RT Communication - Are we understanding everyone?

[OZAZTEC]

Without any disrespect to anyone, I feel something needs to be done about the level of spoken English in the skies.

I am sure everyone is pleased with the foreign students training in OZ but I believe there MUST be a minimum level of oral english required to ensure safe communication and flight.

I am not sure from which countries, but there are many students in the MEL area flying from YMPC and YMMB who at times I just can't understand - and do they understand me??

In the circuit at PC yesterday there were about 4, I guess on solo ops and I couldn't understand most of the calls - Eyeballs on double Overtime! Saturday at EN 3 or 4 came in and gave headaches to the controllers.

I believe training organisations have a duty to ensure that all their students have a good oral english capability before they are let lose in the skies.

Is this happening elswhere in OZ ? Any incidents as a direct result of mis-understood comunication? Any foreign students on this board? What are your thoughts?
:rolleyes:

[Sheep Guts]

OZAZTEC,
Its worrying isnt it well, I think its happens all over the world, even if people are speaking the same language, the accent sometimes masks the meaning. Where I am at the moment, Spanish and English are spoken routinely. Some times with misunderstandings, but if you stay with the standard phraseology, it can be reduced considerably. The ICAO ideal model of Aviaition English being the standard, is far from the truth. In Latin America Spanish is the only language spoken unless you speak to a controller. This can become a hinderance, when for example getting a forecast, from someone who speaks English as their second language. They slip an extra zero in or omit one like eg. Broken Cu at 5000 WHEN ITS ACTUALLY 500:( and the lists go on. You have to be carefull. Standard Phraseology is essential. Adios:D

[Hugh Jarse]

I was fortunate (?) to have worked at one of the colleges that train foreign students, so over the time I was there I came to understand what they were saying.

The key here is that what these kids say on the radio isn't necessarily what they mean, regardless of whether the pilots have done "Aviation English". A lot of the meaning gets lost in the translation, and doesn't necessarily make sense to those who don't work in the environment every day.

I wish I had a dollar for everytime I had to translate for my Captain back when there were students from non-English speaking backgrounds around the Tamworth-Narrabri-Moree-Armidale areas. You can't blame the individual cadets. It's the system that permits them to operate with the minimum level of English that is the problem.

However, we need to look at the problem from both sides of the coin. Hands up those who find 3 or 4 or 5 instructions in one transmission from ATC confusing???

I'm first to put my hand up. Yet we have to deal with this every day. :mad:

Or, think what it would be like to go to China and have to learn to fly in Mandarin......

[Douglas Mcdonnell]

I guess you could say all is quiet on the western front Jarse. Thankfully you sorted them out for us.

[Capt Claret]

This sort of thing does not only occur in aviation.

Recently in the NT a dean at NTU received faxed death threats, death by decappitation, from several students, I think of Chinese origin.

The problem was basically that said students had paid for an English Standards test 'back home'. Having paid, they passed.

Then in Australia they paid for Uni tuition, expecting that they would pass, when in reality their understanding of the English language is such that they couldn't properly understand their lectures.

I would not be surprised if something similar occured with flying students too.

[ferris]

Frequently the foreign students have an instructor with them who will jump in if the situation warrants. The best way for these students to learn is via 'immersion'. I work with a number of guys subjected to this immersion, and though they hated it at the time, now speak better English than me (that's not a big statement, I know). Face it, if it you want the money, jobs etc these students bring, you have to put up with a little inconvenience. And it's not just non-english speakers who battle with the R/T.

[OZAZTEC]

SG - Point taken - but from an European background Spanglish is normally pretty easy to understand. Interestlingly I flew out of HK some years ago and even some Chinese pilots (ppl) had problems understanding the (chinese) controller's (english) instructions outside of Kai Tak (Sek Kong from memory) - Standard Phraseology is key!

-------

HJ "The key here is that what these kids say on the radio isn't necessarily what they mean, regardless of whether the pilots have done "Aviation English". A lot of the meaning gets lost in the translation, and doesn't necessarily make sense to those who don't work in the environment every day."

Doesn't this make it worse and confirm my fears?

--------

CC - Thanks - decapitation may be less painfull

---------

Ferris - Understand money & jobs etc. - but my point is - Is it Safe?

----------

Don't get me wrong - I positively encourage Everyone into Aviation but like BAK we need BOEK - (oral english):rolleyes:

[weasil]

This is a topic that comes up periodically.
I was also flying in NSW during the period when there were asian students out of tamworth.
I also instructed in San Francisco, students from Air China, and Korean Air.
The problem in Australia is that people are so isolated from the non english speaking part of the world that you have no patience for something most of the world has to deal with on a regular basis.
Ever tried understanding a native english speaker from scotland on the radio? Or how about flying across 3 countries who all speak different languages in the space of 100nm?
The accidents that have attracted attention in the past have been due to use of nonstandard phraseology, not because the pilot's accent was hard to understand.
Do some research on accident statistics before deciding that the system is flawed and extremely dangerous.

[Woomera]

At OZAZTECs request I have changed the word in the Poll from LEVEL to STANDARD.

