"break, Break"
 

G-XXX: "Good Morning Brest, G-XXX, FL350 direct CLM"
Brest CTR : "Break Break Air France 356 proceed direct XXX"
AF356: "Direct XXX AF356" (obviously in French so you wouldn't understand it - all this to enhance safety :oh:)
Brest CTR: "Other station try again".

Now hold on... break break what? You haven't said anything before the break break... Is it just me or does French ATC have a complete lack of understanding of the meaning of this term? I hear this on a daily basis. (and no, it's not because I wasn't listening out before transmitting ;))

I find this quite an annoying habit because:
1) Half of the time it means the controller wasn't listening in the 1st place.
2) Half of the time the a/c the controller is calling will miss the call because the controller started with Break Break instead of its callsign.

Would like your opinions :D

(open sarcasm) Of course knowing where AF356 is going direct to will keep you safe... even if you don't know where they are starting from...... :yuk:

Sick of this english only bullsh!t. :ugh:

SAO

"Break Break"
 

Also best not used when there's a formation on frequency! ;)

Dear "Say Again, Over..",

Yes, it will. Just like so many runway incursions at CDG and near misses during take-off rolls would not have happened if everyone spoke English. Being lucky enough to have to attend ATC/Human Factors seminars every so often, I get to see ATC traces and recordings of these Language related problems. Seeing your occupation, you should too?

Stop being ignorant, speak the language we can all understand and avoid more tragedies.

Rant over :ugh:
----------------

Back on topic, please!

English only please gentleman, i know it annoys some of you but it keeps us all safe!

davecr,

That last post didn't really qualify as a rant. You better get used to the idea of :ugh::ugh::ugh: as far as this subject is concerned.

Reminds me of a jumpseat ride into CYMX a few years back in a Swissair MD11with two french speaking gentlemen at the pointy end. At a certain stage during the approach a local calls in on frequency, using the local version of french. The controller responded in like manner. Simultaneously both gentlemen looked at one another for a couple of seconds without saying a word, then the captain turned and asked me; 'Did you understand any of that?' As if! 'Neither did we' was his closing comment.

Very very sad to see that the same is happening in Canada.. Only doing shorthaul myself at the moment so didn't think about the other side of the pond.

Lets just hope that someday, they will come to their senses and choose air safety over their own pride.

<<Sick of this english only bullsh!t>>

Well, we may all be sick of you!

Ok, I get the point of the English speaking part of this forum, I can imagine it is annoying - or even unsafe - not to understand what others are saying ...

But guess what language such terms as "Pan" and "Mayday" are derived from?

And as far as I know, ICAO rules still allow the use of the language of the country overflown.

That doesn't have ANYTHING to do with the discussion, Moira...

If they want me to say "Chimpanzee, Chimpanzee" instead of PAN, PAN, I will gladly oblige, as long as it is an internationally agreed term that EVERYONE ELSE on the frequency understands. Just as I would like everyone on the frequeny to know when I'm crossing an active runway, because pilots and controllers MAKE MISTAKES.

The western aviation authorities are acknowledging human error as the biggest factor in accidents, but for some reason ICAO is failing to see that understanding what other pilots and ATC are saying can, and HAS, saved many many lives.

Let's just say that for someone who DOES have some knowledge of French, it is often easier to understand a Frenchman speaking French, than a Frenchman attempting to speak English. (with due respect to those who do have proper command of the English language).

And yes, I know that is completely off topic too

Who applies ICAO English as per the requirements? If you don't, learn:ugh:. Check the first publication of ICAO Doc 7300 signed in 1944, which language was it published in? The French (and Spanish) version were only agreed and published in 1968, known as the Buenos Aires Protocol.

I rest my case.:ok:

No rant, just a bit of historics for those who don't read original ICAO conventions.

