New ATC Documentary on BBC2
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sunny Warwickshire
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EGPFlyer, if you make the effort to talk to me in one of the ICAO languages, I shall make the effort to talk to you in one of the others (probably English)
2 controllers at Glasgow:
One English, who speaks French, German, Italian, Japanese and Polish.
The Other is German who speaks God knows how many languages but you can include French and Italian on his list along with German and English
2 controllers at Glasgow:
One English, who speaks French, German, Italian, Japanese and Polish.
The Other is German who speaks God knows how many languages but you can include French and Italian on his list along with German and English
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Sunny South
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jump Complete
In response to your post:
In parictular the shots of the wreckage of the mid air collision over Delhi, including what appeared to be the torso of one of the passengers (or crew) Making a point about serious safety issues is one thing, but we don't need to see that (and of course the relatives most definetly do not) to get the point. I also question (although this particular programe didn't actually do this,) the need for transcripts of the CVRs to be broadcast, with the pilots very last words on this Earth shown (with subtitles) as Sunday night entertainment. It is one thing on a CRM course. Presumably all the participents are professionals who might learn something from it and save future lives, but for 'Joe Public' the "Pull up, pull up! Oh my God, this is it!" kind of transcript Channel 4 seems to be getting fons of showing, is just making cheap shock-horror entertaiment out of tragidy
While i agree that it is not something the relatives want to hear or see, i think that for too long "joe public" has been spoon fed complete ****e from the media, and it will do the public good to be shown some reality.
Please dont take this the wrong way, as i am in no way saying that the program was totally factual, and i agree with other post suggesting it was slightly sensationalised. All i am getting at is that the public are always sheltered from the reality of what really happens not just within the aviation industry but with everything. IMHO showing images of what a disaster scene really looks like(charred and disembowelled bodies included) shows people what the realities of such a situation is like, and may help people to put things into perspective.
An example from last week in a popular Scottish red topped rag, which turned a simple RTO, into a terrifying and life threatening experience for a well known Scottish football team. The last thing that the industry needs at this time i am sure you will agree.
If only people knew the facts then maybe they wouldnt believe all this ****e, that is what i am getting at.
In response to your post:
In parictular the shots of the wreckage of the mid air collision over Delhi, including what appeared to be the torso of one of the passengers (or crew) Making a point about serious safety issues is one thing, but we don't need to see that (and of course the relatives most definetly do not) to get the point. I also question (although this particular programe didn't actually do this,) the need for transcripts of the CVRs to be broadcast, with the pilots very last words on this Earth shown (with subtitles) as Sunday night entertainment. It is one thing on a CRM course. Presumably all the participents are professionals who might learn something from it and save future lives, but for 'Joe Public' the "Pull up, pull up! Oh my God, this is it!" kind of transcript Channel 4 seems to be getting fons of showing, is just making cheap shock-horror entertaiment out of tragidy
While i agree that it is not something the relatives want to hear or see, i think that for too long "joe public" has been spoon fed complete ****e from the media, and it will do the public good to be shown some reality.
Please dont take this the wrong way, as i am in no way saying that the program was totally factual, and i agree with other post suggesting it was slightly sensationalised. All i am getting at is that the public are always sheltered from the reality of what really happens not just within the aviation industry but with everything. IMHO showing images of what a disaster scene really looks like(charred and disembowelled bodies included) shows people what the realities of such a situation is like, and may help people to put things into perspective.
An example from last week in a popular Scottish red topped rag, which turned a simple RTO, into a terrifying and life threatening experience for a well known Scottish football team. The last thing that the industry needs at this time i am sure you will agree.
If only people knew the facts then maybe they wouldnt believe all this ****e, that is what i am getting at.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Sarf England
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did I watch the same programme as everybody else? Personally I thought it was utter tripe with a misleading title. It did not feature a single occurrence in which the skies were crowded. It was almost on a par with that awful "The Day Britain Stopped" programme.
The issues that could have been raised properly on the programme were not; there was no investigative flesh on the bones of the rather sensationalist incidents. Repeated images of the two tragic accidents might have increased feelings of sorrow for the victims, but did nothing to justify the title "Crowded Skies". It was more BBC bilge aimed at running down an industry that's already suffering from a lack of public confidence.
