Is English the official language of ATC or not?

[Nicholas49]

I thought it was. And I assumed it definitely would be at an airport such as Geneva. But listening over the Internet to transmissions from the Departure/Arrivals frequency this afternoon, I heard some Air France pilots talking to controllers in French. I don't mean simply saying 'au revoir' at the end of the transmission. The whole transmission and reply was in French.

'What's new?', I hear you say. But is this not unlawful?

Surely, speaking in French in the flight deck is one thing, but if you communicate with an ATCO you must speak English, otherwise you exclude other pilots on that frequency who do not speak/understand French from understanding your conversation, which could be a safety issue?

Am I being naive here?!

Nick

[Escape Path]

'What's new?', I hear you say. But is this not unlawful?

Not that I'm aware of.

Surely, speaking in French in the flight deck is one thing, but if you communicate with an ATCO you must speak English, otherwise you exclude other pilots on that frequency who do not speak/understand French from understanding your conversation, which could be a safety issue?

The country's language (if it's an ICAO language) is the official language used by that country's ATC. However, if someone calls ATC in English, ATC must reply in English. The "safety issue" bit was discussed here in PPRuNe not too long ago.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Nicholas49..... this has been debated since Pontius was a pilot. It's legit and it happens all the time, not just at airfields but at ATCC too.

[Plazbot]

ICAO Standard phraseology is what should be used. It just happens to be English words.

[SINGAPURCANAC]

Civil aviation law is the point. Not ICAO recommendation or practice.

In my Civil Aviation law is very clearly written that on frequency you may speak English or any other state' official language( We have officially three by name ,but it is one actually) . So we have to.We are aware that it might rise some safety issue but we solved it with adequate sentence in MATS. If any doubt could arise from using different language on frequnce than operational ATCO must translate to all concerned parties all necessary information.

De facto situation is that 99 % of pilots use English language,at "resonable" level,and only a few military pilots or sport pilots croosing control zone sometimes use "local" terms and procedures , widely known as "shall we...." :E

but you have to leave the legal space for use of local language because of the constitution matters. Everyone has right to speak his own language.
Since the constitution is the highest than all lower level documents must follow constitution.

[Spitoon]

ICAO Standard phraseology is what should be used. It just happens to be English words. Generally correct.....when English is used. The ICAO rules say the language used should be the local language or English on request - or something to that effect, I don't have the book to hand at the moment.

[Nicholas49]

I see the reasons why local languages are allowed to be used. After all, Geneva is in a country one of whose official languages is French.

But I guess it also means that if those British pilots I heard on the same frequency don't understand French (not to presume of course - they may speak fluent French like most of us :}), then they also didn't understand what was said between the ATCO and French aircraft. That can't be great.

Maybe it doesn't matter. I'm certainly not in a position to judge. Nor am I trying to re-write the rules. I am, simply, a bit surprised.

[SINGAPURCANAC]

as we told you, it is legal, it is not safe,and some mitigation is applicable(translation or separate frequency)

What is the most important thing to understand? Geneva ATCOs is multilingual, definitely. If you don't know French ,they know English.

In some countries there is operational ATCO on published frequency , communication is/ should be done on English but ATCO on duty doesn't know English at all.
that is the problem, and it happens. :}

[BrATCO]

French, Italian, Spanish... shame on you!

Yeah, yeah... We know, we know... :rolleyes:

Nicholas49,
being a French controller, I'm (ashamed to be) used to use English and French on the same Frequencies.
On pilot's request.
The pilot is always the first to speak. For safety reasons, I won't play the game of speaking English with a pilot who speaks French. I don't know if he's able to speak English. Just for the same reason, I speak English with a pilot who speaks English. He might not understand if I speak French.

As Singapourcanac said, the translation (or explaination of the situation) is given to the pilot who is not supposed to have understood, when I suspect he could be interested. Either French or English.

[bbrunton]

At many airports in South America the Jeppesen Approach Plate says "Spanish Required" indicating that tower personnel do not speak anything but Spanish. Fortunately I also speak spanish so it has not been a problem for me.

So much for ICAO...


Bill

[aldegar]

French, Italian, Spanish... shame on you!

Sorry, I'm not very smart... Could you please explain to me what should we be ashamed of? Of being able to do our jobs in two different languages? (like I'm sure you are capable of). Of complying with my national AIP (based on ICAO)?

I don't make the rules, I follow them. If you don't like them is not my problem, but I definitely have nothing to be ashamed of. And like I've posted before in some other thread here, when it is necessary (situational awareness, traffic separations...) I use allways english whenever there is a non-spanish pilot involved.

