety)

The problem is not the language. The problem is the mentality of people who have been recruited, trained and refreshed to be just after God (for those who still believe..) on the left seat of the cockpit ( may I add before God for AFR...).
Socrate says some hundred years ago that a conflict should only be fairly solved by someone outside of the conflict.
Lets ATC do ATC and don't interfere, it will be vey helpful and give you some more time to think twice before to cross a runway without ATC Clearance

[Sonnendec]

Amen, mate, ament :P :E .

[Capt Pit Bull]

So there I am, climbing up to (somewhat unusually) FL90.

Somewhat unusual, because the airfield in question has a block FL of 100 on the SID that we usually fly.

Being very familiar with the field, which happens to be the major international airport at a country in north western europe that has a lot of sea around its north and west borders, I think to my self.... "Hmmm.... THATS unusual".

So I then hear (in english would you believe!) another aircraft being cleared to descend to FL100. Its an inbound, cleared to cross 1,000 feet above us. I know where it will be in the sky because I have (shock horror) situational awareness, and have flown that STAR dozens of times, including about an hour previously.

I can also see a blip on my TCAS traffic display. Now... those of you who have followed me rambling on about TCAS in previous threads will know that I would never advocate thinking that TCAS gives a good enough horizontal picture to allow a pilot to start second guessing a controller.... it doesn't. But it certainly can provide some input into the pilots situational model that might provide a clue all is not going to plan. In this case the blip is approximately constant relative bearing, clearly 1,000 feet above us.

So naturally, I'm somewhat surprised when the controller removes our speed limit and clears us to FL100. Immediate response is 'Are you sure you want us at FL100?'. The reply being 'ahh.... no, maintain FL90'.

So... this error chain was broken at that point only because the controller had been speaking to the other aircraft in English. I should point out that this particular North East European airport is well known for having non english speech in common use. Had the controller been speaking a different langauge... like, say... French, we would have been looking at a TCAS RA, which IMHO is way to far down the error chain for comfort. Particularly since the MEL allows flight with TCAS inop, which it is from time to time.

Real or made up? You folk can decide about that.

I'm just a little concerned from the above posts that there are *some* controllers whose opinion of the importance of Pilots maintaining situational awareness is so non existant.

It certainly doesn't match my view of the majority of controllers that I've met. The longer you fly aeroplanes, the more importance you tend to place on situational awareness.

CPB

[Sonnendec]

Nobody said that situational awareness is not important, but let us have different opinions about the unique language on frequency. Accusing the counterpart of being not responsable does not take us anywhere. Do you really think we dont want the airspace under our control to be the safest?

Best regards.

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

Hey Sonnendec, in relation to that sequence. When you said he was restricted can you just clarify, did the number 2 get told to maintain not above a speed or to maintain a specific speed. If it was the latter, then you should have reported him for failing to follow an ATC instruction, and hence it has nothing to do with the language issue. If it was just a not above speed restriction then he was entitled to slow down more, and it was your fault.

Anyway I can't for the life of me what everyone is arguing about, one language whatever that language is, the worldover has to be safer as everyone knows what everyone is saying and doing. Accepting that there may be teething problems, while some get up to speed on the language of choice, in years to come it would be accepted that to be a pilot or controller anywhere in the world you must speak language XXXX. To say that speaking in a language to one pilot that another pilot on your frequency cannot understand cannot in any way ever be safer, and you can huff and puff till you're blue in the face that is not going to change. And honestly, the vocabulary used in ATC is so limited when you think about it, you can speak very little english but get by quite well as a pilot. How hard is it to mandate that all turns, climbs, descents, restrictions, and clearances be given in one language. Pilots who barely speak this language could learn what is required in one weekend surely, and then any other questions etc. of a pilot that you have that is more of a stretch on their language abilitys could be asked in their native tongue, as generally these exchanges would be of no interest to other pilots. Seems like a fair compromise to me. But hey I'm just a mono-lingual Aussie living and working in an Arab country, what would I know.

[alexban]

Sonnendec ,how you doin' mate? How's the weather in Canarias? I see you didn't change your point of view,even by a bit? Cool
Just been in Spain ,this days.A radio nightmare into airports,and app. You should've been in the cockpit: " what did he say? He was talking to us? No,he said something about turbinas :D . Ah,ok ,then. Hey ,he said something? No,I guess not to us.Look on TCAS,that one is going ahead of us? I don't know,maybe not. I think he said something like....Then again..hey he's calling us.Sure? :D ' Situational awareness for us...he,he,what's that?!
Of course,with that amount of spanish trafic ,you can say it's a lot safer to speak spanish with them.And a lot of 'fun' for the rest of us :D
You may have a point,but it's like the easy way out.Of course you know better,don't jump at my throat now Sonnen ;)
In my country we do not encourage speaking of other than english on the radio.Years ago we also use native language,it looked easier to me than.Now ,I think it's ok with english.Also our ATCs.
Sunny days to you all!
:ok:

[Hotel Mode]

Think i might have been with you that day CPB!