Moira, I do see your point there. I would understand if the local small GA airfields would still be allowed to use their native language - but a big international airfield like CDG is no place for 2 languages. All AF pilots speak "good" english (enough to make themselves understood and be understood by others), they just prefer not to. Again, this only implies one thing: Rather proud than safe (thanks guys!).

My two cents,
I worked with French ATCOs for one year. Great experience.

At first I must say that they could eat and drink a lot.( Not more than me but very close to my average results):ok:
Also l'equip were excellent in terms of friendship and so on:ok:

General aviation knowledge- good,in some cases excellent -if they were able to explain it on english:{
Use of english- I will quote my German instructor:
IN FRANCE,EVEN SMALL CHILDREN SPEAK FRENCH VERY WELL!:E

It is easier to learn some level of french rather than... like
Decolage approve ( sorry for incorect french speling)....

But anyhow, we should respect them. They like their language,culture,country and nothing wrong with this. Until they start work in international aviation.

"break break" to me is a waste of time if all the controllers said it to pilots flying around the LTMA it would double r/t worklooad and therefore become dangerous. I think it should be taken out of the std phraseology book.

Agreed! Many years ago, I was working at a busy light aircraft field and used "Break, break" in a transmission. The first aircraft addressed screeched to a halt just short of an (inactive) cross runway. It took me a few seconds to realise that he had taken it as "Brake, brake!". I've never used it since!

My tone was wrong...
 

I apologize for my tone. I believe strongly that the safety of unilingual control is a myth but I used words that were inappropriate.

Firstly, I accept that understanding what the aircraft you're looking directly at will do adds a measure of safety however, how can you be sure ATC was talking to him?

In a terminal environment, traffic sharing the same airspace can be split into three or four frequencies... do you demand to know where everybody is at any given time? While you're on downwind, someone might be overflying 1000' above you. You might have another 1000' below. Do you demand that ATC tell you what they were told and what they read back on another frequency?

I presently work in a bilingual environment. If I have to choose between having a clear chanel of understanding between myself and pilots or having all pilots understand.... my choice is clear.

What would you really rather have? A controller that can control effectively, using all the tools he/she has at his disposal (yes, including language?) Or would you rather think you have the whole picture by hearing people speak broken, unintelligible english?

I do find it so arrogant that some would think that people in the backwoods of China, or the middle of France or Québec should be required to speak english to fly... just so an english only speaking pilot might (or might not) have an idea of who is where.

SAO

I suppose the ICAO level 4 requirement is also arrogant.....Even if they'll be flying in the backwoods of the world and tomorrow to Heathrow.

It appears I keep putting my foot in my mouth (or my keyboard...)

Of course not!! is the answer to your question.

English is not THE language of aviation but the common language of aviation. As such, if you're required to speak english to get services, let it be a proficient version thereof.

If I fly to Heathrow or Dallas or even Calgary, I accept that I'll have to use english and I do use it. But why, because you speak english to your controller do you expect the Japanese (insert any other language here) to do so as well? Can you imagine the number of incidents that happen daily around the world because two people sharing one tongue and able to understand eachother perfectly in it use another language to do business?... only because someone speaking english is flying in the same bit of airspace as them?

Seriously now. Really. Do you really think that a russian controller speaking english to a russian pilot is safer because you can partly understand what they are saying? I'll take the controller who knows what the pilot is doing over that any day!

Cheers,

SAO

"I believe strongly that the safety of unilingual control is a myth"

I am truly horrified that any pilot/ air traffic controller could even think this. I can show you many (MANY) ATC traces to prove you wrong. No, I don't always have to know who you are talking to. Yes, I'd like to be aware of my surroundings and when a/c are getting cleared for take off/landing. You do not have to speak perfect english to be understood, as long as you take the time to learn your standard phraseology. That's what its there for!! Have you never heard of the concept of a safety net? Shows you how different CRM courses are over there..

("AFXXX, cleared for takeoff runway 26" - how difficult is that?)

If you want to speak your native language, go fly a cessna to a little regional airstrip. Don't do it at an international airport.

:oh::oh: