ICAO Language Proficiency Tests

[dartagnan]

I discovered this recently.

Some of you should start to worry if you want keep your job...!!!
still they say if you fail, you MAY no longer...
so what is all about?

----------------------------------


Pilots, Air Traffic Controllers and all others who use English in R/T communication on international routes must reach ICAO English Language Level 4 (Operational) by March 2008 - confirmed by successful completion of an ICAO-approved proficiency test.

Those who pass the test at Level 4 must be re-tested every three years. Those who fail may no longer be licensed to operate on international routes.
-----------------------------------
What the standards mean for the industry
Non-native speakers and native speakers of English must demonstrate a minimum language proficiency at ICAO Level 4 (Operational) as a licensing requirement.For air traffic service personnel and pilots whose first language is not English, testing to determine language proficiency according to the ICAO Proficiency scale will be required. Personnel must demonstrate the ability to use the language specific to all aspects of Radiotelephony communication.

Personnel who demonstrate proficiency at:

ICAO Level 6 (Expert) will not be required to demonstrate subsequent language proficiency.
ICAO Level 5 (Extended) will need to be retested every six years.
ICAO Level 4 (Pre-operational) will need to be retested every three years.
ICAO Level 3 or below will need specific Aviation English language training to reach the minimum ICAO Operational level.

Member States who do not comply with the new licensing requirements will be required to notify ICAO, which may limit international recognition of licenses.

When changes take effect
Although these standards became applicable in November 2003, all ICAO Member States have been given until March 2008 to fulfill the necessary training requirements to allow personnel to meet mandatory testing and licensing requirements.


Member states are obliged to ensure all personnel meet the minimum
ICAO Operational (Level 4) proficiency level in English by March 2008

[ChristiaanJ]

... and native speakers of English must demonstrate a minimum language proficiency at ICAO Level 4 (Operational) as a licensing requirement.(My emphasis).
This is going to be interesting.

[Admiral346]

Oh my god, China without ATC, that's going to be interessting.

[Green Baron 737]

Or is it..........Interesting this is going to get!!! ;)

[whitehorse]

The UK Campaign Against Aviation Have already started to put a remark in section X111 on page 3 of UK Certificate when you apply for a change to your certificate, eg additional type. This is to prepare the IT section for the proposed changes.
I now have it confirmed that I am Profficient in English.:cool:

[flyguykorea]

No need to be alarmed folks, March 5 2008 has been extended for another 3 years for countries demonstrating willingness to comply to ICAO Level 4 standards, but not quite there yet.

[Sqwak7700]

No need to be alarmed folks, March 5 2008 has been extended for another 3 years for countries demonstrating willingness to comply to ICAO Level 4 standards, but not quite there yet.

Too bad. This is long overdue, and instead of having some backbone and sticking to it, they chose to delay it once again. I hope whom ever made that decision will accept full responsibility when a major accident occurs due to lack of english communication skills. :ugh:

[cribble]

I use apostrophes correctly in written English, and can be understood by most Poms south of about Lincoln. Do I qualify? :\

[BEagle]

Will this mean an end to "WHA' 'S YOUR DME SITIA?" bellowed from the back of a bathroom into a cheap microphone?

Seriously though, if I undrstand the UK CAA's double-speak, they are intending to 'grant' Level 4 ICAO to all UK FRTOL holders. I consider this an insult and I do not support the CAA's proposals as they currently stand.

I consider that native English speakers who hold FRTOLs should be entitled to make a self-declaration of Level 6 proficiency, with the usual penalties for false declaration.

Anyone who wants to comment should e-mail [email protected] before 30 Nov 2007.

[His dudeness]

What I like most is the face of newbies, flying in UK airspace the first time. They get along with german controllers, austrian, danish, swedish, norwegian,swiss, dutch, even sometimes french or spanish ones, but when the first "scottish" london controller comes over the airwaves, I get those views...like Manuel´s "Que?"
I consider this being not very effective, since there a loads of people who would not pass level 4 in ATC and Cockpits alike. The German has still not said how one can get level 5 or 6, unless you are British native or from the US. Having had lessons from Rashid and Charlie at Wichita FSI I´m not to sure about the Level they have...in mybook it wasn´t quite 4...
The German way was not to bad in my book, a quite extensive written test on RTF phraseology, read a long and difficult NOTAM, translate it and simulate a flight from a to b, IFR and b to a VFR, all under the supervision of an actual ATC controller and another gentleman from the radio regulating authority.

My personal opinion is, that we need a phraseology that is the same all over the world and an entry test like the old german one.

[dartagnan]

I have been requested to pass this exam for an airline interview recently.

the first 30 minutes, is a computerized test about english grammar.Most (non US or UK) pilots I know, haven't scored enough.

the second part is a face to face conversation , ...read and explain a text, and talk about a social problem by example. Nothing on radio communication...but again, most pilots didnt pass it!

Nothing really hard if you are fluent, but still, all pilots in my group have failed except me.
I am the only one who have studied in the USA/UK.

No need to learn flying if your english is not at Level 4 or above (it means fluent in english), ...cuz if they are serious about this new law, airlines will struggle to find "ICAO Level 4" pilots.

[FLEXJET]

Dartagnan, please tell us in which country you took this exam?

National authorities may decide of what this exam may consist of.
In Switzerland for example, it will be even allowed during an OPC or a class-rating renewal, as long as the examiner will be qualified to assess ICAO English exam candidates.

[Flare-Idle]

IMHO - that should also help to cure the "disease" of ATC transmission in the national languages periodically encountered in places like Spain, France and Italy.
Especially going to BCN and MAD sometimes is a night mare and calls for trouble sooner or later...:uhoh:

[ChristiaanJ]

Flare-Idle,
You'll find that that subject crops up regularly on PPRuNe. Somebody can probably point you to the most recent thread.

I don't think the Level 4 proficiency requirement is there to address the use of national languages, but only to improve the standard of English used by pilots and ATC.

The use and misuse of national languages is an issue that will need separate rule making.

[F4F]

"disease" of ATC transmission in the national languages is the main problem (as in CDG or MAD or FCO or XXX) and as such would have to be treated first... but once again dear EASA and NAAs totally miss the point :ugh:


live 2 fly 2 live

[ChristiaanJ]

F4F,
If you really want a rehash of those discussions, please start another thread.
This is NOT the same subject.

[Gonzo]

BEagle, as far as I understand it, these aren't 'proposals', it's coming.

In fact for ATCOs, it's been 'in' for a while, nearly six months in fact. I'm not sure if that was just NATS, or all UK ATCOs.

[ChristiaanJ]

For those of you who read Italian, have a look here :

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=279020

For those who don't, check out post #22.

It implicitly raises the same issues that FLEXJET mentions: what about the qualifications of the examiners?

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

[merlinxx]

Why should I not, I'm a white Welsh sheep sh*gger.

Yes it is a tremendous problem, not just airborne, but on the ground as well.

[MungoP]

Trying to make an approach into N'Djamena (Chad) not too long ago... Major CB arrives just ahead of me causing me to break off the app and hold to the north... Wx rdr shows another huge storm cell close behind the first but maybe we can get in between... Ask ATC what conditions look like from the twr... "say again "
... what is your weather now ? ... He reads out at very long length the METAR and TAF from 1 hr before...

Yes but what are the airfield conditions now.. ?

"Say again"...

What is the Wx now..at the airport ? he reads the full 1 hr old METAR and TAF again...

Yes but NOW what is the weather NOW ?.. he starts to read the full METAR and TAF all over again but I don't wait to hear it...switch freqs and b*gger off to my alternate...

Who says we don't need this test now ?

[ESSP Flyer]

Hi all, this is my first post to his forum.

I myself is a PPL VFR pilot and also a micro light instructor, i.e. the lowest of the low!:)
For this one however, I feel I have got something to add and/or muddy up the water.
Just for the sake of argument let’s make up the following scenario:
ATC: Level 5 English
Pilot: Level 6 English

A situation develops into an incident, or in worst case, an accident, due to a misunderstanding between the ATC and pilot.
The local CAA comes to the conclusion that the fault of the accident was due to lack of proficiency in the English language.
Logically the ATC, who in this case has the lower level is then automatically to blame for the accident.

Anybody else but me giving this problem a thought?

[hetfield]

Ich babbel nur Hessisch.

[His dudeness]

hetfield, thats level 3 Hessisch.... ISCH not ich ! :)

MungoP: and you really think the Chad ATC will retrain the guy to an acceptable level? Or rather have nobody reading you old news?

The idea is nice, still I doubt it will change much. But hey, lets have a try!

[tired]

Got to do it if I want to keep my South African license valid too. Depsite the fact that I wrote my Comm and my ATPL exams and my Radio license in English, and went through the South Afrcian school system with English as first language. Sure it makes sense to someone!!

[PA-28-180]

Ah ha! NOW I know why some training companies here in Asia are ramping up an Aviation English program...I do believe that I will apply!
Thanks for the update....although as pointed out, it's actually been an ICAO requirement for a while now.

[Farrell]

Stop panicking kiddies.

Plenty of time left to become "compliant".

[dartagnan]

plenty of time? u are kidding me?

only 4 months.Can you learn a foreign language in 4 months?

[MrBernoulli]

You'll have to learn 2 languages to be compliant - English, and something I think they call Ur-Mare-Ee-Kan?????????????

[DFC]

You'll have to learn 2 languages to be compliant -

Not as funny as you may think.

You have to demonstrate copetence in all languages you will have to use.

For many until now, flying to a French airfield at lunch time when only French Language was used or at some others at all times since French Language only is always used simply involved a basic grasp and a crib sheet of common phrases.

Now such pilots will be required to have level 4 competence in French as well as English.

The English requirement applies to International Navigation.....enroute and airports of entry etc. Countries can have national language spoken at non-international airports and to visit you need level 4 of the national language............Russia being a very good example.

Long live the Radion OperaKtor! :)

Regards,

DFC

[DoNotFeed]

crossed all seas
did typeratings in australia, usa, uk, at home of course :}
instructed americans, british, aussiees, some kind of EU members
wrote books in the one and only aviation slang :p
could this qualify - or do i have to retire now ;)

[Farrell]

Seriously though folks...no need to panic.
Whilst ICAO has indeed stipulated that you have to be ICAO 4 compliant by March 2008, there is an extension period of two, maybe even three years because this is proving to be much more difficult than originally anticipated.
I am busting my ass off over here at the moment getting everyone up to speed on the ATC end of it, whilst my colleague has been flying up and down and left and right in the GCC testing pilots, controllers and a host of other "industry" people.

Those who are compliant are left alone. Those who are not, get sent to me.
Some need a complete re-education in RT and some even need to go back to General Aviation English courses.

Whilst there is a clear desire from all the authorities in the region to become compliant, it will take a lot longer than 4 months to bring them all the way there.

I have already posted a tome on the "grandfathering" issue a while back.

The most recent news that has almost doubled the workload for RT instructors around the globe is that even native speakers need to be tested because one of the criteria for Level 4 is "proper use of phraseology".

This is going to surprise quite a few native speakers, especially some of those in the US who, despite being fantastic controllers, need to have a serious look at how they say things.

I for one feel that the whole ICAO Levels system is a great idea, however, I do feel that a lot of the human edge of RT may disappear over time.

[dartagnan]

2-3 years extension won't change anything. Do you think guys will go to UK or US to learn english?.
I am talking about guys who study and/or who did their ATPL in europe(except UK).I did mine in UK, this is why I passed this "level 4 ICAO"requirement.

Spending hours in english books or even going to a school to study english is not enough.

in 2 or 3years we will see the same thing again(deja vu???), and they will have to extend this program again.

I think they will cancel this program or make it much easier for non english native speaker.

Pilots are pretty happy with their RT operator license by knowing some few words in the cockpit.

They won't learn english cuz they don't have the time, the money or the motivation.These english courses are very expensive (6000-7000 pounds and more!) so who is going to pay to learn a better english than just the rudiments?

yes, no need to panic cuz this is utopia!why not russian?, it is one of the 5 ICAO languages.

[A7700]

Could you extend a little bit on the link between "lunch time" and the use of french...?

[blueb06]

Interesting thread there, but for practical purpose, how do we proceed to get that ICAO language level endorsment on a UK JAA licence ?

I read a document on CAA website that pilots having an RT licence would get the grandfathers rights, with an automatic level 4 validation. It may be treated automatically between CAA and operators.

But for individuals, will the CAA send a new licence to the pilots in there database or do each pilot has to apply with CAA for a new endorsment on his licence ?

or maybe it's too early to worry about that if there is a 2-3 years delay as said above ??