Here are some issues that could have been covered in a more factual documentary (although it still wouldn't need to rejoice in the title of "Crowded Skies"):
1) Why are civilian airliners still being allowed to fly in the bandit country that lies between airway Y70 and Newcastle / Teesside? Since the NORCA was replaced with an airway, civil traffic into NT/NV from the south and the east should be using it. Instead, airlines are taking chances with their passenger's lives by flying direct from NALAX/OTBED, into areas of high military activity. And for what? 35nm of extra flying. 50nm at the most. The airlines can cry profitability, but the airway system is there to keep them safe. If they choose not to use it, and have a major incident, then they are negligent. Simple as that.
2) There is a clear need for better comprehension of r/t between pilot and controller. Ultimately the answer to this problem, and indeed to the problem of increasing air traffic, is datalink. There should be increased funding into a cooperative solution. And it's no use people on opposite sides of the Atlantic using two different systems - the airlines would cry profitability again.
3) There is no excuse in this day and age for major radar units to be operating without SSR. That includes Delhi and anywhere else that may be thought of as "third world". Good to see that Delhi has a shiny new radar room now though. The words stable, door and horse immediately spring to mind. Although is it good practice to allow radar echoes to merge when operating primary radar only?
We can only hope that the Beeb have made a better effort for the other two programmes in the series.
LTP
The issues that could have been raised properly on the programme were not; there was no investigative flesh on the bones of the rather sensationalist incidents. Repeated images of the two tragic accidents might have increased feelings of sorrow for the victims, but did nothing to justify the title "Crowded Skies". It was more BBC bilge aimed at running down an industry that's already suffering from a lack of public confidence.
Here are some issues that could have been covered in a more factual documentary (although it still wouldn't need to rejoice in the title of "Crowded Skies"):
1) Why are civilian airliners still being allowed to fly in the bandit country that lies between airway Y70 and Newcastle / Teesside? Since the NORCA was replaced with an airway, civil traffic into NT/NV from the south and the east should be using it. Instead, airlines are taking chances with their passenger's lives by flying direct from NALAX/OTBED, into areas of high military activity. And for what? 35nm of extra flying. 50nm at the most. The airlines can cry profitability, but the airway system is there to keep them safe. If they choose not to use it, and have a major incident, then they are negligent. Simple as that.
2) There is a clear need for better comprehension of r/t between pilot and controller. Ultimately the answer to this problem, and indeed to the problem of increasing air traffic, is datalink. There should be increased funding into a cooperative solution. And it's no use people on opposite sides of the Atlantic using two different systems - the airlines would cry profitability again.
3) There is no excuse in this day and age for major radar units to be operating without SSR. That includes Delhi and anywhere else that may be thought of as "third world". Good to see that Delhi has a shiny new radar room now though. The words stable, door and horse immediately spring to mind. Although is it good practice to allow radar echoes to merge when operating primary radar only?
We can only hope that the Beeb have made a better effort for the other two programmes in the series.
LTP
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BIK116.9
Are you seriously suggesting that datalinking clearance to take off and land, or to reduce speed on final approach is your preferred solution? No..... I think not. Nor does it have a place in issuing emergency avoiding action to avoid a collision.
Datalink will have a valuable place in aviation, but not in a terminal control environment, which is what was being discussed here.
Try to engage brain rather than point score!
Are you seriously suggesting that datalinking clearance to take off and land, or to reduce speed on final approach is your preferred solution? No..... I think not. Nor does it have a place in issuing emergency avoiding action to avoid a collision.
Datalink will have a valuable place in aviation, but not in a terminal control environment, which is what was being discussed here.
Try to engage brain rather than point score!
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: London,Bucharest...wherever...
Posts: 1,014
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An aside but for the record - the cockpit used in the Delhi collision reconstruction was a TU154M and not an IL76, they are very different - didn't detract from the presentation however
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Bahrain
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know this much. Despite the huge amount of traffic in UK and Europe it’s still the safest airspace I use. The Far East, especially India is a nightmare closely followed by Syria and the Cyprus mess. Even China has improved beyond all recognition. The French as ever are a law unto themselves, it just amazes me how they have managed to avoid a serious accident attributed directly to there complete disregard of ATC language rules. I was sat at the hold in Paris a couple of days ago surrounded by French registered aircraft and hadn’t got a clue about what was going on. There all chattering away in French. When are these guys going to grow up. It would be interesting to hear from French ATC on this forum!!! If they dare.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: EU
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wasn't as bad as it could have been
I am always apprehensive when television makes an attempt to explain our business. The average viewer is unable to see the big picture and just zooms in on the accidents/incidents and assumes them to be the norm. Having said that I thought the program was interesting, and tried to raise some very valid points.