[Blockla]

Situational awareness is enhanced by single language communications. However, there is little point if everyone is 'forced' onto a non-native language (pilots and controllers) to facilitate the one a day/week/month/year English only operator. Obviously it would be up to local regulators to determine the language(s) to be used; I hope that these regulators are constantly reviewing things based upon reports where situation awareness or language issues arise and subsequently when necessary changes are made to SOPs.

The other issue is non-radio communications and it's general degradation to situational awareness; things like CPDLC/ACARS and other forms of Datalink where information can be relayed without voice comms; providing no-one with situational awareness regardless of the language used.

[twentypoint4]

F-GHED G-SSWN (http://www.bea.aero/docspa/2000/f-ed000525a/htm/f-ed000525a.html)

This is an interesting read if you havn't heard about this already. Its quite a bit into the report until you reach...

..."In the radio exchanges with ATC, the MD 83 crew spoke French while the Shorts crew spoke English"

[Nicholas49]

I don't know if he's able to speak English.

S/he must be able to speak English if s/he holds an ATPL, no?

Wasn't there an issue recently where some English native-speaking pilots did not obtain the highest level of English proficiency?

Blockla - I agree entirely, but Geneva is not one of those airports, is it?

[ATC Watcher]

Here we go again, but to answer briefly once more : the language to be spoken on the R/T is the language(s) stipulated in the AIP of teh country you are flying in. if in Geneva English and French is mentionned you can use either of them, like in many countries in the world like Montreal for instance.

Again,as someone said we are paid to obey the rules . Am I for changing the rules, yes, but until they are changed I have to follow them. So if I am, say in Paris, and an aircrfat call me in French, I answer in French, period.

[A I]

I know it was a very lomg time ago but to my mind the use of Spanish by the Los Rodeos Approach controller to a Spanish registered inter-island flight was a major factor in the accident to GBDAN. Worth a read. Air Accidents Investigation: 8/1981 G-BDAN (http://uk.wrs.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0oGk3NFyoxNkigBT0pLBQx.;_ylu=X3oDMTBydHRjbmRzBHNlYwNzc gRwb3MDMwRjb2xvA3NrMQR2dGlkAw--/SIG=12omfko0t/EXP=1301158853/**http%3a//www.aaib.gov.uk/publications/formal_reports/8_1981_g_bdan.cfm)

[Nicholas49]

OK, thank you for the explanation.

I didn't mean to kick the hornet's nest or resurrect an old debate. I genuinely didn't know what the official position was.

[Shadowrun]

Thanks for the link, A_I.

I've read "analysis" and "conclusions" and I didn't find anything about speaking in Spanish.

[BrATCO]

I didn't mean to kick the hornet's nest or resurrect an old debate.

Too bad !
This debate must be older than the Tower of Babel...:}

PS : S/he must be able to speak English if s/he holds an ATPL, no?
Yes, but I believe IFR rating doesn't always mean ATPL, hence English rating. And some airspaces include VFR and IFR traffic together on the same freq...
An old debate !

[blissbak]

If nothing has changed currently there are (unfortunately) 6 official ICAO languages so that you are not allowed to complain, moreover if this matter hurted you while listening the frequency using internet :ouch:

[Spitoon]

blissbak, do not confuse the language(s) that ICAO uses in its publications with the language used for radio communications.

It is almost inevitable that an organisation which produces documents for a global audience will have to publish different language versions in order to be accessible in the common tongue of all regions. But the language used for RTF comms - so that there is common situational; awareness etc. - is something very different.

[blissbak]

Yea that's just a coincidence that on frequency english is replaced most of all by French, Spanish and Russian (dunno about chinese and arabish yet) languages and they are among the 6 told before :hmm:
Checking out Annex 10 I can't find anything about english as a must do in the RTF so far ...

[Spitoon]

Not a coincidence - just the most common second language in a particular region.

As to Annex 10 - you need Volume 2 para 5.2.1.2. It says:

5.2.1.2 Language to be used

5.2.1.2.1 The air-ground radiotelephony communications shall be conducted in the language normally used by the station on the ground or in the English language.

Note 1.— The language normally used by the station on the ground may not necessarily be the language of the State in which it is located. A common language may be agreed upon regionally as a requirement for stations on the ground in that region.

Note 2.— The level of language proficiency required for aeronautical radiotelephony communications is specified in the Appendix to Annex 1.

5.2.1.2.2 The English language shall be available, on request from any aircraft station, at all stations on the ground serving designated airports and routes used by international air services.

5.2.1.2.3 The languages available at a given station on the ground shall form part of the Aeronautical Information Publications and other published aeronautical information concerning such facilities.