[Farrell]

All examiners have to be using a system that fills the criteria set out by ICAO.
It's not just a simple case of a teacher coming in and saying yes you are great and then signing you off.
For example....how it is run here is.
I teach an RT course broken into four main areas of learning. Light traffic routine, light traffic non routine, heavy traffic routine and heavy traffic non routine.
All candidates are assessed using a Cambridge University test, which gives us a fairly accurate idea of their overall English level.
Research done by the provider has set a knowledge yardstick between the result of the above and the relationship between that and the subject's RT ability.
Any candidate who falls below that is put into a General Aviation Language Course for ten weeks and then moves to the RT course. If they are assistant controllers or student pilots, I recommend that they finish the Gen courses and go back to either their ATPL notes, Aerodrome course notes or ICAO 051 notes before they go on the RT course so that the procedures and the reasons behind them are fresh in their minds.
Then, after the RT course is done, they sit a proficiency test which consists of RT checks and interviews. These sessions are recorded and marked and sent away to three or sometimes four independent examiners who score them. The backgrounds of the examiners are related to the industry and they are also trained for language testing. They are also not in the same country! They are over 5000 miles away! This is an added bonus as there is no in-house marking.

The four scores through almost twenty parameters are usually very similar and any large discrepancies go through an appeal system. This to my knowledge however has not been required yet.
The time extension was given purely from the instructors requests as we just can't get everyone through the systems on time.
Any new controllers being employed over here will have to be ICAO compliant before sitting in a tower or on a scope.
Assistant controllers are being asked to have at least IELTS 5.5 before joining a cadet program.

[Thor Nogson]

however, I do feel that a lot of the human edge of RT may disappear over time.

As SLF, I'd be happy to trade some (all?) of the human edge for understanding between the active participants. Isn't that the whole idea?

TN

[MungoP]

This requirement is long overdue... comms are right up there as one of the most prominent safety issues, if the quality of our radios was consistently causing us to misinterpret instructions and leave us unaware of the intentions of other aircraft the manufacturers would be investing billions to improve them (and passing the cost on to us) so where is the sense in accepting a level of reduced safety due to poor comms simply because pilots and ATC are too lazy to learn a basic level of English ? .. we have to learn a considerable amount of useless stuff before being granted our ATPLs ... this is at least highly relevant to safety.

As to the cost.. very few people in the world today have NO understanding of English... the internet / hollywood and TV have ensured that... buying a computer based language course and immersing oneself in english reading material would soon have anyone with half a brain ( the typical pilot ) dealing with the rudiments of the language and it wouldn't cost thousands as some here would have us believe.. it's our chosen profession and something as important as this issue is to safety should be taken seriously...

That's my contribution and I can already hear the response from some quarters repeating that famous comment from the CVR of a south american jet a few years back...
"Shadapa Gringo "

[Airbubba]

That's my contribution and I can already hear the response from some quarters repeating that famous comment from the CVR of a south american jet a few years back...
"Shadapa Gringo "

That was the Avianca captain's response to a GPWS warning back in 1988. The former N321PA, B727-21 impacted the mountain around 6000 feet...

Requiring "latinos" to speak English is a politcally charged subject in the U.S. The government Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has sued the Salvation Army because a facility in Massachusetts required workers to speak fluent English:

http://alexander.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Articles.Detail&Article_id=204

Charges of racism are leveled by advocacy groups. Somehow this sort of thing doesn't apply to say, Norwegians. :)

[oceancrosser]

Will this mean an end to "WHA' 'S YOUR DME SITIA?" bellowed from the back of a bathroom into a cheap microphone?

Not only in the Mediterranean does the quality of ATC transmissions leave something to be desired. UK ATC can sound awfully "hollow" and scratchy. When recently, I saw a UK instructional video from NATS showing the controllers using headsets that look like they were designed in the 1950´s I finally understood why. :ugh:

[Skydrol Leak]

I think that the trend of "I speak English" and "I think I speak English" in aviation made it far throughout all these years. The post from Deartignan was refreshing in a way that we really don't take it for granted untill it hits us right?
OK, one of my best friends is a guy who is working daily with airplanes overflowing south central EU over Slovenia. He is an senior ATC.
He told me a lot of stories who are related to speaking the one and only universal language that aviators use today-English!
According to him during his 20 years of service the worst English speaking experiences he had (and some of them were pretty close encounters meaning;the breach of the airways, descent rules, FL,etc...as well) was with;
French
Italian
Russian
Spanish airlines
I will not put out the names of the airlines, since I don't think it's fair to point a finger at anyone, but just so you know, there is a lot of people up there not doing their job the way It should be done.
It came from the real source and It is pretty sad that in 2007 at this day and age a pilot, who should be of an open, smart,educated and academic character ends up in someones airspace acting pretty much like a troll.

Any feedbacks?

[Ace Springbok]

Korean and Chinese aviation authorities conduct ICAO tests to laughable standards. We have both local and some expat pilots with atrocious command of English pass with level 6 simply because they study by rote all the tests. Then we have people with excellent command of English coming away with a mere 4 or 5 simply because of their accent or some hesitation during the test ( they have not mugged up on the questions/answers, sure they have some hesitation at some strange questions ). So we have level 6 pilot missing almost all ATC clearances ( ATCers have to repeat several times ) and miscopying/misunderstanding instructions. Competent pilots with good command of English but only level 4/5 by those tests fly with nary a problem with ATC in Europe, the US or even down under. The authorities need to do better than that.

[Dan Winterland]

And therin lies the problem. Different authorites applying different standards. In HKG, the test is conducted by a native English speaker and the standard to acheive level 6 is very high. I doubt that this is the case in Beijing. However, it does seem to be a serious attempt to improve safety.

My test is in three weeks. Fingers crossed!

[flyguykorea]

Korean and Chinese aviation authorities conduct ICAO tests to laughable standards.

You can add Japan to that list also. Last I heard 499 our ot 500 pilots tested at JAL passed! In a way, you have to feel sorry for the poor sod who failed. When the airline is responsible for a test that neither the pilots, union or airline wants, what else would you expect?

Mind you, at a previous ICAO delegation meeting back in 2003, it was explicitely stated that nations with English as the first language should put their hands up to offer assistance to nations where English was not the first language (both financially and logistically). I seriously doubt if there's been any of this help going around.

[Ignition Override]

Hetfield:

Ebbewoi zum Spaetzl?

[DoNotFeed]

You have been overridden.
The message to Hetfield should be:
Ebbawoi zum Spatzl.
Or in plain language 'Gehst ebba zum Spatzal'.
Of course this works only close to bavaria and has to be treated as level 8.
:):)

[jezzbaldwin]

I have been known within not too distant past to work as an English language examiner for the ICAO test. Extensions are indeed possible in some states, but it is down to the individual CAA to instigate an exemption plan that will assure compliance by the extended date (currently looking like 2011). DO NOT take this as a given!!! There are CAAs in the world who have not adopted the exemptions and therefore you could find in March 08 that your licence is suspended for all international activities - not a nice thought! If in doubt, check it out.

[australiancalou]

What a disaster if everybody fail this NEW exam.:}:}:}
I have been Cpt on longhaul for 9 years flying all around the earth and a bunch of paperscratchers will dictate if I am or not able to do my job.
I passed all the exams to get my ATPL (old fashion with astronav) including International Radio Q and ATPL English test and these Deskkeepers are just telling me I've got to pass their F...... test OR I wil NOT FLY ANYMORE.
I suggest we all ban this new attempt of these non flying technocrats to lead our profession.

[GMDS]

.................. and if we all fail, aviation is still roaring ...... with the 499 Japanese English experts ......;)

[whoateallthepies]

Blimey Bruce! I'm a Brit pilot been flying 30 years and now on Sunday a bunch of Aussies (http://www.relta.org/) are going to test my use of the Queen's English. And no poofters.
http://i.1asphost.com/whoateallthepies/pie.jpg

[art737]

English is my first language. Now and again I block on a certain words for about 1 - 4 seconds because I stutter. In all past flying tense/emergency situations I have spoken competently and fluently. In a test environment with your license and future lying ahead of you my fluency wont be as good. I would say in normal speech I speak 80 – 100 % fluently

I know and can confidently say that I will always be able to understand and get my message across the radio without compromise of safety.

So now will this destroy my passion for aviation? No. I haven't been for the dreaded test yet. They want to suspend/revoke my license because im slightly disadvantaged by not being as fluent as everybody else???

[jezzbaldwin]

http://bigmag.co.uk/plane/q_a/level_tables/eng_table/
Check out this link - If you are only able to utter your name, then work hard!!! If you can string words together in fits and starts and generally fit into Level 2 then still work hard!!! If you may fit into the Level 3 criteria, check with your employer or authority to see if you have an extension (if not then work hard, if you do then why not also work hard and aim for Level 5 by 2011 - certainly dont put it off until 2010!).
My advice is to speak with, and listen to as many fellow crews as possible, maybe take some lessons if you feel you need them, but generally just work on speaking as much English as possible.
Good luck to all!

[flyguykorea]

I know and can confidently say that I will always be able to understand and get my message across the radio without compromise of safety.

And that is exactly what they are looking for in this test.

You don't have to speak the Queen's English, and if you take a look through any of the tests that are around (RELTA, IAES, G-TELP, etc etc), you will notice that they are simply testing your proficiency to communicate to ATC competently in a variety of normal and non-normal situations.

[richatom]

Seriously though, if I undrstand the UK CAA's double-speak, they are intending to 'grant' Level 4 ICAO to all UK FRTOL holders. I consider this an insult and I do not support the CAA's proposals as they currently stand.

I consider that native English speakers who hold FRTOLs should be entitled to make a self-declaration of Level 6 proficiency, with the usual penalties for false declaration.



Beagle, you have a good point there, and there is already a precedent here in France. The DGAC have stated that anybody who holds a DGAC CPL will be awarded level 6 ICAO French - and that is without taking any form of r/t test in French. I think therefore it is entirely reasonable that CAA FRTOL licence holders be given level 6 in English - especially as they will have actually had to take an r/t test to get the FRTOL.

The French precedent actually goes a little too far the other way. I am not a native French speaker but I did my training in France and hold a DGAC fATPL. Despite having done my CPL and IR tests with English r/t, I have been awarded level 6 French by the DGAC! Even more stupidly, they will not recognise my CAA FRTOL as even being equivalent to FCL1.200, and they insist that I take the ICAO English test!:ugh:

[hetfield]

@Ignition Override (http://www.pprune.org/forums/member.php?u=18559)

There were some strange gals/guys in the EU who realy want to eliminate the name "Ebbelwoi" (to be exact - Apfelwein).


They lost:D:D:D

[ChristiaanJ]

FOK,I've never been able to determine whether the Spanish speak fast, or just have a lot of words to say to cover the English phrases?Seriously, I've done my share of technical translation and the word count French/English or English/French always comes out about 30% + for the French. My, admittedly more limited, knowledge of Spanish leads me to believe it's the same for Spanish.

Let me stick my neck out, and say that, for communication, French and probably Spanish, are less efficient than English. Of course, they're great for waffle, which is why French is always proclaimed to be the "diplomatic" language.

You should see some of the French aviation forums, and note how many words they use to say nothing....

By the way, is English the first language spoken by Australians?!Dunno. Depends on what you call English. The "Queen's English" is spoken only on the BBC. VERY little elsewhere in the UK.

[PA-28-180]

Thanks for the link to the ICAO levels. Seems that they are using something quite similar to the Morley intellibility scale. This was developed by Dr. Jane Morley and has been used for years by myself and the majority of ESL instructors for student evaluation.
There IS an American aviation training company with operations in Korea currently advertising for ESL instructors, so it seems that at least some outfits are taking this requirement seriously. Anyone know of any others out there besides FlightTrans?
English training is something I've done for over 11 years and, combined with my aviation experience, seems a good business match. Thanks!

[Dream Land]

What a disaster if everybody ( ? ) fail this NEW exam.Please fill in the blank. :E
1. will
2. was
3. would
4. won't

[pilotbear]

should
did
:E

[MungoP]

Interaposciacalcatedoccicaldy ... :{ regards... Blackadder

[London's Control]

Bahrain Controllers are all ICAO Class 4 certified :}

[212man]

I've just received my renewed UK CAA issued JAR-FCL ATPL, and as a remark in section XIII it just says "language proficiency: English". I assume they mean 'level 6', but there is no other indication. Seems somewhat vague to me :confused:

[australiancalou]

What a disaster if everybody :}:}:} fail this new exam.

[richatom]

I've just received my renewed UK CAA issued JAR-FCL ATPL, and as a remark in section XIII it just says "language proficiency: English". I assume they mean 'level 6', but there is no other indication. Seems somewhat vague to me :confused:

The French DGAC have decided to award all their licence-holders level 6 French (without any compulsory test or exam), so it would seem reasonable that all CAA licence holders should be awarded level 6 English.