The use of native languages is a problem. The use of French/Spanish/Italian and Russian eats into our safety margins, and has killed people. There is only one common based communication language that all pilots (and ATC) are expected to master (can’t remember the number of words involved but it is not the complete English language). So what is the problem?? Just national pride I guess. You can dismiss this by telling pilots to learn each native language but that is being ignorant. Communication is a weak link in our safety chain. Even when English is spoken in a lot of countries it is hard to understand. You have to adjust your ears to all the different accents. Making things more interesting is the use of HF in large parts of the world and all these accents do not improve readability.
The use of ACARS will and has helped out. I have participated in experiments over the past four years in the development of Free Flight. And I thought that the BBC program sort of brushed over these advanced research projects in search of sensationalism (i.e. Sky is full; it is going to get worse). The capacity increase that these systems are capable off will deal with our growth for many years to come. Free flight has a dual advantage in that is will allow more optimum routings (doing away with our basic airway structure) and giving the aircrew much greater situational awareness. The last I heard the researchers will have the soft-hardware ready for deployment in 2007. It will mean a total revision of the way we work and interface with ATC, another topic though. It will not solve the capacity problems on the ground though and that is an even harder topic to tackle.
Regards, O.
The use of native languages is a problem. The use of French/Spanish/Italian and Russian eats into our safety margins, and has killed people. There is only one common based communication language that all pilots (and ATC) are expected to master (can’t remember the number of words involved but it is not the complete English language). So what is the problem?? Just national pride I guess. You can dismiss this by telling pilots to learn each native language but that is being ignorant. Communication is a weak link in our safety chain. Even when English is spoken in a lot of countries it is hard to understand. You have to adjust your ears to all the different accents. Making things more interesting is the use of HF in large parts of the world and all these accents do not improve readability.
The use of ACARS will and has helped out. I have participated in experiments over the past four years in the development of Free Flight. And I thought that the BBC program sort of brushed over these advanced research projects in search of sensationalism (i.e. Sky is full; it is going to get worse). The capacity increase that these systems are capable off will deal with our growth for many years to come. Free flight has a dual advantage in that is will allow more optimum routings (doing away with our basic airway structure) and giving the aircrew much greater situational awareness. The last I heard the researchers will have the soft-hardware ready for deployment in 2007. It will mean a total revision of the way we work and interface with ATC, another topic though. It will not solve the capacity problems on the ground though and that is an even harder topic to tackle.
Regards, O.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Bahrain
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear BIK_116.80
I'm sure there are many other pilots who like me span the globe in a months work. Am I supposed to learn ALL the languages of the world. To date we operate to over 40 countries. The international language of aviation is ENGLISH virtually everyone recognises this FACT. Why oh why do the French have to buck the system. As I mentioned in my previous post when oh when are these guys going to grow up and act like the proffesionals they purport to be!!!!
I'm sure there are many other pilots who like me span the globe in a months work. Am I supposed to learn ALL the languages of the world. To date we operate to over 40 countries. The international language of aviation is ENGLISH virtually everyone recognises this FACT. Why oh why do the French have to buck the system. As I mentioned in my previous post when oh when are these guys going to grow up and act like the proffesionals they purport to be!!!!
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: South East
Age: 56
Posts: 614
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RADAR 707. One of those Germans should be able to speak every language. I was on his course. He is a cyborg. Say hi!
With regards to the programme. I thought it was good but I think highlighted the need for one language.
I am not sure about having to provide an an ATCO that can speak the lingo??
With regards to the programme. I thought it was good but I think highlighted the need for one language.
I am not sure about having to provide an an ATCO that can speak the lingo??
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: London,Bucharest...wherever...
Posts: 1,014
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My own interpolation of the legalities of this are as follows (and I stand to be corrected)
The five ICAO languages, English, French, Spanish, Arabic and Russian are only designated by the Convention for presentation of ICAO documentation to members and this designation does not extend to operational use, RT etc.