[blissbak]

You didn't get my point, I'll do an eg. ...
French rules say that french language, except about special cases like training ,is used between pilots and controller both french and french language is listed before the english one.
On the contrary the netherland AIP is very synthetic: "The radio communication shall be executed in the English language".
Even if in Italy, where we are not on the top list about the english language, it's the one to be used mainly, and you can bet it's done 90% of the time.

That's a matter of mentality.

[A7700]

One more time a stupid use of this accident to support the mandatory use of the so called "language of aviation" ( defined as such only by native english speakers and certainly not by ICAO).
The captain of the Short was even unable to comply with a simple ATC clearance ( He forced the copilot -despite his reluctance- to line up behind a landing when he was told to line up in sequence - nobody in front of him !- after a departure...The ground ATC ask him before to monitor the TWR frequency and nobody knows if they were already monitoring ( hearing, listening, discussing ..) at the time the take off clearance was given to the MD82.
The copilot was killed but why the captain suicide himself some time after ?
Why the MD82 crew do not react to the "english" clearance given to the Short and acknowledge from an intersection in front of him ?
Each time the same aswer : "workload on board", so situational awareness is a kind of ghost with high and low

The so called "situational awareness" is just part of the arrogance of the airside against the "ground side"..and a lot of pilots rate themselves instant ATC expert in any occasion until to react against ATC. But here there is nobody to report !

The future "dixit" Eurocontrol and Sesar is data link : Do you envisage to print on board all messages to all aircraft on the same frequency ?

And to come back to language , which english you are talking about ? Can you give me the adress of the english language academy that define "by the book" what are the rules commanding the words, grammar and other synthax..
Why despite it is mandatory in all other aviation sector, there is no safety case about the choice of this language ?

The real problem is not safety: it is the american imperialism over the world. Dont make the mistake , "english" is the hammer but the blacksmith is american...and i am not sure they are speaking the same language !!!

[babotika]

Many less people are native English speakers than Spanish or Mandarin speakers... Looking at it from a global majority point of view, in aviation, these two languages should be the only finalists in a race for a single unique aviation language - but that obviously won't happen.

I've flown in France/Quebec with French on frequency, Spain with Spanish on frequency, China with Mandarin on frequency. It's a little spooky, it's difficult to picture the overall situation, but after a few flights one picks up basics like cleared to land/take-off and numbers and besides it's the controller's job to control and the pilot's job to fly.
I'd rather the locals be able to communicate effectively than stumble over their R/T making a mess of the frequency or misunderstanding an instruction.

I have utmost faith and respect for my colleagues on the other side of the radio, and if they make a mistake I have TCAS, and eyes. I probably make more mistakes on a daily basis too... Not a very popular view but I stand by it.

S.

[Spitoon]

babotika - the most reasoned and realistic post in the thread.

[ATC Watcher]

Babotika: absolutely. One of the Pilot job (in IFR) is to follow ATC instructions, and controller job is to ensure separation using the best communications means. Language is only one issue, phraseology is another one. In my experience of 40 years wrong phraseology has caused quite a large number of accidents , but simultenaous use of local and English on the R/T ? none that I can remember..

CDG collison or Dan air Teneriffe were not caused by bilingual use on the R/T.

Anyway , as already mentionned above, with data link coming up, this debate will die itself naturally.

[Lon More]

Years ago. i went to convert my licences to Dutch ones. I had to resit ll the exams, but the one that most annoyed me. being already a controller based in the Netherlands) was having to take an R/T one (I failed BTW. Fascinating thing was chatting to aguy before the exam, a businessman who had bought his own plane. The only English he could speak was enough to get him round the circuit as long as nothing unusual, like "extend downind" was said. He passed. I failed.

The point is - how much use ill data links see at th bottom end of civil aviation?

[aewaite17]

I recall seeing a BAW and AFR incident at CDG. The BAW was given clearance to cross the active runway in English, and immediately after the AFR given clearance to take-off in French.

The BAW ended up expediting the cross and the AFR had to abort.

One of the causal factors attributed to the incident was that the AFR and BAW pilots did not understand/process the others clearance, and that as the controller was using two different languages there wasn't that moment of "this isn't right" which you get when you say "Cross 26L" and "Cleared for take-off 26L" immediately after one another.

I fully empathise with people having to learn a new language for ATC, but I do feel in an international environment a single language (I don't care which) and fully standard RTF would improve safety.

[FerrypilotDK]

I remember a French Canadian controller, who told the pilot of a US N registered aircraft, that he wasn´t permitted to speak French on the radio(!) (Even though the pilot in question speaks French) because he was not in a F or C registered aircraft.

Shortly thereafter, he asked to proceed "direct Seven Islands." ATC-"The name is Sept Iles!" Pilot-"If I can´t speak French on your frequency, then it is SEVEN ISLANDS! Now, am I cleared or not?!"

"cleared as requested......."