[Crusty Ol Cap'n]

Have been flying for 40 years now and got my level 6 yesterday! It still won't help me understand the controllers in China, Thailand, Vietnam, Africa etc. :ugh: It is also useless when the French, Spanish or North African controllers use their own native languages!:=

[RYR-738-JOCKEY]

I've been following this thread for a while now, and I'm still puzzled over the fact that several of you have sat an exam while I have not heard a single word from my authorities. I've also asked my colleagues about this, and no one seems to know anything about it. So, if anyone could enlighten me about when and where these tests will take place, I'd be very grateful.
(I fly internationally in Europe)

[Dream Land]

I'm not totally sure but I believe we are all supposed to be in compliance (ICAO) by 2008, what our Asian airline did was to do an evaluation test from a company in Canada to see exactly what our own situation is, we now have full time English classes in progress, pilots and ATC specialists.

[dartagnan]

I was unaware of this until an airline asked me to pass these tests at their own cost and they sent me to an english school to pass a computerized & oral tests.

this is serious, guys, if you don't comply with these requirement in less 4 months, they can take your license away until you satisfy with level 4 ICAO.

it is your business to comply with new regulation, the CAA won't run after thousand of pilots for this.
For british pilots, I don't see any problems as they may give you a level7 for life , but what about french pilots having a CAA UK license?

these tests have to be evaluated in a language school or in a center recognized by the CAA, it means high failure rate=more money for them!

I estimate the pass rate at 30% only in Europe.

[dartagnan]

should we write to the CAA (license department) and ask for a new license with level 4 endorsement?

I have a certificate level 4, should I send it to the CAA?

my second question is : why do they ask for a level 4 if everybody is granted a level 4? is it a again a bureaucracy game to satisfy ICAO decisions?:rolleyes:

[Alpine Flyer]

Some countries have done their homework and some have not. In Mexico the union established a program that would allow pilots to test their language proficiency years ahead of the deadline and gave the airlines the anonymised results so they had an inkling of what lay ahead of them.

Other countries such as Austria (and Germany?) have done close to nothing and now clamour for extensions. In Austria we don't even have a licensed testing facility because our CAA hasn't given out any licenses yet. Under pressure from well organized general aviation lobbies they now propose to hand out at least level 4 to almost everyone in posession of a PPL or higher.

The 3 year extension to 2011 is sad because the whole program has been around for a good number of years but some CAAs chose to ignore it.

Even if most Austrian/German/Scandinavian pilots don't really need the program as they usually know enough English from school to understand communication beyond phraseology, a dabbling Germany will be a good excuse for Ukraine/Russia/etc. to grant similar "grandfather rights" to their pilots and controllers.

The current German/Austrian RTF licenses only test knowledge of phraseology. You could theoretically pass them without actually speaking English if you only memorize all the RTF wording.

Language Proficiency goes beyond that as it tests the ability to understand plain language, something that might be handy if you want to tell Krasnodar Approach what kind of dangerous goods you have on board or what kind of distress you're in. (And I assume that things go far worse than that outside my area of operations.)

To all those subjects of the Queen flaming against such tests or asking for self-certification: enjoy the world's favor for your language and play by the same rules as anyone else. Given your immigration rates being a subject of the queen doesn't prove anything about your language abilities and so authorities should test your knowledge even if your last name is listed in the Domesday book.

(Please forgive any mistakes, I have not been tested yet.)

[Farrell]

Dartagnan

I understand that you feel very passionate about this.

But please stop commenting on issues that you have only a little knowledge of.

No one is going to be restricted from flying in four months time for not being ICAO compliant.

You are inadvertently creating a safety issue when you are worrying crews about the consequences of not being compliant.

Those who are tested below level four will be assisted in gaining the appropriate qualifications and not just hung out to dry.

If you have time, go and visit the ICAO site for language testing and when you have digested all of that and then looked through all the nuances and exemptions that can and will be issued, then maybe you can start commenting on the issue at hand.

In the meantime, I would kindly suggest that you refrain from scaremongering your colleagues.

Thanks

[Farrell]

"The UAE just resolved the problem by certifying ALL EK captains at level 6 !!"

That is totally rubbish.

Am not commenting any further on this thread as comments like the above are just annoying.

[rduarte]

And the F/O ? :confused:

[richatom]

Ozymandias, thank you for that link to the CAA document.

My problem is that though native English speaker, I have a French licence, and all my flight tests are conducted in French and not with a native English speaker - so I will not be able to ask for level 6 upgrade at my next flight test.

But paragraph 2.1.1.3 is interesting - "Assessment of English language proficiency at level 6 need does (sic) not require assessment by an organisation or individual so qualified, and may be undertaken by another native English speaker".

I wonder if that means that I can just ring the CAA, ask to talk to licencing department, and request that my CAA FRTOL be amended to level 6? After all, you have to have good English just to get through the answering machine service!

[airman13]

Bon jour a tous,

Now I woud like to be understood by all people out there.....I guess most of them pilots, flight attendants, flight engineers, ATCOS, and so on.....

Je voudrais que les exams soient aussi en francais, parceque le francais est depuis les annees 50-60 le numero 2 , apres l'anglais.....et comme dans l'aviation ,il est necessaire une ''back up''.Donc si je ne passerai le test en anglais, que j'aie le droit de le soutenir en francais oü espagnole ,oü italiano....quiqonqe je ferrai des vols en France, Espagne, l'Italie ...et ainsi de suite....n'est-ce pas???????????????????

[navtrack]

French is the official language of the ICAO, isn't it ?

[fantom]

Henry V.

Agencourt.

I rest my case.

[planeenglish]

Hello everyone,
Good job Farrell, nice to "see" you again. I have been posting on this forum for ages about the new LPRs and no one cared.
Well, for any of you who care you can hear what all levels sound like here and see how they are rated. This is a cd-rom issued by ICAO through voice samples sent in by teachers and testers like me. http://www.ulc.gov.pl/download/ICAO_LPR/
The document 9835 is being revised and should be released for distribution around Spring. Some slight changes have been made.
To Alpine Flyer, the grace period is not necessarily for those countries who chose to ignore the new standards. However, it will be those slackers who profit. The inability of larger countries who are trying to meet the standards to meet the 2008 deadline has prompted this "extension" of sorts (China has been trying to get compliant since early 2000 but there are so many pilots and ATC it is taking oodles of time). ICAO recently issued the mandate on what a country must do to if it is impossible to become compliant by 2008 ie, NOTAMS and AIM. This gives people who didn't know that in 2003 these standards were in place time to get compliant.
He who is deemed level 4 today still has three years to demonstrate level four if he is not then the CAA should not allow him to operate.
I have tested hundreds of pilots from over 20 different language backgrounds and the results show 64% are not compliant. It takes about 200 study hours to get from one level to another. (This is a rough estimate.) Of those there were Austrians, French, Swiss, Italian and various other countries which you list below as countries whose people usually speak English well enough.
For RYR-738-JOCKEY: It all depends on your CAA and which license you fly on. I know that there are very few compliant tests for pilots now and I know that some European countries have chosen their compliant tests. My CAA is in the process. Some CAA's have decided to perform their own test on site or have delegated FTOs or other institutions.
I have been busting my butt trying to inform people on these standards and how to get compliant for years. It's about time it is taken seriously.
Best to all,
PE

[Thylakoid]

It is not rubbish; it's a fact, and it is in writing :*

[serpilot]

:confused:ICAO recently issued the mandate on what a country must do to if it is impossible to become compliant by 2008 ie, NOTAMS and AIM. This gives people who didn't know that in 2003 these standards were in place time to get compliant.


PLANEENGLISH, Please refer the ICAO document that states what you mentioned.

Thanks in advance

[flyguykorea]

You can view the ICAO working paper here:
http://http://www.icao.int/icao/en/assembl/a36/wp/wp151_en.pdf

If for some reason you cannot directly link to the ICAO website, you need to visit http://www.icao.int

then Meetings;
36th session;
all working papers;
sort by number, and look for doc A36-WP/151

[Slasher]

Do you speak "Level 4 ICAO"?

I dunno. I can speak level 2 French.

Maybe the local ICAOtians whoever they are can help me out here. :p

[planeenglish]

Dear Serpilot,

I only have them in PDF, PM me with your email if you want them. Thanks,
PE

[serpilot]

FLYGUYKOREA & PLANEENGLISH,

Thank you four your help, I got the file.
You´re very kind

:ok:

[dartagnan]

I have just learned by some students in Aeroclubs, that their CAA asked them (by postmail) to get at least a"level 4 ICAO" if they intend to get a professional license after March 2008.
Regrettably some clubs do not have any instructor who speak English (at level 4), instruction is still given in non english language in most countries.

I think for many wanabes, they can make a cross on this career unless they take the time and the effort to learn English.

[GearDown&Locked]

Do you speak "Level 4 ICAO"?

I do. I can even adapt my own phonetics to the local accent, which can be quite funny actually. :E

Who cares. :(

[PA-28-180]

Gear...
As a pilot and a 13 year ESL teacher, I can tell you that accent ABSOLUTELY does NOT make any difference...EXCEPT in one case. If the accent is SO strong that the listener is listening more to the ACCENT than to the WORDS of the speaker. When this happens, to quote the movie "Cool hand Luke"..."What we have here, is a FAILURE to communicate"!
Now from experience and this site, I know that this is exactly what happens throughout Asia (among other places), so I (for one) am happy that the ICAO has recognized the problem and is doing something about it.
Stay safe! :ok:

[planeenglish]

Dear dartagnan,

It's true. Thankfully there are some Aeroclubs/FTO that do realize this and they are doing something about it. One I work for has faced the issue and put its instructors through courses before asking their own student to do the same. Its a start-a positive one.

Isn't this all a safety issue?

PE

[GearDown&Locked]

PA-28-180, what I'm trying to say here is irrespectively of the various local accents you may encounter, there is a greater skill than knowing perfect flawless London City English, and that is the ability to read a message behind the strange accent (for native English speakers mostly) naturally.

[PA-28-180]

Hi Gear...
Then I agree with you. In actuallity, HOW we say something means a LOT more than what we say! Much of this problem is mitigated if you can SEE the person your speaking to. In fact, in some cases, when you can see the person speaking you have a good chance to understand the message...even if you do not really speak the language the message is being communicated with. 85% of ALL verbal communication actually has nothing to do with WORDS...it's body language, tone of voice, rate of speech, etc. Given this, it's no wonder, really, why there are communication (NOT r/t) problems in aviation (and other sectors) when you lose much of these important communication cues. Don't believe? Ever owned a dog or cat? Really think that they don't communicate with you? (I DON't mean the "please feed me" dance, either!)
This loss of 'visual communication' cues is one of the major reasons for important business meetings to be handled face to face, instead of over the phone.

[Daniel_11000]

Switzerland has smartly solved the problem: before march-08 ALL holders of Swiss licences (with a rating for R/T in english) will be issued (for free !) a level-4 licence, which will be valid for the next 3-years.
Everybody is sure that in the next 3 years everything will 'calm' down, and requisites/schools/examiners etc will be clarified. Swiss CAA expect, in those three years, to certify many instructors as 'english examiners', and the 'renewal' (if the candidate is 'proficient' in English) will be given during a flight proficiency test or skill test or CR/TR test etc.

[settogathrust]

Does anybody have the audio of Air China at JFK. I think it sums it up nicely.
Here it is. Courtesy of you tube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWDEIvjwaFU

[oceancrosser]

I can think of entire ATC regions that will have to be shut down if this becomes reality... :ugh:

[ChristiaanJ]

BI,
You don't need "far-flung places".

Try some UK and US regional accents....
And those can be even more of a problem, because they are "native English speakers" and therefore think they speak intelligeable English.

Not to mention that... as the Air China "incident" at JFK clearly illustrates... they often ignore standard terminology and go to colloquial English, and still expect to be understood by non-native English speakers.

[PA-28-180]

BI.
Yes, I realize that the transmission of technical information, i.e., altitude, heading, clearance readbacks are a bit different forms of communication. However, the problem in aviation, is that this is ALL many pilots/atc have been trained for. Anything "outside of the box", i.e. an EMERGENCY (see the initial report of the Thai/Taiwan airline incident over Korea) it quite obviously doesn't work. Pilots/controllers really need to be trained to COMMUNICATE in English. There's only one way to do it, folks...if you want to speak English, SPEAK ENGLISH-and do it as much as you can. Don't know if planeenglish would agree, but this is my experience from teaching anyway.
Also, I have flown in Asia....I know EXACTLY what you mean! Try doing it though in a recip/prop aircraft without a noise cancelling headset! :eek:

[1xxxxx1]

has somebody an idea what the FAA will be doing?
there are plenty of FAA ATP holders that are non native english speakers, non US citizens and not working in North America
but using the FAA ATP with issued ratings for validation to get another foreign ATP.
If the FAA ATP card states "level 4 english" it would be easier to validate this as well, otherwise one has to go again for an extra test in each country where one validates.
As a contract pilot a pain.