ICAO Annex 6 'Operation of Aircraft' makes no statement that I can find, directly or indirectly, as to the language to be used for RT etc. (it only covers validity of licenses, communication equipment required etc.). I do not have ICAO PANS OPS. readily available to clarify any requirement at the Controller end.
The adoption of English as the International Language in the air has very vague roots in the now dated provisions of the International Telecommunications Union which designates English as the spoken language to be used to communicate 'with a vessel on the high seas i.e. international waters'. There is no parallel ICAO legislation/guidance.
Now what can clearly be seen is a large and potentially dangerous 'black hole' of no ICAO legislation covering the language to be used between ATC and Aircraft...there isn't any!
The five ICAO languages, English, French, Spanish, Arabic and Russian are only designated by the Convention for presentation of ICAO documentation to members and this designation does not extend to operational use, RT etc.
ICAO Annex 6 'Operation of Aircraft' makes no statement that I can find, directly or indirectly, as to the language to be used for RT etc. (it only covers validity of licenses, communication equipment required etc.). I do not have ICAO PANS OPS. readily available to clarify any requirement at the Controller end.
The adoption of English as the International Language in the air has very vague roots in the now dated provisions of the International Telecommunications Union which designates English as the spoken language to be used to communicate 'with a vessel on the high seas i.e. international waters'. There is no parallel ICAO legislation/guidance.
Now what can clearly be seen is a large and potentially dangerous 'black hole' of no ICAO legislation covering the language to be used between ATC and Aircraft...there isn't any!
Last edited by Boss Raptor; 4th Aug 2003 at 16:20.
Ohcirrej
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: This is the internet FFS.........
Posts: 2,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EGPFlyer, I can translate that.................
SHT6G, enter the hold, delay not determined due to recurrent ATC staff shortages
Forgive me if this has been thrashed to death before, but is there any truth to the rumour that some operators had english translators on the flight deck?
SHT6G, enter the hold, delay not determined due to recurrent ATC staff shortages
Forgive me if this has been thrashed to death before, but is there any truth to the rumour that some operators had english translators on the flight deck?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thought it started off OK but then got dogged down. If they were making a point about the Delhi crash, then it could have been followed up with lots of stuff on level busts, the size of the problem and how ATC TRUCE programs, and presentations to airlines are trying to tackle it. ATC I & I could have given them some spine chilling radar replays!
Perhaps all those who object to French being used might like to consider boycotting all major French airfields. That might make a difference to French aviation revenue! Perhaps all those who speak poor English could consider the same about UK ones as well!
As for Data Links, I can't see how this will work in a busy TMA environment. I thought that one of the points being raised was that everyone wanted feedback on what everyone else was doing? Give us Mode S today and safety will improve!
Perhaps all those who object to French being used might like to consider boycotting all major French airfields. That might make a difference to French aviation revenue! Perhaps all those who speak poor English could consider the same about UK ones as well!
As for Data Links, I can't see how this will work in a busy TMA environment. I thought that one of the points being raised was that everyone wanted feedback on what everyone else was doing? Give us Mode S today and safety will improve!
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An interesting programme, but as ususal spoiled by a tendency towards sensationalism. I hope it is a series, no mention thus far of TCAS, or standard levels, wouldn't do to suggest there is any hope, would it?
As for the datalink, I think it would be the way to go eventually, but the prog. did make a valid point in saying about standardisation being a problem because whichever system is adopted, there is a lot of money to be made!
Situational awareness could be addressed using a display similar to JTIDS that the military have, but there will obviously be a tendancy for some pilots to become amateur ATCOs and argue about their clearances (some do it already with TCAS!).
In the short term, with respect to language problems, the most important thing, whichever language we adopt, is to use standard phraseology. The american ATC is particularly bad for this, probably because most of their traffic speaks English (sort of) as their mother tongue, so they get away with it. As for the French, I believe this is forced upon them by government, they have a whole ministry devoted to protection of the French Language, which issues quotas to french commercial radio dictating how much french language music they must play, and they want to ban the expression "le weekend" (can't say I blame them). As English is my language, I would obviously like it to be the ICAO standard, but it is the most widely spoken, and I guess Spanish would be the next logical choice, but trying to get everyone to learn 5 languages? Not likely.