Cheers and excellent topic that is being heard in the right halls.

[Sheep Guts]

OZAZTEC,

I suppose "Spanglish" as you put it is easier than say Mandarin, but what I meant to say is, that for Pilots and Controllers alike that speak English, as their second or even third language face an uphill battle. I know that when I try and speak Spanish, 99% of the time I am thinking in English before I speak.

I wonder with all the technology around today electronic translaters etc. I wonder if something could be adapted to, or for aviation?

We in Australia, are being exposed to more different accented English on the airwaves TODAY, due to the fact that our country is now a more conducive environment for training. We just have to adapt, as Weasil has said, use standard phraseology!:)

I got a shock when I first flew, outside AUSTRALIA in Central America, my eyes were peeled for a few months until I mastered Spanish. :rolleyes:

Allways be sure to understand the use of "Say Again" when needed, I often hear Pilots refrain from using it or just say "disregard "and it complicates things later on. Its just because they feel its not professional to ask the controller again. This is a dangerous Senario I know!:confused:

[divingduck]

I agreee with whoever said that the hardest accents to get a handle on were Glaswegians!!

Back home in Oz we have become used to everyone being able to speak and understand English, even our own idiomatic English (which BTW not many other English speakers understand).
However, in the rest of the world (it's a fairly large place too...) accents and understanding are barriers to communication that must be overcome, how? Standard phrasiology..no other way. I show my trainees here in the Middle East how easy it is to use them, then try the next China Southern (or Russian, or whatever) with non standard phrasiology...result? Chaos, but a good learning tool.

the standard phrasiologies are there for a very good reason.

BTW, none of the guys that I work with (except for about half the expats) have English as a first language....yet they all manage quite well, you just get used to it!

cheers

[airbrake42]

I believe standard phraseology is the answer!

Not limited to pilots with english as a second or third language.

[criticalmass]

It isn't just accents or mis-pronunciation or a palpable lack of competency in aviation English that annoys me (although I do find it very annoying, especially when I don't get a reply after politely asking the offending station to "say again"), but radio transmissions which are inaudible because:-

i) the equipment needs repair (e. g. lack of modulation depth), or
ii) the transmissions are masked by alternator-whine or the cyclic whine of strobe inverters winding up.

That really annoys me because it points to a need for some radio/aircraft electrical system maintenance which isn't happening. If that maintenance isn't being done on those aircraft, what else isn't being done?

[661 KTAS]

VH-DAA !! I can identify that aircraft as soon as the PTT is keyed!!

On a similar note - Why do Eastern DHC8's sound (over the radio) like they have an AFL hooter going in the background ?!

[OZAZTEC]

Thanks everyone for your views and votes on this topic.
Interesting and believe "standard phraseology" as said above is the key.

Keep it Safe.:eek:

[Charlie Foxtrot India]

My pet hate...use of the non-standard "Affirmative". The whole point of having "affirm" is so that it sounds very different to "negative" yet I hear pilots and controllers say "affirmative" more often than "affirm". :mad:

[airbrake42]

It all starts at the flying traning stage and then should be monitored at the check flight stage. Instructors and training and check pilots should be ashamed of them selves and the standards they set!!
Problem is that they are some of the worst examples.

Test your selves. What is the CORRECT terminolgy for a position report. Say for example you are over posi "A" still on climb F360 and next posi is "B" without reference to AIP/jepps

[LeadSled]

Weasil,
Well said !!

Just to drop in a small fact, English is NOT the only ICAO official language, there are, as I recall, 5, including Spanish.

Airbrake42, if you want the full story on how a position report should go out, you will NOT find it in the Australian AIP, or the Jep., that is only part of the story.

The complete ICAO SARP is in Annex 10, Vol.11, and also to be found in a slightly simplified form in the UK CAA CAP 316 ( think that's the number, but it will be in any good UK pilot shop), this CAP is an excellent reference for anybody who wants to find out what the ICAO recommendations REALLY are.

For operations outside Australia, the Australian AIP can lead a young lad or lass seriously astray. The NZ AIP is a far better publication for ICAO standards, but not quite such a useful training aid as the UK CAP.

Tootle pip!!

[airbrake42]

Leadsled,

That may well be so, however, since we are talking about Aus airspace with mainly Aus pilots who normally, guess 99.9%, don't have access to the documents you refer and do use AIP and Jeps for as a reference, it would be reasonable for them/us to know the content of those docs.

Back to the original topic, if standard phraseology was the norm, in my oppinion, it would make life a lot easier for not only pilots with english as a second language, but ATC and the rest of us.

[McIce]

Diving Duck

I see that you are a pilot flying abroad. Have you ever asked the locals if they understand your 'Oz' accent?

I am a Scot flying in Oz and at times I find the Australian accent very difficult to understand. I hear a lot of Japanese accents here and because they are sticking to Standard Phraseology they are often easier to comprehend.

I think the answer is, yes we must stick to the standard terms but also a bit of understanding is needed from everybody in remembering that no matter where you come from you probably do not speak perfect English.

Know whit a meen man...
Cheers Ice

;)