[stratocumulus]

has anyone seen the test yet (or any english test compliant with 9835) ?

[richatom]

The French DGAC have chosen to simply combine the ICAO English test with the existing FCL1.200 IFR r/t test. In the existing FCL1.200 test , there are two oral tests, each marked out of 20. In the first test, the candidates just listen to 14 ATC, ATIS or VOLMET messages, which they have to translate to French. The second test consists of a fictitious flight, in which the candidate must carry out an r/t conversation in English with the examiner. At the end of the test, the candidate is given an envelope containing a description (in French) of an emergency situation, which the candidate must then explain in English to the examiner.

To pass the FCL1.200 and earn level 4 English, the candidate must obtain a minimum of 10 in each test.

To earn level 5, the candidate must obtain minmum 14 in each test.

To earn level 6, the candidate must earn minimum of 18 in each test.

I find the logic behind these tests weak because it would be quite possible for a native English speaker to fail the tests as it relies on a knowledge of French to pass. Moreover, there will be a lot of candidates with very minimal English who are awarded level 6, because the English part of the tests is very easy and not really representative of real life r/t.

Even more absurdly, the DGAC exempt completely all candidates who have done their ATPL theory in English from the FCL1.200 altogther. So just because a candidate has answered a few multiple choice questions in English, they consider his spoken English to be adequate for international IFR flight....

Yet somebody like myself, who is a native English speaker, CAA FRTOL holder, and DGAC licence holder, and who has taken IRSE and IRME flight tests using English r/t - is obliged to take the FCL1.200!

[Brian Abraham]

You don't need "far-flung places".

Try some UK and US regional accents....
And those can be even more of a problem, because they are "native English speakers" and therefore think they speak intelligeable English.


Spot on ChristiaanJ. Have a very good friend who migrated to Oz 47 years ago, from being Glasgow born and bred . Even today I only pick up perhaps one in five words. English tests are not new, us foriegners doing training in the US military 40 years ago had to do an English test prior to commencing course.

[Wojtus]

I've just passed ELPAC exam and got level 5. :D But this test obviously prefers fast-typers. I consider myself as a really fast one, while I still hardly typed all I wanted to while answering some questions.

The scenario is: you get eg. 5 seconds after the question for typing. Good answer needs not more then 2-3 words. But on some questions you're not sure what information is most crucial, so you want to type everything you heard just to prove you heard it. You can spend 4 seconds choosing which words to write - and type them within a second. Or you may type all 5 seconds long and fill the box with anything that could satisfy the marker (that's what I preffered). Slow-typers have no such comfort and many of them fail this part of ELPAC. And still, Eurocontrol claims the test was positively tested with slow-typers :ugh:

[dartagnan]

what it has to do with english conversation?

I got a 30 minutes test of english conversation face to face with an english teacher, and she evaluated me at level 4 (at least).

My test has been fair and correct.
Now if they test people with different technics, I would prefer to be tested with the system which would give me more points and without any stress.

[Wojtus]

what it has to do with english conversation?
Oh, forgot to mention. ELPAC consist of two parts (papers). First one is listening (and typing) as I described. Second part is 20-25 minutes live conversation with some tasks to do.

[chuks]

That was what you would hear at Opa-Locka Airport circa 1980 when some student from some other part of "America," such as Panama, say, was told some boring details such as, "Stand by for your take-off clearance. Hold your position. I say again, hold your position."

Cue one small aircraft swinging onto the active to disappear into the middle distance. "Take-off" he knew; what the rest of that was, "Dios que sabe." Happy days!

I am very proud of my German radio licence, issued by the Post and Telecommunications Authority. I really had to work for it by doing a pretend CVFR flight. That said, at the time my conversational German was about on the level of "Gib mir ein Bier, bitte," what they call "Soldatendeutsch."

Here one should only need to learn about 250 words (the experts here can tell us if that is the correct number) and certain phrases to be a safe user of Aviation English. It sounds as if much more than that shall be necessary, though.

Not quite on topic but do remember that there is nothing illegal about using a local language in R/T. I find it a bit boring flying with a Pom who gets all huffy about hearing French or Arabic spoken here in Algeria. It is sub-optimal, yes, but it is not out of order.

[poldek77]

You may try the sample version of the test on ELPAC (EuroControl) page:

http://elpac.info/

[dartagnan]

I did the demo test online, this is for controllers?cuz the exemple are sometimes hard to understand.
I have problem to figure out what's the problem between planes and controller due to accent and how bad are some accent (russian?).
I guess I scored a 65% but I can not be a traffic controller for sure.
You need to know to type fast!

[despegue]

I tried to find anything about exam-centres on the website of the Belgian CAA.. nothing.
I have heard absolutely NADA about this requirement exept from trying to update myself.
Is the airline or the CAA responsible for organizing the tests?

Does anyone know where I have to pass the test in Belgium?
If the Belgian CAA doesn't have the courtousy to inform its pilots of a major change in licencing requirements, then I'm nt going to run after them and pretend to be ignorant about the whole thing. My collegues are doing the same. However, I do agree that the requirement itself is a good thing, but should be done in a uniform way.

[Moira]

Dartagnan, if you find the accents in the sample test difficult to understand, you just don't want to hear the real thing ...

[ChristiaanJ]

D'Artagnan,
I agree with Moira.....
... if you find the accents in the sample test difficult to understand, you just don't want to hear the real thing ...
I just took the sample test out of pure curiosity (no, I'm not an air traffic controller).
Looking at the results afterwards I didn't do badly at all.
My problem was simply assessing the scenario as a near-outsider, and typing in the right answers fast enough !
At no time did I have any problem with the accents... which might raise questions about how realistic the test is.

[planeenglish]

Hello everyone,
Speaking about accents and monolingual native English speakers, think about what is really (or should be if the test is actually compliant) tested: the ability to communicate efficiently and therefore safely. Having a high proficiency level of the English language is no good if you use it colloquially on the radio. A high level should be awarded to those who consciously use unambiguous and concise language. For a native or expert speaker this is important that they use language leaving out jargon and slang and omit complex structures.
It is about language awareness (look here for a native speaker who is really linguistically aware (http://bathursted.ccnb.nb.ca/vatcan/fir/moncton/WeeklyTopics/Archives/20040502/CurrentTopic.html)). ICAO just now put an amendment to Annex 10 stating that "Go Ahead" could be mistaken for an authorization to proceed with taxiing therefore should be omitted when making "call and answer" transmissions. The CAA of England has been doing it for decades in all situations as they understood the danger of "Go Ahead".
"The Test" (for those who asked, there are about a handful and of those only a couple are actually compliant) should measure one's ability to use plain language only when standard R/T does not suffice and then they choose to use plain language in an unambiguous manner-structured correctly and efficiently.
Best to all,
PE

[chuks]

I was at the CAA itself yesterday, when I asked what was up.

It seems as if some parts of this have not been finalised. People who have done an RT test get an entry in the licence that will be valid for 3 years (I think it is) with some mechanism to do the required test coming next year. I assume we can visit some approved testing centre to see just how we get on with the language.

[ChristiaanJ]

Have a look at para 3.4 in the first link.
Apart from political correctness running amok as usual, think about some of the broad local Scottish and Yorkshire accents you may have encountered on UK R/T......

[dartagnan]

must we ask for this endorsement, or the CAA will contact us?

[chuks]

The CAA man told me that they shall mail the required page to the recorded home address. He said they were busy working on that now.

[Yankee Whisky]

Two pilots from different regions in a bi-lingual country are approaching a non-controlled airport; one interprets the windsock to land Rw 09, the other thinks 27 is the better one.
They both set up a circuit to land on their chosen runway after announcing it in their native languages. Neither pilot understands what the other is saying. Neither gives a monkey's nuts about the wisdom of common language in the circuit because they both think that "I am in my right".
Both pilots elect to overshoot when they see another a/c on a collision course when on finals. One pilot overshoots to the "dead" side of the circuit, the other, unfortunately, does not overshoot on his dead side!
The scenario can, and has, occured somewhere in the world (maybe under different circumstances) in particular where language is a political issue and put in the civil law. It happened to me and I got away with a close call.

[selfin]

There is still much to be learned from the philosophy behind ASD Simplified Technical English.

[captain87]

I'm an ATPL Student and I've just performed the ICAO Placement Test in order to be evaluated before starting the courses. I had a Level 3, which is established by the lowest score obtained in one of the 6 fields (Pronuciation, Structure, Vocabulary, Fluency, Comprehension, Interactions).

I had the following results: 3.5 - 3 - 2.5 - 3.5 - 3.5 - 3

Furthermore there is a written exams score in which I performed 39 right answers over 60 ... but the written one is not important such the oral.

Since all the pilots and controllers have to reach the minumum proficiency level operation (Level 4), I have been suggested to start the course by Module B (see www.relta.org (http://www.relta.org)) then followed by Advanced Radiotelephony Course.

I think this is the better way in order to improve the safety in communications and to reduce the number of misfortunes due to it.

My mother-tongue teacher said that Level 4 means that the user can well understand english and obviously that he can be well understood without any misunderstandings. It is a goal that can be perfectly reached in 125-250 hours of class-based-course and CBT's (Computer Based Training).

I noticed that there is a common problem for non-native speakers: the understanding of american/very fluent (contracted) english that usually brings the user to be out of comprehension.

I think there will not be huge problems at all caused by it since ICAO doesn't want to eliminate the foreign pilots but to improve readability and safety indeed.

Happy new Year and Have a lot of fun !!!

by captain87

[planeenglish]

Hello captain87,
I tried to send you a PM but am not able. Just a slight clarification- I believe the test you sat was actually a placement test, not a proficiency test.
A placement test is a needs analysis for possible training whereas a proficiency test determines actual ability.
A placement test will probably have a written test where a proficiency test should not. (Writing is proof of knowledge and not a true measure of practical ability and therefore not "allowed" for an ICAO compliant test. Liken it to your written exam for your pilots license, you must still have a practical flying test before obtaining your license.)
Lastly, a placement test allows half measures (hence your score of 3.5 in some areas) this is to let the individual know where in that band, or level, you are. A whole number means the lower end of the band and a .5 will mean the higher end of the band. This is vital information for your future instructor.
Regarding the understanding of American/very fluent (contracted) English that usually brings the user to be out of comprehension. It is difficult for mother tongue speakers to understand colloquial language. Hopefully with these new standards linguistic awareness will heighten and those who tend to use such regional language will learn to speak with the listener in mind.
Best to all,
PE

[captain87]

For PlaneEnglish

Yes you're perfectly right. What I performed was not a proficiency test but a placement one. I got wrong !
I was a little consfused about it first time !
According my example with scores, I would have like to say that the lowest score gives the Level ... is that true ?

Thank you for your response and Happy New Year !

by captain87

[dartagnan]

captain87,

you write better than me in english.
they try to cash money from you!:E

[captain87]

:ok: Dartagnan,

Thank you very much for your consideration ! ... I am perfectly aware that is very difficult for a non-native speaker to write correct english and speaking it anytime. It is also very difficult to understand american conversations between two or more native-speakers. ICAO states that who doesn't speak and understand english at Level-4 (as a minimum) cannot operate as a pilot and ATC controller ... what's the plot of this story ? ... I perfectly try to do the best for my preparation in order to improve my proficiency, but placing them within the limits of possibility ! ... I got a Level 3 at Placement Test.
As I know, there are much more persons who start from low levels (ICAO 0-1-2) than high. Level 0 hasn't been kept in mind by ICAO (doesn't exist) but is absolutely REAL ! ... although there was many "dumb" speakers who had a Level-1 in my course.
The greater part of these have just started an ATPL Course and ICAO asks them reaching a Level-4 in 10 months. Is it possible ? ...

Personally I have a doubt about it ! ...

captain87

[PA-28-180]

Planeenglish....Please check your email, and thanks for your PM!
:)

[dartagnan]

the best way to reach level 4 or 5 from level 0 or 1, is to aim to UK, australia, S.Africa, Canada... or USA and start flying there.

even if you study in english in italy, and your school is in english, you may not reach level 4.

[Farrell]

PlaneEnglish

I think captain87 might be one of your bunny wabbits????

[captain87]

:rolleyes: Farrel,

As I stated in my previous posts, I perfectly agree with ICAO requirements. Safety also means communicating more efficiently and without any misunderstandings ... I personally think that a user who belongs to Level 1 ICAO shouldn't absolutely begin an ATPL Course until reaching an adequite proficiency level. My last post about the short time in which it is asked to users reaching a Level 4 is simply a personal doubt !
Sometime it's a right thing being altruist, beacuse we could be in that situation anytime ... "A bunny wabbit would eat his carrot without reflecting about other hungry rabbits ..."

We discussed several times in class about this topic ... I'm not the only one who think I may be right !

Cheers
by captain87

[dartagnan]

i sell my level 4 for 1000$? interested?