As for removing humans from ATC, I'd much rather have an ATCO to talk to than a computer. I doubt anyone would board an aeroplane without human flight crew and I wouldn't want to operate an aeroplane in an ATC environment run by a product of Bill Gates' pension fund.
MSG: You have pop-up traffic, type and destination unknown, same height, converging heading, range 0.25 mile, standby while windows calculates a new heading.....
As for the datalink, I think it would be the way to go eventually, but the prog. did make a valid point in saying about standardisation being a problem because whichever system is adopted, there is a lot of money to be made!
Situational awareness could be addressed using a display similar to JTIDS that the military have, but there will obviously be a tendancy for some pilots to become amateur ATCOs and argue about their clearances (some do it already with TCAS!).
In the short term, with respect to language problems, the most important thing, whichever language we adopt, is to use standard phraseology. The american ATC is particularly bad for this, probably because most of their traffic speaks English (sort of) as their mother tongue, so they get away with it. As for the French, I believe this is forced upon them by government, they have a whole ministry devoted to protection of the French Language, which issues quotas to french commercial radio dictating how much french language music they must play, and they want to ban the expression "le weekend" (can't say I blame them). As English is my language, I would obviously like it to be the ICAO standard, but it is the most widely spoken, and I guess Spanish would be the next logical choice, but trying to get everyone to learn 5 languages? Not likely.
As for removing humans from ATC, I'd much rather have an ATCO to talk to than a computer. I doubt anyone would board an aeroplane without human flight crew and I wouldn't want to operate an aeroplane in an ATC environment run by a product of Bill Gates' pension fund.
MSG: You have pop-up traffic, type and destination unknown, same height, converging heading, range 0.25 mile, standby while windows calculates a new heading.....
I was rather amused that the US ATC person, lamenting the poor English he encounters from his customers, gave the example of them being unable to understand the phrase "climb and maintain <level>", that delightful piece of non-ICAO phraeology. Divided by a common language... 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: London,Bucharest...wherever...
Posts: 1,014
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know for fact that Russian en-route control centres often have a translator sitting next to the controller to assist and attempt to avoid any misunderstandings.
on your FM dial
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Bindook
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TopBunk,
Yes.
With datalink an ATC computer can communicate 10 different speed constraints to 10 different aircraft in less than a second. In that same second it can communicate a landing clearance to another aircraft. With current voice methods that amount of communication takes many seconds, there is enormous scope for mis-communication and there is usually some wally checking in on frequency that will talk over the top of everyone.
The process could be further automated. An ATC computer that automatically monitors the inbound traffic spacing and closure rates and compares them to pre-programmed in-trail requirements and an aircraft performance database could generate the speed constraints automatically and very precisely and communicate them to the aircraft without any controller intervention.
Then again – why does it have to be a ground-based solution? There is no technical reason why a ground-based ATC computer cannot abdicate some of the work-load to an airborne avionics suite – eg “follow XYZ star - leave the initial approach fix at time 12:40:45 - maintain 4.00 miles behind the aircraft which is squarking 1234”. That level of precision is simply unachievable with current methods.
Datalink and automated inbound spacing would be a vast improvement over the current out-dated ground-based radar and voice communications methods which rely far too much on fallible humans eye-balling it. Safety, capacity and efficiency would all be enhanced.
Well it could - but that’s what TCAS is for. In any case, why do you find yourself needing to issue emergency avoiding action instructions in the first place?
I suggest that an automated datalink arrangement is less likely to create situations that require the issuance of emergency avoiding action instructions.
That’s your opinion and you are certainly entitled to it.
I do not share that opinion.
Try to see the bigger picture, rather than endeavouring to protect the future value of a skill-set that has taken years to acquire but which will be obsolete if datalink is implemented to its greatest possible extent.
MrBig,
What – like the English are a law unto themselves in their own country? Tell me, how many ICAO variations has the UK filed?
Which “ATC language rules” are you referring to?
There is no law that says that the air traffic controllers at Paris must use only one language. And there is no law that says that they are not allowed to speak French.
If you would prefer them to use only one language then I’m sure they would be delighted to accommodate you – but please don’t be surprised if it isn’t English.