Anyway, my current bete noir is flying through francophone Africa where some (about 50%) of Air France crews speak French to the comntrollers. Now sorry guys but ATC is not great down there and you need all the situational awareness you can get to sort out separation and this does not help. The other 50% seem to grasp this and speak English. Just because you can doesnt mean you should.

[Sonnendec]

Hey Alex!

Hehe, i´m sure you had a great time listening to my stressed colleagues in the Quijote´s language. It´s a beautiful language, isnt it? ;) I am learning with this discussion, dont think i am completely closed to other´s point of view, and i understand the point of speaking only english, but as you said, by the moment, with the large amount of spanish traffic, it would not be safer at all to have english as the unique language. I read a study about the matter made by the Canadian Board (as you all know, it´s a bilingual country, they speak both english and french), where the conclusion was that it didnt affect safety to speak both languages on frequency. Unfortunately i only read it but didnt keep it, so i can´t send it to you; i tell you only for you to know that it´s not only the point of view of some crazy controllers that dont want to give up their language on behalf of safety. And again, if english (i think it´s funny when someone says "any language", we all know it would be english) gets imposed to us, we will just accept it and work with it. I´m just a controller, the smart people that study this kind of things are the ones that have the last word. I would anyhow miss our spanish phraseology :E

And for our australian friend: about that secuence, let me tell you that we are not machines, and very often we make mistakes. But this is not the case: lets see, if i tell the three pilots:

BALXXX you are number one, maintain high speed and report IAS
Canarias, BALXXX will maintain 300 kts
BALXXX, rgr, break, CFGXXX number two, IAS 290 below FL280
Canarias, CFGXXX 290 below 280
BAWXXX IAS 290 below 280
BAW rgr 290

do you think i should have told anything else to the pilots? i assume they have all the situational awareness that i can give them. Or should i explain to them all my secuence, as well as my name and telephone number? :cool: If a pilot does something unexpected, such as an espectacular speed reduction, dont try to blame me. And either the pilot, I also understand that he is not a machine (maybe in the future? hope not), and mistakes dont have to mean reports all the time. Of course, my example is fictional, those are not necessarilly the companies involved at all.

And alex, right now we have a splendid sun with few clouds, 25 degrees celsius and a clear beach waiting for me and my swimming suit (i´ll have to buy a tanga some of these days :{ ), if just i hadnt to work these afternoon....

Best regards, mates!

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

Thanks for the clarification, Sonney, you were indeed in the right, and the pilot screwed up, thats all I was trying to ascertain. But in this case when you are taking positive control of the sequence, really the pilots needed to do what they were told and all would have been fine.

I guess most of us would agree that the time you want a pilot to have situational awareness and as such have us all understanding each other is when we screw up. As you said we aren't machines, we do make mistakes, so any fallbacks available that will save our arse as well as that of the pilots and there passengers should be grasped. In my humble opinion all pilots and controllers understanding everything said by everyone on the air is one of those fallbacks available. But as I said my humble opinion, and as everyone knows us Aussies are as humble as they come ;)

[Giles Wembley-Hogg]

Sonnendec, I am sure that in the R/T example you gave you meant to use a phrase such as:

BALXXX maintain 300kts or greater

In the example you gave here, separation hasn't really been proved as "high speed" can mean different things to different people. I accept that the BAL pilot said he would "maintain 300kts", but is that for the next 5mins until he considers 250kts to be high speed, or to 20nm final when 160kts is high speed for him on that day?

A bit pedantic and slightly off topic I know.

G W-H

[Sonnendec]

Hello Giles:

It´s as easy as this: i need you to maintain certain IAS so i can adjust the traffics behind. In Canarias TMA you have to reduce to IAS 250 or less below FL150; my sector limit was FL205, so i just needed them to maintain that separation for a little while; next controller would manage to keep them separated to transfer them to approach just like i tranfered them to him, and then approach would start vectoring them with a 5 nm separation (we have 8 nm at enroute sectors).

I never have the need to give more information than the one in the example, because, fortunately, almost always pilots understand what i am trying to do. Sometimes they dont, and that was the point.

Best regards.

[saintex2002]

...Bien lo has dicho Sonnendec...No hay que decir mas...;) ;) ;)