[captain87]

:ok: Dartagnan,

send me your bank account data ! ... Can I always keep you in mind for a Level 5 then ? ...

[planeenglish]

Hello all,
Hi Captain 87, yes, it's me.
dartagnan says the best way to get to level 4 proficiency is by living in an English speaking country (I urge my students to find a girlfriend or boyfriend that is a monolingual English speaker-it works every time. Level four in less than a year!). I say it may be the most efficient way but beware that living in one of these places is a good way to improve your colloquial language and proficiency but one must not forget a structured course in English. Unfortunately we "expert speakers" don't always use the best methods for communication. It is useless for a level one to live in these countries without having any instruction first or upon arrival. Not understanding ANYTHING will lead to frustration and will just make the learning process much more difficult.
I've got students that do, in fact, reach level 4 proficiency having never stepped foot in an English speaking country. I also suggest taking your ATPL course in English. This is a great way to use and learn the vocabulary and improve structure and overall proficiency. Oxford Aviation's cd roms (I am not paid by OAT) for PPL are now graded for helping English as a second language (ESL) students understand. They even have a record function to help you with pronunciation.
Hi Farrell, no he's not my bunny rabbit he's my Guinea Pig. :) Unfortunately here in JAA land one must choose between teaching and testing and I have been given the testing hat by default. :ouch: I love teaching and can only do so for those students I had before this new rule came into effect or military. It's a perfectly understandable rule, an ethical one. I really miss teaching though. :{
Lastly, dartagnan, who said you were level 4? Which test did you take?

PA-28-180 , Roger, howerver I can't open the file. Can you re-send?
Thanks to all,
PE

[PA-28-180]

Hi Planeenglish!
I've resent the file(s) to your email. Let me know if you still have trouble. Thanks again! :)

[planeenglish]

Hi PA-28Mission accomplished. Check your emails. For interesting facts about AV Eng (not just pilot/controller dialogue and the ICAO requirements but also REAL aviation English) check out the ICAEA (mods: non profit) www.icaea.pata.pl


Ciao,
PE

[PA-28-180]

Hi PE!
Again, thanks so very much! I will check the website and register. Look forward to hearing from you soon. :)

[FougaMagister]

I had my licence renewed by the CAA just the other day (for a fee of 123 quid :* , thankfully picked up by the company), and along came a letter explaining the new format and language proficiency. The trouble is that Section XIII only mentions: "language proficiency: English". It doesn't say to what level. At the end of the accompanying letter, I was none the wiser as to whether or not I would be assessed in the near future! :confused:

Now, thanks to the links provided on this thread, I am under the impression that I am ICAO Level 4-compliant without the need to be tested before my next OPC/LPC, since all my flight training was done in English under CAA auspices, and my Radio licence was issued by the CAA.

However, like Dartagnan, I am not an native English speaker (although I can do a decent impersonation of a Brummie accent :} ) but have done my flight training in the USA, South Africa and Britain, and now work for an Irish outfit where my colleagues include English, Scottish, Irish, Australian, French, German, Belgian, Dutch, Danish, Swedish, etc. I have lived and worked in Britain for the past 9 years.

I find getting an automatic Level 4 against a automatic Level 6 for natives, a bit insulting - some of my colleagues (mostly from Northern Europe) have a better command of the English language than a number of Brits I know!

Cheers :cool:


(fantom: it's spelled Agincourt - your mistake shows how little you know about the whole episode. Check http://www.soton.ac.uk/research/southamptonstories/lawartsoc/agincourt.html)

[planeenglish]

Hi FougaMagister ,
make sure you check with your CAA as recently I tested a native English speaker and saw his new English CAA license with the same endorsement (whereupon I stopped the testing session).
Remember, if you are a level four then you'll have to be re-tested in three years, level six never re-tests. I would ask your CAA rep. It's worth finding out the answer and not just go on your impression.
Let us know what the result is.
Best of luck,
PE

[captain87]

:p I personally think that I'll succed to reach Level 4 within next 6 months of my integrated course performed by PlaneEnglish ... In that course there are all the requirements a user needs, indipendently from country where course is performed. Obviously it's a nearly impossible target if being considered by a Low-Level user (Level 1-2).
I really consider PlaneEnglish as the best english aviation school in Italy ! ... studying tools, methods and teachers are all largely qualified.
Said that, I wouldn't like that someone thought I'm advertising PE. That's simply the truth !

Taking in consideration a user who starts from Level 1, I may perfectly state he could reach Level 4 relatively in 250 class-based hours or 1500 , but it depends not from PlaneEnglish but simply from himself and his plight frequenting lessons and doing homeworks at the best.

I just established a new target that means reaching Level-5 once I get Level-4 !

Cheers,
captain87

[dazdaz]

Hey guys...pm me for english chat/help out. Test 1) note the mistake on this post?

[FougaMagister]

planeenglish: wilco, thank you! The link you provided to ICAO Language Proficiency Requirements is indeed useful, but I must say that proficiency-wise, I wasn't too impressed by the samples of what ICAO Level 5 is! (I didn't listen to the Level 3 samples). I'll check with the CAA Licensing Dept at LGW what ICAO proficiency level they have assigned to me - since that's not mentioned in Section XIII of the licence :confused:. Plus I'd like to know if, as a non-native speaker, I could shoot for an ICAO Level 6 proficiency so as not to have to be re-tested in the future! :E

Cheers :cool:

[planeenglish]

Yes, I've tested level 6 Italians, Belgians, Malaysian and many other ESL speakers. It is certainly possible for one to reach level 6, especially when living and working in an English speaking country. If you are working as a pilot then listen and learn.

Listen to these: http://www.ulc.gov.pl/download/ICAO_LPR/

Best to all,

PE

[TheOddOne]

Well!

I don't know about the relative quality of the English spoken, but the audio quality made it all-but impossible to understand what was being spoken! There's really no rhyme or reason for publishing something which is so difficult to listen to - HF across the Atlantic is usually better than this. They all sound like they've got their heads in buckets.

TheOddOne

[IRRenewal]

CAA document here. (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/1574/PLD%20IA%2001-07%20-%20NPA-FCL%2026%20-%20Version%201%2000%2000.pdf)

This link was kindly provided earlier in this thread by Ozymandias.

Read page 10. This explains why your licence doesn't state what level of proficiency you have obtained. Where it states "language proficiency: English" it means level 4 or higher.

[IRRenewal]

In addition to above, on your next flight test with a CAA examiner present them with Form SRG\1199, Record of English Language Proficiency. Can be found on the CAA website. Allows any CAA examiner to assess your English as level 6.

Do this as soon as possible, and you never have to worry about it again.

Download the form from the CAA website here. (http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?catid=33&pagetype=65&appid=11&mode=detail&id=2972)


Edit to add: CAA have removed this form from their web site. It appears it was posted too early and without proper guidance on how to use it.

[FougaMagister]

Thanks for the link. Irrelevant to me unfortunately; as mentioned above, I fly on a JAA/UK licence for an Irish outfit. Our TREs are IAA-approved, therefore they don't have a CAA ref. number. My understanding therefore is that they can't fill that form. Yet another question for the CAA Licensing Dept!

Cheers :cool:

[old,not bold]

There's an interesting article about the ICAO language proficiency standards in the copy of the UK Royal Aeronautical Society's magazine which came today.

It is clearly expert, as you would expect, and is very informative.

However, at one point it tells a story that the last words on the CVR of a Chinese MD83 before it crashed were "what does 'pull up' mean?".

To me, this has the hallmarks of an apocryphal story; I simply cannot make myself believe that anyone properly qualified to fly that aircraft - licence, type-rating, 6-monthly checks etc etc - would have to ask that, no matter what the pilot's native language is and how poor his/her English might be.

On the other hand, the RAeS is not given to circulating sensational mythology.

Does anyone know whether it's true or false?

By the way; also according to the article, the Chinese now seem to be leading the non-English speaking world with their system to ensure that all pilots and ATC staff comply with ICAO Level 4 as a minimum, with carefully monitored and approved training and testing.

The only fault with the article (and perhaps with ICAO's approach) is that it seems to ignore the front-line maintenance staff. The communication difficulties that exist now, with many nationalities working together on the line and in the hangar in almost every maintenance organisation outside N. America, are potentially as big a safety issue as the difficulties pilots have with radio communications.

Poor comprehension of work instructions (spoken and written) and manuals, misunderstandings among engineering colleagues and, for line engineers at least, difficulty in communicating with aircrew, are all possible causal factors for uncaptured maintenance errors.

Many manuals are so badly written that native English speakers have trouble, but that's another, related issue.

[planeenglish]

Yes, old, not bold, it is true. China Northern Flight 6901 was the flight mentioned in the article.

Also,The Chinese are one of the most advanced at the moment for getting ATC and pilots tested and trained. They are not all level four but they are making great passes in getting them there.
I would like to see the article in the RAeS and will do what I can to find it as I am not a member or subscriber.
As far as maintenance personnel is concerned it is not part of the ICAO standards and therefore, unfortunately has been pushed aside. We, as ICAEA, are looking into opening people's eyes on the subject more now that interest is gaining since the new pilot/atc standards have come about.
I've got some fantastic studies on English language problems in maintenance. Also, just look at the Aloha accident. It was documented after that accident that the mechanics couldn't understand the way the FAA had written the guidelines on rivet inspections (and perhaps the company ignored them a bit too) so now manuals are graded to a high school English level.
As ICAEA, I am planning on having a symposium of sorts here in Italy and I will focus on ALL aspects of aviation English not just pilot/controller communications. It doesn't do any good to ignore the safety factor in other areas as you so rightly mention here.
Cheers,
PE

[dartagnan]

Countdown has begun...2 months remaining to learn english or pass your rating, for the one who want start this wonderful job...
after march 2008, schools will struggle to find new students, unless they lie to them (as usual), by telling them they can get level 4 in 1-2 months.

"you have 2 months left, tic-tac, pilot"

[Winnie]

I just became a Language Examiner in Canada. We only use 3 levels, 6 Expert, 4 Operational, and "less than 4" non-operational.

If you score 4, you need a retest within 5 years, if you receive "less than 4" you will not be issued a license...

Current License holders have their previous correspondence with TC, and their written tests assessed, and graded upon what is then found. (I by the way, am not a Native English speaker, nor am i French...)

The test is completely oral, and done over the phone, so that there is no physical interaction between the test taker and the examiner.

The test is scenario based and fairly simple, and a pilot at solo level should pass it with ease. Any native english speaker should pass wit flying colors, and if not, usually due to taking the test out of context. It is NOT an aviation exam, it is a language exam.

As it was said before, the easiest way to increase proficiency in a language, is to live there, and DON'T live with people from your country, as you will not speak the new language... (I know, several of my former students have had that problem...)

Cheers
W.

[RV6]

If the test is done over the phone, what's to stop a candidate getting a native speaker to do it for him/her?

[MidgetBoy]

@Winnie, to my knowledge, some instructors are allowed to do it in person with their own students. Apparently examiners who are allowed to oversee written exams/issue temporary licenses/do flight tests will also be given the chance to do the oral exams in person in the near future.


Wasn't there a case awhile back where some China pilots were banned from a country (this happens a lot doesn't it?) because they get confused and don't know what to do?

[Winnie]

RV6: "If the test is done over the phone, what's to stop a candidate getting a native speaker to do it for him/her? "

Well the way it is done, is that we go through the flightschool, and usually you can trust the CFI there (Chief Flight Instructor)

MidgetBoy: "Winnie, to my knowledge, some instructors are allowed to do it in person with their own students. Apparently examiners who are allowed to oversee written exams/issue temporary licenses/do flight tests will also be given the chance to do the oral exams in person in the near future"

Nope, here you have to go to a delegated authority, and the test can NOT be conducted "face-to-face". It has to be at least separated by a wall.

Yes you can conduct the test on a subject you have taught, no probs, as there should really be no bias. Either the student/candidate understand english, or they don't.

And as mentioned before the test is purely oral, it takes about 20 minutes, and is scenario based.

[richatom]

Hello Captain87,

Did you write your last post yourself without any assistance? If so, your written English is near-perfect, and certainly a lot better than many native English-speakers!

[MidgetBoy]

@Winnie, well I know someone who owns a flight school and was told that he would be allowed to do these oral exams face to face with students in the near future. He is also allowed to administrate written exams and issue temporary licenses.

However it does seem awkward that someone would need to communicate properly on this when it's already hard enough for weak English speakers to pass certain written exams.

[Romeo India Xray]

The problem is that ICAO were not able/not in a position to advise testing standards and procedures. This means that tests can be devised in something of an arbitrary way provided they adhere to the ICAO rating scale and ICAO doc 9835, and are given the nod by the relevant authority.