If you regularly go to Paris then why don’t you learn a few words of the language? Don’t you owe it to yourself and your passengers? Or would you prefer to fly around with sub-optimal situational awareness just to prove a point? Alternately, perhaps there is a French-speaking pilot in your (or another) company who should operate the route instead of you on safety grounds.
I suggest that you should consider learning a few aviation related words in as many different languages as you can. I’m sure you already have.
In what way, precisely, are you suggesting that the air traffic controllers at Paris are “buck[ing] the system”?
Current policy is that the Paris air traffic controllers should be able to speak English in order to accommodate pilots that are unable (or unwilling) to speak French. As far as I am aware the air traffic controllers at Paris are in compliance with that policy.
Topofthestack,
Very good point well made. I agree.
See above.
Datalink will work beautifully in the TMA environment on two conditions :
(1) Get the design right at the strategic stage - SIDs and STARs etc
(2) Forget about radar vectoring and human intervention. The separation and sequencing process should be automated so the human controller sits there and monitors the performance of the computers. The human ATC job should be one of monitoring and managing, rather formulating a plan in your head as you go along and screaming instructions down a microphone at 400 words per minute to pilots that mishear them and for whom English is not their first language.
Listening to voice communications gives the flight crew situational awareness based on what other traffic has been instructed to do and what the other traffic has read back.
A cockpit TCAS display of traffic out to 40 miles and 9,900 feet above and 9,900 feet below gives the flight crew situational awareness based on what the other traffic is doing.
Bookworm,
If you are from the UK then I wouldn’t start throwing stones – glass houses and all that.
Tell me again - how many ICAO differences has the UK filed?
Are you seriously suggesting that datalinking clearance to take off and land, or to reduce speed on final approach is your preferred solution?
With datalink an ATC computer can communicate 10 different speed constraints to 10 different aircraft in less than a second. In that same second it can communicate a landing clearance to another aircraft. With current voice methods that amount of communication takes many seconds, there is enormous scope for mis-communication and there is usually some wally checking in on frequency that will talk over the top of everyone.
The process could be further automated. An ATC computer that automatically monitors the inbound traffic spacing and closure rates and compares them to pre-programmed in-trail requirements and an aircraft performance database could generate the speed constraints automatically and very precisely and communicate them to the aircraft without any controller intervention.
Then again – why does it have to be a ground-based solution? There is no technical reason why a ground-based ATC computer cannot abdicate some of the work-load to an airborne avionics suite – eg “follow XYZ star - leave the initial approach fix at time 12:40:45 - maintain 4.00 miles behind the aircraft which is squarking 1234”. That level of precision is simply unachievable with current methods.
Datalink and automated inbound spacing would be a vast improvement over the current out-dated ground-based radar and voice communications methods which rely far too much on fallible humans eye-balling it. Safety, capacity and efficiency would all be enhanced.
Nor does it have a place in issuing emergency avoiding action to avoid a collision.
I suggest that an automated datalink arrangement is less likely to create situations that require the issuance of emergency avoiding action instructions.
Datalink will have a valuable place in aviation, but not in a terminal control environment....
I do not share that opinion.
Try to engage brain rather than point score!
MrBig,
The French as ever are a law unto themselves....
....it just amazes me how they [the French] have managed to avoid a serious accident attributed directly to there complete disregard of ATC language rules.
There is no law that says that the air traffic controllers at Paris must use only one language. And there is no law that says that they are not allowed to speak French.
If you would prefer them to use only one language then I’m sure they would be delighted to accommodate you – but please don’t be surprised if it isn’t English.
I was sat at the hold in Paris a couple of days ago surrounded by French registered aircraft and hadn’t got a clue about what was going on. There all chattering away in French.
I'm sure there are many other pilots who like me span the globe in a months work. Am I supposed to learn ALL the languages of the world.
The international language of aviation is ENGLISH virtually everyone recognises this FACT. Why oh why do the French have to buck the system.
Current policy is that the Paris air traffic controllers should be able to speak English in order to accommodate pilots that are unable (or unwilling) to speak French. As far as I am aware the air traffic controllers at Paris are in compliance with that policy.
Topofthestack,
Perhaps all those who object to French being used might like to consider boycotting all major French airfields......perhaps all those who speak poor English could consider the same about UK ones as well!”