I am writing this as an aviation English examiner - with the CAA that I work for the tests are conducted by aviation people (pilots/trainers etc) who have also been trained in administering the test. The candidate has a test during which their language abilities are fully explored, is recorded and then rated in compliance with the ICAO rating scale.

We use the full range of 6 rating levels in each of 6 rating areas. This is useful to a candidate as an indicator of where they would best benefit from improvement.

[Winnie]

The only written exams he is allowed to do are the PSTAR exams, all the others are computerized...

Also, there has to be a divider between the test taker and the evaluator, that is the minimum.

He may or may not be telling you the whole story, or have not yet gone through the course.

Cheers
w.

[planeenglish]

Here we go again,

watch out people,

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=279020

PE

[planeenglish]

Hello Poldek 77,

It was intentional seeing that I had already written to this ICAO english person in detail on that forum. This person has written on each forum in new threads saying that his/her test is something that it is not.

I'll re-write what I posted in the Italian forum even though the posts by this person have been deleted.

He/She claimed to have a test to assess proficiency with regards to the ICAO LPR standards. This person also claimed that the test was certified and the assessor was also a certified ICAO instructor. It was a scam. ICAO does not certify tests or examiners/assessors.:

Dear ICAO English and Moderators,

ICAO do not issue ANY certificates nor do ICAO certify Instructors for rating/evaluating an English proficiency test.

You can not tell someone to pay for your test then tell them "it is up to them to deal with their CAA". What you claim is fraudulent.

Moderators, I can guarantee you, as well as ICAO (see ICAO.int FAQs concerning personnel licensing http://www.icao.int/icao/en/trivia/peltrgFAQ.htm) that what I write is FACT.

If you were a serious company with a serious and compliant testing body then you would have a real email address and not a generic gmail address, wouldn't you?

If you were a serious Testing Association your threads would be grammatically correct and your written English would be impeccable. It is neither of these things.

Say who you are and what you really do and stop trying swindle these people out of money.

Feel free to contact me personally, if you really are what you say you are then you SURELY KNOW WHO I AM!

PE

[planeenglish]

Dear Winnie;

Please note that in the holistic descriptors it states that a candidate must demonstrate proficiency in both non-face to face AND face to face situations.
A test that does not simulate the latter is really not a compliant test.

For All, with regards to Midget Boy's statement about testing one's student, it is unethical to test your own student and whereas ICAO hints this JAA has stipulated in am.7 of the FCLs this procedure of not testing your own student.

Best to all,

PE

[pasoundman]

whitehorse
I now have it confirmed that I am Profficient <sic> in English

Just not in spelling it ! :~)


cribble
I use apostrophes correctly in written English, and can be understood by most Poms south of about Lincoln.

Apostrophes aren't used before the word AND.

[PA-28-180]

PlaneEnglish....Why am I NOT surprised by the scam artists running out of the walls (or is that UP from the sewers!! With a well known deadline, this isn't a big surprise. Wouldn't be the first time, but GOOD FOR YOU for having pointed it out to the rest of the site!
Also, thanks so very much for your help!:ok:

[Winnie]

PE" you said "Dear Winnie;

Please note that in the holistic descriptors it states that a candidate must demonstrate proficiency in both non-face to face AND face to face situations.
A test that does not simulate the latter is really not a compliant test.

For All, with regards to Midget Boy's statement about testing one's student, it is unethical to test your own student and whereas ICAO hints this JAA has stipulated in am.7 of the FCLs this procedure of not testing your own student.

Best to all,

PE"

How each state chooses to comply with the requirement as set forth in the ICAO document, is up to them, and no country complies the same way. Canada has chosen several differences, and one of them is in how the test is conducted (i.e. over the phone only), and also in the scoring, using only 3 levels.

The test have been made by language professionals, and should be unbiased, and will quickly determine where the candidate is in relation to the four scores, "Expert", "Operational" and "Below Operational".

So whether "holistically" can be done over the phone or not is besides the point, and Canada becomes compliant on March 5, 2008...
Cheers

W

[planeenglish]

Dear Winnie, it is interesting how Canada has interpreted the standards. Do they test radiotelephony as well as plain language with this telephone test? Is this method for both pilots and ATC?

Best,
PE

[Winnie]

Your radiotelephony test is part of your flighttest, in addition to the written test to Industry Canada

As for the interpretation of the ICAO process... well most countries interpret some of the rules differently (fligth/duty times, requirements for ratings, license renewals and so on) so if this is different too?? Well that is how it goes.

I believe it is the same test for Pilots as ATC. And current license holders will have been assesed in some way, be it through correspondence and previous tests, or even as simple as a phone-conversation with someone from TC.

In Canada it will most likely affect student pilots more than anyone. And like what was said previously in this thread, if english is NOT you first/native language, perhaps a brush up on listening skills, and immersion are the advices I'd give.

[planeenglish]

Thanks for the info. I looked on the TC site and didn't find anything too recent but I did find out about the study group and all.

If you are an av eng tester you might be interested in a workshop in Poland this May on av. Eng testing. (mods, this is a non profit org.) Have a look here. (http://www.icaea.pansa.pl)

Best to all,

PE

[Raredata]

Hi.I'm sure it's already been discussed,haven't had time to read everything.How does one arrange an English test?
Thanks.

[planeenglish]

Hi, it depends on if you are an ATC or pilot, in which country and on what license.

PE

[PA-28-180]

Hi PE! Hope all is well.
Will that web site also be publishing the papers presented during the meeting? Thanks!

[planeenglish]

Hi PA 28, yes, we normally do publish them but it just takes time-a few months. The workshops are much better live and it is a great way to meet av. eng people but I can understand that for you Warsaw is not that close. However, if it is possible do try to attend.
Best to all,

PE

[PA-28-180]

Hi PE!
Thanks for that!
I'm sure that the workshops will be great, but as you noted, Warsaw is a 'bit' off the beaten track for me! I look forward to reading them however! :ok:

[Wojtus]

Polish CAA has just announced start of examinating pilots, here's the link to the materials for candidates:
http://www.ulc.gov.pl/download/lkeang/index.html

[Gulfstreamaviator]

I only managed day one but found the lack of preperation quite stunning.

The ATC senior chaps have their licences endorsed, but my chaps do not.
My GCAA Licence was issued less than 1 mth ago, and no endorsement.

Well as I have not taken the test, I am not surprised. As I understand it there is no urgency in pilots being allocated test dates, or is that too proactive.

There is no written, or reading tests, only a verbal test.

I do have an endorsement in my JAA Licence, but not yet in my FAA or GCAA, so I suppose technicaaly I need three tests......

Well there is no urgency, as it is not mandatory today.

glf

[PA-28-180]

Might not be 'mandatory' today, but March 5 is rapidly approaching. :eek:

[GlueBall]

No worries: If you have 100+ posts, PPRuNe participation qualifies you for Level-4 English. :p

[dartagnan]

is there a PPRUNE ICAO certificate we could maybe download once we have 100 posts?

[poorwanderingwun]

GlueBall No worries: If you have 100+ posts, PPRuNe participation qualifies you for Level-4 English.

Don't bet on it... reading through the threads I sometimes wonder if the standard of English displayed in these forums isn't one of the primary causes of concern to the powers that be. :E

[planeenglish]

:}:}:}:}:}:}

[Gulfstreamaviator]

Not riten or redding.

gfl

[PA-28-180]

Yeah....NO RITHMETIC either! :}
Hi PE! :)

[captain87]

:confused: Hello everyone,

before treating this topic again, it is mandatory to make a premise:
It has been proved that a lot of Level-4 users find hard understanding a conversation between two or more native speakers interacting very fluently; if this conversation is simulated by telephone, a Level-4 user may not understand more than 40-50 % of the total.
Besides Level-4 has been automatically attributed to some pilots/intructors whose proficiency is below or near Level-3 ... It would sounds more than ridicolous while thinking that ICAO should promote safety ... many professional pilots had better improve their english before flying, interacting with others, making a pax communication ...

The main point of this thread concearns the suitability of ICAO levels with english language itself.

Keep writing,
captain87

[Ignition Override]

Alpine Flyer:

"...name in the Domesday Book". Excellent!

[Teal]

Alpine Flyer:

My (family) name is in the Domesday Book (1086 AD from memory) and I have university and post-graduate qualifications in English. It would be absurd to test me for my level of English but I guess bureaucrats would not see the absurdity of it. :ugh:

(Sort of reminds me of an Indian friend who graduated in Speech Pathology at a London University. When she applied to migrate to Australia she had to sit an English language test).

[golfwidower]

Is there such a thing as a degree in modesty I wonder?

[IRISHPILOT]

Hello there.

Didn't pay much attention to all this to date, as I believe my company needs to sort this out if they want us to continue to fly post March 5th.

Thanks to the IAA, who mailed me an ICAO 4 certificate today, I won't have to worry for another while now.

The Irish have no RT licence and gave every licence holder (JAR and national) ICAO 4. The national ATPL which I did, was not multiple choice, but essay style and oral, so we have been tested and now common sense prevailed. Thanks!

cheers IP

[PA-28-180]

One month and counting......:eek:
Perhaps, this thread should become a 'sticky' for awhile?

[despegue]

All Belgian Issued JAA licences have since 2002 a note stating that the holder is proficient in the use of English Radiotelephony. That is apparantly enough and no test or certificate is required.
Simple and easy!

[square circuit]

before treating this topic again, it is mandatory to make a premise:
It has been proved that a lot of Level-4 users find hard understanding a conversation between two or more native speakers interacting very fluently; if this conversation is simulated by telephone, a Level-4 user may not understand more than 40-50 % of the total.
Besides Level-4 has been automatically attributed to some pilots/intructors whose proficiency is below or near Level-3 ... It would sounds more than ridicolous while thinking that ICAO should promote safety ... many professional pilots had better improve their english before flying, interacting with others, making a pax communication ...

The main point of this thread concearns the suitability of ICAO levels with english language itself.

At least 6 errors in this alone!!!:=
That's why I'm an ATCO. ...You can't hear my spelling mistakes!! Hee!Hee!

[captain87]

Hi square circuit

be sure that I still not have a Level-4 ...
I feel not ashamed by saying that I didn't get Level-4 ... I'm performing an advanced aeronautical english course just for that ! I'm young (20 years) and I humbly think that anything can be improved, especially a language !
I use english language more than italian language itself ! I study in english, I write in english, I speak english ... but actually I have not experienced big problems while doing so ...

You probably are more experienced than me at all ! ;)

:ok: Best of all,
captain87

[dartagnan]

like me, I do more things in english than in my native language...
I have been tested and got level4.

[Gulfstreamaviator]

In DEL last night, great problems for ESL (english second language) guys talking to other ESL guys, but from different base languages.

This is where the problem will be visible.

Just my Rupee's worth.

glf

[captain87]

dartagnan,
I stil not have a Level-4 because I I've not been tested yet ... What I did was a placement test not a proficiency test.
I will be tested after the completion of the course ...

:) Best Regards,
captain87

[raymer]

hi there
I need some iformation about the books and reference of the level 4 :ok:

[dartagnan]

would have been better to do the test, and then the placement test.
all they want is your Euro, nothing else.

I see already these sharks going after students and telling them they have no chance to pass a flight test if they don't join their special level4 class to guaranty employment,or no airlines will want them and their career is already over unless they sign the big cheque for the 6-12 month of special airline pilot english course which will guaranty a first pass to any airlines..., etc, etc...


what say the FAA about this?

[PA-28-180]

All...
As a pilot AND an ESL teacher, I can tell you one thing for sure-if ANYONE in language training offers ANY type of guarantee regarding timing and success, they are (as previously stated) nothing but a shark swimming after your money!
As all students are different, it's not possible to GUARANTEE that within a certain time frame, they will be successful. There are WAY too many factors involved that can affect a students outcome.

[moscho999]

I would like to pick up a comment from His dudeness from the first page of the discussion:

What I like most is the face of newbies, flying in UK airspace the first time. They get along with german controllers, austrian, danish, swedish, norwegian,swiss, dutch, even sometimes french or spanish ones, but when the first "scottish" london controller comes over the airwaves, I get those views...like Manuel´s "Que?"

It really is like this. Beeing a native speaker doesn't mean that one is understandable. Often I have the impression that those "hard to understand" controllers don't speak a foreign language and, therefore, cannot understand the problems of non-native speakers and continue to speak in their dialect.

Speaking understandable english IS important - as well for the guys from the island.

[PA-28-180]

A good point!
Accent is NEVER important UNLESS the listener is paying more attention to the ACCENT than they are to the MESSAGE. When this happens, as said in the movie "Cool hand Luke", "what we have here, is a failure to communicate"! ;)

[planeenglish]

Hello everyone,

First off, despegue your level four endorsement is good until 2011. Then you will face a test. Look here. (http://www.mobilit.fgov.be/data/aero/ICAOLANG.pdf)

Next, for dartagnan you write:

would have been better to do the test, and then the placement test.
all they want is your Euro, nothing else.

I did not steal money from captain 87 nor have I stolen money from anyone. To the contrary, I am working my arse off to make sure people do not steal money from pilots, companies, ATC, etc. I performed a placement test on captain 87 and his classmates because he is in an ATPL course that he must finish and be level 4 before he gets his license issued by the State. I was hired by his FTO, who were the FIRST in this country to actually do something about making sure their students leave the flight school able to speak aviation English at least at an Operational Level Four proficiency. I, as a teacher, must know which class to place my student in. If I have no knowledge of his level of English I would not be able to train him properly. He is in not prepared to take a proficiency test as he is a student pilot. The beginning of any language course starts with a placement test. It is simply part of the process-not a scam to steal money.

I do suggest that anyone who faces a proficiency test first try the free sample test given by the developers of the test. It is part of the standard to have a test "readily available" for those who must sit that exam for practice.


I see already these sharks going after students and telling them they have no chance to pass a flight test if they don't join their special level4 class to guaranty employment,or no airlines will want them and their career is already over unless they sign the big cheque for the 6-12 month of special airline pilot english course which will guaranty a first pass to any airlines..., etc, etc...

I am no shark. I know that there are companies trying to scare people. There was one person on this forum tricking people but I got him kicked off of here. He would be a shark. I have been hired by airlines to perform placement tests to understand the linguistic situation of their pilots and also to hold tests during recruitment selection.

what say the FAA about this?

They are not saying anything yet. You can check on the ICAO Safety website for updates and currently compliant countries.

For the record, monolingual speakers of any language do normally have more difficulty in understanding the problems one faces when talking with a person speaking a second language. Therefore they are less sympathetic to the listener. If you read in CRM syllabi "good communications" are referred to and also it is stated that they should be used but very few actually go into detail about how to use effective and "good" communications or even what they are. Communication skills can be learned and they should be taught, above all to those who are monolingual English speakers.

Best to all,

PE

[despegue]

Thanks for the info!

[LedZeppelin]

:= Grammar tests, reading, and discussing social issues are just not relevant to you, and employers should scrutinise any test they use, or buy into. There are dozens of tests around, delivered mostly by language schools and university departments who do not really understand the industry needs. ICAEA have a conference in Warsaw in May, where they will try to hammer out some of the issues mentioned in this thread, including "who assesses the assessors?"

[Ace Springbok]

Heard from an ex-colleague in far north east Asia that he was paired up with a skipper ( expat ) in a 3 crew operation. The said skipper had level 6 English, but missed most of the ATC transmission! Also did not understand some of the instructions! Golly, what kind of level 6 English was he tested to in Korea?

[PA-28-180]

PE....:ok:

Ace...perhaps this skipper was new to Korea?? If true, it's not hard to understand why he had difficulty copying Korean ATC...have you ever heard Korean ATC?? :eek:

[Ace Springbok]

Nope, it was a flight to Europe!! That's why my pal was flabbegasted!

[planeenglish]

Thanks LedZeppelin,

You forgot to add our link ICAEA (http://www.icaea.pansa.pl).

Our issues on agenda for WAW are regarding tests and different types of testing solutions and development in hopes to introduce these new methods of testing to the public.

What you say is absolutely correct that grammar tests and the like are not the right testing tool for this job. I know for a fact there are many tests out there that do not test effective comms. The forum in WAW is a means of understanding testing strategies and rater accreditation.

It is not just for teachers of English but also for pilots and ATC and especially CAAs to help better understand a testing solution.

I am still trying to piece together a forum/seminar in Italy this Fall but will cover training solutions to help aid teachers, pilots and Operators find a real solution to their training needs not just two-bit language schools trying to make a buck.

I hope to meet you all there!

Best,
PE

[Molokai]

Ace, I know what you mean...met 2 KAL expat skipper in NRT. They were not from English speaking countries; my F/O and I could hardly make out what they said and they had trouble understanding us. My #1 then asked if KAL need ICAO testing, to which they proudly announced they both attained LEVEL 6. When prodded further what their secret techniques were, they mentioned that KAL produced 40 sets of sample tests which they studied by rote day in day out. Lo and behold on the day of the test, they breezed through as the test was an exact copy of one of the 40 sample tests!

Small wonder with level 6 achieved with rote study, one can still blunder around with ATC communication.

I also come across crew with fairly good English skills who managed only level 4 or 5 simply because they had trouble during the tests administered by Korean staff who did not bother or unable to explain the steps clearly in English to the candidates!

[Oz_TB10]

Hey guys,

Just a thought, if i have done the IELTS ( British ) and got a 7.5/9, does that in any way exempt me from sitting for any further exams?

By the way i hold an Australian license.

Thanks

[dartagnan]

a non UK company is asking me for a FCL1.200 certificate.
this is for the english language??.

I have a UK Jar license, and I would like to know if the radio license is the same as this FCL1.200, or is it the written test VFR/IFR com?

where can I get this FCL 1.200 form?

[planeenglish]

Dear Oz_TB10, neither the IELTS test or any other test of that type will substitute a compliant ICAO test. For Aussies see here (http://www.casa.gov.au/fcl/language/index.htm)

dartagnan, you can find the answer to that question on the French CAA site DGAC (http://www.aviation-civile.gouv.fr/html/avia_leg/compet_linguist.html)

Best to all,

PE

[Marhubeng]

This may be slightly off topic, but please allow me to add something to this discussion which I feel is relevant.
I'm not a native English speaker. But I'm from one of those countries (The Netherlands) where most pilots and controllers have adequate, or maybe even more then adequate, control of the English language.
From my personal experience however, I can tell you that I communicate most easily, and most efficiently with other non-native English speakers from North/Western European countries. Probably because they communicate more or less on my 'level'. Communicating with native English speakers is harder, because they tend to use more complicated words and grammar. It gets harder still if they expect me to have exactly the same knowledge of the language. If I tell them I don't understand, and they repeat the exact same words only faster and slightly agitated.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that the aim should not be to make everyone perfectly fluent in English. That's hardly realistic. We should try to make everyone understand each other. And that means that many native English speakers can contribute as well. Stick to standard communication. Avoid long sentences and 'complicated' words. If someone doesn't understand you, try rephrasing your message or even splitting it up, preferably using simple language and speaking in a slow and clear manner.
For my younger colleagues, the first flights to a big U.S. airport are almost as hard from a communication point of view, as are those to the Far East. And while in the Far East you communicate with someone who is aware off his own shortcomings, in the U.S. you communicate with someone who will make it crystal clear to you that it's you who is lacking in the language skills department.

[Oz_TB10]

Planeenglish,

Thanks for the link, but from the page i gather IELTS with a score of 5.5 or higher would suffice. Hoping that a 7.5 will translate to a Level 5 or 6.

Thanks for the help again.

[PA-28-180]

OZ_TB10....just curious, but why did you take the IELTS exam?

[galaxy flyer]

My company just informed us that we need to get new FAA licenses with the endorsement on it. 2 bucks, the FAA theory is that the FARs require English proficiency, so if you have an FAA ticket, you are proficient.

For those of you appalled by Yanks on the radio, their's your answer! Better than KAL!

GF

[planeenglish]

Galaxy Flyer,

I found this on the FAA site (http://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation_industry/airline_operators/airline_safety/info/all_infos/media/2008/info08008.pdf).

These 2 dollars get you a level four endorsement if I understand correctly. It seems then you will all be tested under the new criteria for testing according to the new standards just like everyone else.

So perhpas we yanks will need to brush up on our effective and standard comms. Do you agree?

Best to all,

PE

[Oz_TB10]

PA28-180,

I needed the IELTS to satisfy the University for language purposes. Wasted money on it as the Head of the school asked if i could understand him and vice-versa and told to take a walk.

[galaxy flyer]

Planeenglish:

Well, I didn't see any reference to Level 4 ICAO when I signed up for my new certificate earlier today. I don't think the FAA is planning on testing anyone beyond the examiner when the evaluation is given. Certainly not every 3 years. I suppose he/she could deny a new certificate if the examinee couldn't understand anything. Wouldn't that a funny eval. FAA: "flying was good, all maneuvers accomplished satisfactorily, but denied because the examinee didn't understand a word I said."

I will report what it says when I get it.

GF

PS, yes, we Yanks are horrible on the radio. An exam given on AIM and ICAO radio terms would be given flunk.

[BelArgUSA]

Long ago, in the days the city was still named "Bombay"... The 1980s...
xxx
I was flying a DC8-63F cargo plane, US operator, ACMI for Air India.
My F/O was PNF, and was on R/T during approach and landing.
An argument started while we were clearing the active runway for taxi.
This, between my F/O and the control tower.
My F/O was accused to "make fun" of the Indian accent.
Would the captain report to the airport ATCO office.
xxx
We went to the office, the three of us...
It so happen that my F/O's was named R. Patel, born in India.
He had been for a few years in the US, but still had an Indian accent.
Lucky that Patel was not Muslim, and the Bombay ATCO was not a Sikh.
xxx
:)
Happy contrails

[MarkerInbound]

The FAA position is that since US FARs require English proficiency, the fact that you have US certificate means you are proficient. To make ICAO happy, they are going to put "English Proficient" on the certificates. (I don't know if that's going to be a rating or limitation.) For the 90% of US pilots who never fly internationally, it'll be a waste of ink.

[planeenglish]

To make ICAO happy. :hmm: This is hilarious seeing that the FAA pushed ICAO to do something about foreign pilots in FAA airspace not being able to understand American ATC. Just ask our good friend Thomas McSweeney!

Paleeze. This is a case of making the world adapt to the inefficeint manner of using the radio by Americans. It's cheaper and easier to point the finger and make everyone else learn to understand the Americans than spending money on teaching the Americans to atually use R/T and plain language.

:ugh:

Best,
PE

[BelArgUSA]

Have you ever heard the Rev. Jesse Jackson...?
People (from the US) understand about 25% of what he says.
If you can understand him, you definitely qualify for ICAO Level 4
xxx
My worst aviation nightmares -
Jesse Jackson moonlighting as ORD Clearance Delivery ATC controller -
Or JFK Arrival ATIS being read by him...
xxx
:eek:
Happy contrails

[planeenglish]

:ok::ok::ok::ok:

[dartagnan]

I think english in the USA will be evaluated by their flight instructor during biennal flight review.

In the USA, it is not uncommon to see some licenced pilots with "not use of english in controlled airspace".

pilots with such endorsement are not allowed to fly in class A,B,C,D only E and G. Class E is controlled, but no radio contact requested unless IFR.

Examiners won't give you the "full" rating if you can not demonstrate english during:
-Oral examination (face to face )
-check ride.

[galaxy flyer]

Dartagnan:

In 38 years, I never heard of either CFIs evaluating English or licenses with such restrictions on controlled airspace.

Any citations would be welcome. Mind you, I have heard some horrid English or passes for it.

GF

[MarkerInbound]

The CFI has nothing to do with this in the US. If you have a certificate, per the FAA, that is prima facie evidence that you are "English Proficient." The FAA Inspector's Handbook for ATP checkrides (I don't have the GA version) says if there is doubt about the applicant's ability to clearly speak, understand, read or write English when the applicant comes in for the written test authorization, the authorization should not be issued and the issue refered to a supervisior.

Twenty five years ago I remember a pilot at a freight company at KDFW who couldn't get an ATP. He was stuck with a CPL and was ex Vietnamese Air Force. His accent really was bad. Heard him one night flying a Twin Beech. He requested something from center. After three tries center said, "Cleared as requested." I figured it was middle of the night and they were just going to watch him on the radar and see what happened.

[DA50driver]

I had a Japanese student who was limited to flights outside controlled airspace due to a lack of English proficiency. It happens, but it's not very common. He could fly all the way from the Mid-West to Seattle that way though. (About 12 hours worth of flying). We had the limitation removed once his language skills reached an acceptable level.

[dartagnan]

based on FAR61.103/123/153 , a FAA cfi can present a student to the FAA even if he doesn't speak english. He will be restricted and not authorized to use his radio and the back of his license will be:"not authorized to use English language in controlled airspace".

This is valid from private to ATP holders.So it is up to the CFI and the FAA examiners to decide if he read, speak, write, and understand the English
language.

FAR61.103/123/153

Be able to read, speak, write, and understand the English
language. If the applicant is unable to meet one of these requirements
due to medical reasons, then the Administrator may place such operating
limitations on that applicant's pilot certificate as are necessary for
the safe operation of the aircraft;


(being allergic to English, is alright for the FAA:p)

[BelArgUSA]

Dartagnan -
xxx
The decision remains with the FAA Inspector/Examiner or Designee.
CFIs do not have the authority to "decide"...
xxx
:)
Happy contrails

[MarkerInbound]

The FAA Inspector's Handbook has this paragraph:

All applicants must be able to read, speak, write, and understand the English language. Only an applicant who is unable to meet these requirements due to medical reasons (e.g., hearing impairment, speech impairment due to medical reasons) is permitted to be issued a pilot or flight instructor certificate with the limitation “NOT VALID FOR FLIGHTS REQUIRING THE USE OF ENGLISH.”