As for Data Links, I can't see how this will work in a busy TMA environment.
Datalink will work beautifully in the TMA environment on two conditions :
(1) Get the design right at the strategic stage - SIDs and STARs etc
(2) Forget about radar vectoring and human intervention. The separation and sequencing process should be automated so the human controller sits there and monitors the performance of the computers. The human ATC job should be one of monitoring and managing, rather formulating a plan in your head as you go along and screaming instructions down a microphone at 400 words per minute to pilots that mishear them and for whom English is not their first language.
I thought that one of the points being raised was that everyone wanted feedback on what everyone else was doing?
A cockpit TCAS display of traffic out to 40 miles and 9,900 feet above and 9,900 feet below gives the flight crew situational awareness based on what the other traffic is doing.
Bookworm,
I was rather amused that the US ATC person, lamenting the poor English....the phrase "climb and maintain <level>", that delightful piece of non-ICAO phraeology.
Tell me again - how many ICAO differences has the UK filed?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Belgium
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
with respect to language problems, the most important thing, whichever language we adopt, is to use standard phraseology.
"Traffic 12 o'clock 1000 feet above "
and NOT
"Traffic 12 o'clock at FL140"
Why did the BBC not mention this? Brits being Brits I reckon, long live the Empire, the English language will conquer all.
The language issue has been thoroughly dealt with on another thread, but for what its worth, my opinion is this. Of course there has to be a single language of the skies worldwide. Its just common sense. I'm not arguing that English is the natural choice, I am not so full of blinding national pride. But in such a far reaching international environment everyone has to be able to understand everyone else. It just means that anybody working within the industry, pilots and controllers alike, need to be able to speak the chosen language, be it English, French, Spanish, whatever.
With regards to datalink, I am very sceptical. At Maastricht we are experimenting with CPDLC, a datalink system in the early stages of development. I cannot see, apart from a few instructions (freq change, squawk change) how it could be used in any busy environment. It takes the controllers attention away from his radar screen, it does not give pilots spatial awareness (at least using another language you could hear a call sign and maybe work out a level given to it), and as far as misunderstanding is concerned, how easy would it be to simply press the wrong button and accidentally issue the wrong FL? Ok I am prepared to give it a chance, but until the system proves me wrong this will remain my opinion.
With datalink an ATC computer can communicate 10 different speed constraints to 10 different aircraft in less than a second.
And what if the datalink software, perish the thought, failed? The controller is left with a very dangerous case of overcrowding to sort out. The whole point of datalink, from a safety perspective, is that it should not take over the job of a controller, the atco must at all times be able to use r/t to carry out the same job as the datalink.
Well it could - but that’s what TCAS is for. In any case, why do you find yourself needing to issue emergency avoiding action instructions in the first place?
TCAS. False RA's which the pilot is obliged to act upon are the scurge of my life, especially when the a/c concerned climbs outside atc restrictions int opposite traffic which is seen by TCAS as less of a threat than the the traffic atc is keeping it clear of.Enough said, I will watch the program again next week
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Bahrain
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear BIK_116.80
Learn the language. Mmmmm. Just come back from a 2 week trip overflying countries using the following English, Flemish, French, German, Hungarian, Rumanian, Bulgarian, Turkish, Greek, Arabic, Farsi, Hindi, Urdu, Tamil, Thai, Burmese, Campucian, Vietnamese, Chinese (Mandarin and Cantonees) That was just the first trip. Through in Filipino, Indonesian and Malay for the second week. Now which language do you suggest.
The simple truth is that English is the language of aviation, period. As you say situational awarness is of great importance.
(Please excuse any spelling erors)
Learn the language. Mmmmm. Just come back from a 2 week trip overflying countries using the following English, Flemish, French, German, Hungarian, Rumanian, Bulgarian, Turkish, Greek, Arabic, Farsi, Hindi, Urdu, Tamil, Thai, Burmese, Campucian, Vietnamese, Chinese (Mandarin and Cantonees) That was just the first trip. Through in Filipino, Indonesian and Malay for the second week. Now which language do you suggest.
The simple truth is that English is the language of aviation, period. As you say situational awarness is of great importance.
(Please excuse any spelling erors)