I've seen a bunch of certificates in 30 years and never seen that on one!

[PA-28-180]

DA50 and all....
I did my primary flight training at Concord Buchannan airport in Concord, California (CCR). Just up the road a ways, was the Napa County airport, that housed JAL's pilot cadet training center. The JAL cadets English was so bad in so many cases, that CCR banned them from the CCR TMA on solo flights. I have NO idea what the situation was for them in the OAK or SFO TCA's (as they were known then), particularly as NPA is JUST outside of the SFO/OAK mode C veil.
I was eventually asked to assist by my CFI as he knew that I was an ESL instructor, and the JAL CFI's asked him if he knew someone who could help. Eventually, after 2-3 months, the TMA solo restriction was lifted.
The upside was I was able to 'cage' about 25 hours multi turbine time on JAL's King Air 90's for my efforts! :ok:

[planeenglish]

Old but worth a read. (http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library%5CrgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/A8E4D4B08E98F6D8862569B9007091F6?OpenDocument)

It was after this (1998) that ICAO set up the group, called the PRICE Study Group, that was responsible for looking into the "English language problem" .

Then in 2000 Thomas McSweeny went and cried at a Senate Hearing that foreign pilots were making life unbearable on US aviation and thank Gosh something was being done about the "bad English" of these rotten foreign pilots speaking standard R/T and therefore not able to communicate with Billy Bob and Yankee Jack's American beer barn English.

Funnily this came after (http://www.oig.dot.gov/StreamFile?file=/data/pdfdocs/cc2000198.pdf)

Have times changed over there across the pond?
Best,

PE

[galaxy flyer]

Thanks, Mr D...learn something everyday.

[DA50driver]

(b) Limitations. (1) An applicant who
cannot comply with certain areas of
operation required on the practical test
because of physical limitations may be
issued an airman certificate, rating, or
authorization with the appropriate
limitation placed on the applicant’s
airman certificate provided the—
(i) Applicant is able to meet all other
certification requirements for the airman
certificate, rating, or authorization
sought;
(ii) Physical limitation has been recorded
with the FAA on the applicant’s
medical records; and
(iii) Administrator determines that
the applicant’s inability to perform the
particular area of operation will not
adversely affect safety.
(2) A limitation placed on a person’s
airman certificate may be removed,
provided that person demonstrates for
an examiner satisfactory proficiency in
the area of operation appropriate to
the airman certificate, rating, or authorization
sought.

Please keep in mind that a radio is not a required piece of equipment in the USA. It is only required if you are going into controlled airspace requiring two way communications. You can also legally take off and land at operating control tower airports without a radio. Better know your light signals though.

[dartagnan]

Please keep in mind that a radio is not a required piece of equipment in the USAthat's correct, but if you have a radio on board, by law you must know how to use it, it means that you must know to speak on the radio, and speak in english...

a restricted pilot, must not fly a plane which is equipped with a radio in this case.
Not very important, you will tell me, but the "restricted" pilot would be illegal if his plane is equipped with a radio, and the license should carry something like : "flight autorized only with no radio station on board".

if you look at FAR 91.3, a PIC can deviate of rules, bla bla...so for emergency, he may use the radio...


well, all my theory is wrong, because the restriction apply for MEDICAL reason, and giving a restricted license to someone who don't speak english or don't want to learn english ,it's illegal...

I think after march 2008, the FAA will be stricter on this issue, cuz so far, they have closed their eyes.

[ChristiaanJ]

From the latest link, referring to US airspace...
From January 1997 to August 2000, the data included 309 incidents attributable to language or phraseology problems; however, 16 of these incidents involved foreign air carriers, and 1 of these 16 occurred in airspace over the New York/New Jersey area. None of the 16 incidents resulted in a near midair collision.
No comment needed.

[morningcalm]

To Ace springbok and Molokai, both of whom must hv wide experience in East Asia. You must have experienced our Korean, Chinese and Japanese English and I must admit many of my national pilots have great difficulties with Amreican, British and Australian slang. But mind you, in the US I have on countless occasions overheard United, North West and other Caucasian pilots struggling to understand or read back rapid fire ATC clearances......sometimes readbacks repeated thrice or more. I am sure these pilots would have obtained level 6 without difficulty but they were still stumped by those machine-gunned ATC instructions.

True we have c some Korean f/os who obtained level 5 and 6 with rote study; unfortunately they still have quite a lot of difficulty operating in US and Aussie airspace. True we do have KAL skippers of latino / russian background with level 6 English but who still fumbled along with ATC communication and crew briefing. Strangely we have some foreign skippers who never seem to have any problems with ATC communications or crew liaison but did miserably with only level 5 or 4. So the published test sets allowed some to obtain level 6 without the necessary practical or everyday English skills. I think they need to revamp the system.

[richatom]

Apparently the new FRTOLs that are being issued will be marked ICAO level 4 English, and then can be upgraded to level 6 by an FI or FE at the next flight check.

But there appears to be no stipulation as to the level of English spoken by the FI or FE. Can any JAR FI or FE evaluate the upgrade? Or can only CAA FI or FE do the evaluation? Can a non-native English speaker with a CAA licence evaluate the upgrade?

[FougaMagister]

I suggest you go on the CAA website http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=1688&pagetype=90 and check CAA form SRG1199. It has all the answers to your questions.

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/1688/ICAO%20Language%20Proficiency%20Testing%20by%20Authorised%20 Examiners.pdf

Y a pas de quoi! :cool:

[richatom]

thanks - so only CAA TRE, CRE and FE can judge the upgrade. A compulsory trip back to the UK for an English test will be popular amongst the expats holding CAA licences!

[dartagnan]

can a TRE evaluate himself?

[moosp]

Apologies for not reading the previous twelve pages where the answer may be found, but richatom recognises the "other licence" situation.

I have been assessed as ICAO 6 and also assessed as an an authorised person to conduct assessments under the country of my licence. In my licence I now have the required ICAO statement that I am level six.

However I hold aviation licences from two other countries. My question to you all is, do you know of any procedures in place to transfer the language authority to a foreign licence?

On an aside, I have seen already some serious diversions from the original ICAO document. In Australia the security services have required that a recording is made of the pilots voice and must be kept for seven years. Yep your voice print is now on file for life, so anybody with a few dollars to stouch a poorly paid government employee can get it and use it for marketing, or your ex wife´s lawyer to pin you to a particular phone call.

Where are the Juan Tripps, the Reg Ansetts of the world, who when told by a government to do something stupid would just say, "No, we´re not doing that".

Perhaps that shows why the industry is in such a parlous state. No leadership.

[FougaMagister]

"Can a TRE evaluate himself?"

I would think that (with a few exceptions) their ego would easily allow it! :E

[Winnie]

And today, in my mailbox, came the Norwegian Language validation paper...

Ironically, I am a Canadian Level 6, and Language examiner, in Norway I am assesed as a Level 4...:ugh:

Wonder if they will accept my Canadian Level 6, as proof of higher level??

Particularily since Norway has english as SECOND language (even third really), whilst Canada has English as first... hmmmm... one wonders anyways!:suspect:

[NuName]

Hello to you all out there. I found the message below in my inbox, this is the first I have heard about this. Can anyone throw any light on this? I am an indigenous Brit, OK, I know that doesn't guarantee I can speak English:p Or is this a windup:rolleyes:

Dear Sir/Madam, Please accept this as a reminder that as from the 1st March 2008 it is an ICAO requirement that ALL Pilots world-wide have passed the ICAO English Proficiency Test. The pass levels for this test are 4, 5 and 6. Anything below is a failure and will be subject to retesting. Second failures have a 3 month waiting time.
Therefore if any pilot has not completed this test (and it IS the Pilots responsibility, not the Airline) then, unless a dispensation from the licence issuing authority can be provided, the pilot does not have a current Licence.

[Farmer 1]

Totally wrong, NuNme. The effective date is the 5th of March 2008.

You should receive, or have already received, a new insert for your licence with the extra item included. If not, better start asking questions.

[NuName]

Thanks Farmer 1, I forgot to mention, I run on a FAA ticket, guess I had better get something done.

[BEagle]

See http://web.nbaa.org/public/ops/intl/info08008.pdf

Basically, the FAA considers all FAA licence holders to have already met Level 4 requirements due to the requirements of achieving thr licence.

However, you should still apply for an 'English' endorsement - this can be done on line as described in the .pdf.

[WestWind1950]

Winnie,

I am American and also received a level 4 validation for my German licence. They sent out the validation to all who had an English radio licence. Since their address computer does not obviously care where you were born, only level 4 was distributed. I'm sure once the possibility for testing is available, you can get your level 6. Besides, I'm sure not all Canadians automatically speak level 6! I'm thinking here for example your Quebeck brothers and sisters. :}

I think it was high time something was done in this area. For a while I offered an English discussion group at my air club. We met once a month and spoke only English! Topics were anything from flying to politics to just anything. It was good practice for all and I only stepped in and corrected people when they really needed some help.... and some really needed help! But, since everyone was "forced" to speak English, some of the shyness soon dropped and some spoke freely who had never attempted to before.

So, my suggestion to those in non-English speaking countries.... start a similar "English Pub Night" and do some conversation sessions with your flying buddies! :ok:

Westy

[POL.777]

email from Contractair I should think.

[NuName]

Thanks BEagle, this has sorted out my problem. I wonder how many others out there were unaware of this. BTW, that webpage states 11 March 2008 as the effective date. So now I have the 1st 5th and 11th. Anyone out there that needs it, you can apply online for a replacement FAA certificate that states "English proficient" on it for $2.:D

[marty1468]

Hi Guys,

I'm only a CPL student here in Australia but i received a letter in the mail today from CASA (CASA is Australia's Civil Aviation Safety Authority) about this. The lettter states that from the 5th of March (2008) current license holders who are just flying domestically don't need the test but any new license applications for PPL license and above need to do it as part of their course and from September this will apply to Student pilots also. It basically says that pilots who fly International routes need to do this exam asap.

Details at www.casa.gov.au/language (http://www.casa.gov.au/language)

[BelArgUSA]

As far as the US FAA is concerned, they will automatically issue "English Proficient" endorsement for the certificates. I dont use my FAA certificate, but nice, I will get a new print that verifies that "aye spique ingliche". For $2.oo, it is a nice deal, so I will get a new certificate that is made of credit card plastic with the picture of the (W)right - or Wrong Brothers. Can I charge a fill-up of the 747 with that plastic...? -
xxx
Here in Argentina, we all get Level 4, no test for all the guys that have an ATPL.. Why would you need Level 5 or 6...? - To get the Malvinas maybe...? (the Falklands... in Level 6 jargon)...
xxx
:}
Happy contrails

[gas-chamber]

If you are from a native English speaking country, just ignore it. Let's say there are 50,000 pilots in that situation, do you really think they will make our licences invalid? It's a crock....

[cougerdriver]

http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=137&pagetype=90&pageid=9338

[interpreter]

Although a modest PPL I have had Scottish and Geordie A/T where I have had to "say again" several times. It is the ability of the pilot to comprehend the instruction that is crucial and you only have to listen to some of the controllers in the US to know that to English ears their speech is almost indecipherable sometimes.

When you have requested information and are awaiting or expecting a reply comprehension is high but "out of the blue" queries or instructions can be extremely difficult to comprehend first time.

[simfly]

At NATS ATC college, and we're having to do the English assessments. Believe requierment is level 5, but for NATS level 6.

[outofsynch]

See http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=301125

[AnthonyGA]

Interesting ... if anyone with an ATPL is assumed to be Level 4 or better, why have the requirement in the first place? The reason English proficiency is becoming an issue is that quite a few pilots who already have an ATPL cannot speak English well enough to communicate safely with ATC (and vice versa, since English proficiency is a serious problem for many controllers as well). So just issuing a default statement that someone is at Level 4 because he has the license already defeats the whole purpose of the requirement.

In any case, it looks like this ICAO requirement is already pretty much toothless. It has taken them years even to get to this deadline, and they seem to be making so many exceptions that the deadline isn't really meaningful. Apparently accommodation of pilots and controllers who cannot communicate in English is more important than preventing fatalities and accidents. Of course, the aviation industry isn't unique in having such skewed priorities, but somehow I had hoped that it would be a cut above other industries in placing more emphasis on safety.

[ChristiaanJ]

To get the Malvinas maybe...? (the Falklands... in Level 6 jargon)...Even with Level 6, there will be a few people over there having trouble with a "Fox 2 up your 6...." :rolleyes: