What's your view on VHHH tower ATC service
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's your view on VHHH tower ATC service
Feel free to comment on our service (Delivery / Ground / Tower / Zone) ... praise / complaint / question!
Last edited by 787dreamer; 21st Jun 2006 at 12:48.
Cool as a moosp
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Mostly Hong Kong
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess you are involved with HKATCC. If so here goes.
I have yet to work out when the Ground North and Ground South are bandboxed and combined. When landing on, say 07L and going to the November stands I assume that 121.6 will be required so I pre-load it on finals. After landing tower gives me 122.55. It's a small thing but looking down to change a frequency on a fast turnoff is a bit of a risk.
Do you combine them at a set time, or is it purely on workload?
Another point on descent speeds. Phil has done a great job explaining this in his articles in the various company magazines, but there is still a place for refinement. If you can tell the pilot of a reduced descent speed at least 20 miles before his normal top of descent point, then he can re-program the Vertical Navigation and make the descent earlier. If we get the speed constraint as a reply to our "request descent" call, then its out with the speed brakes and there goes fuel and passenger comfort.
In the big wide world these are small points. I think you are doing a great job, and on a day of thunderstorms in a trough line combined with a red lightning warning, multicultural accents and MCM, SZX and ZUH all snapping at your tail, they don't pay you nearly enough.
I have yet to work out when the Ground North and Ground South are bandboxed and combined. When landing on, say 07L and going to the November stands I assume that 121.6 will be required so I pre-load it on finals. After landing tower gives me 122.55. It's a small thing but looking down to change a frequency on a fast turnoff is a bit of a risk.
Do you combine them at a set time, or is it purely on workload?
Another point on descent speeds. Phil has done a great job explaining this in his articles in the various company magazines, but there is still a place for refinement. If you can tell the pilot of a reduced descent speed at least 20 miles before his normal top of descent point, then he can re-program the Vertical Navigation and make the descent earlier. If we get the speed constraint as a reply to our "request descent" call, then its out with the speed brakes and there goes fuel and passenger comfort.
In the big wide world these are small points. I think you are doing a great job, and on a day of thunderstorms in a trough line combined with a red lightning warning, multicultural accents and MCM, SZX and ZUH all snapping at your tail, they don't pay you nearly enough.
Gender Faculty Specialist
Originally Posted by moosp
It's a small thing but looking down to change a frequency on a fast turnoff is a bit of a risk.
Sorry if it's slightly off subject
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Everywhere
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given the procedural approach to 07L/R seems to be reasonably tight why can you not leave folks to fly the procedure from Limes as per the route and speed control? If you are going to hack miles off the distance to go then at least warn us prior to the event. Given the variable distance to go track miles in HK why not follow the example of say LHR that inform you track miles to run at say 30 or so in order for you to plan your descent profile in good time rather than the bust a gut effort that appears to happen in HK (on 07 in particular) every now and again.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: a few places
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Silberfuchs,
Not that I am with ATC, but I assume reduce G/S by 20kts would mean while up at FL390 G/S 440kts goes down to 420kts and then reduce to 250kts would normally be given when on descent so .83/250 goes into the box (for eg).
The "Vacate Runway after landing" yes you are quite right, yet to hear ATC ask for an aircraft to comply with the ATIS and vacate the runway
(Will be interesting to see if it gets removed)
Not that I am with ATC, but I assume reduce G/S by 20kts would mean while up at FL390 G/S 440kts goes down to 420kts and then reduce to 250kts would normally be given when on descent so .83/250 goes into the box (for eg).
The "Vacate Runway after landing" yes you are quite right, yet to hear ATC ask for an aircraft to comply with the ATIS and vacate the runway
(Will be interesting to see if it gets removed)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a few questions;
Why am I back at 180kts with 40 track miles to go for 25R with barely a cloud in the sky?
Why am I told to "maintain 180kts til 8 miles" when that is part of the published procedure for which I have been cleared?
Why is the girl in Tower panicking about a spacing on finals of 4.9 miles?
Why don't we just fly the published arrival for 07L with a spacing of 4 miles, instead of all this vectoring with 5 mile spacing? Surely the arrival rate would be the same but much easier to predict for all involved. With bollockings for those that don't comply strictly with the speed restrictions. Surely your job would be easier
Please, more sarcastic calls to China Eastern etc, they brighten my whole day.
Why am I back at 180kts with 40 track miles to go for 25R with barely a cloud in the sky?
Why am I told to "maintain 180kts til 8 miles" when that is part of the published procedure for which I have been cleared?
Why is the girl in Tower panicking about a spacing on finals of 4.9 miles?
Why don't we just fly the published arrival for 07L with a spacing of 4 miles, instead of all this vectoring with 5 mile spacing? Surely the arrival rate would be the same but much easier to predict for all involved. With bollockings for those that don't comply strictly with the speed restrictions. Surely your job would be easier
Please, more sarcastic calls to China Eastern etc, they brighten my whole day.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Team America
The "Vacate Runway after landing" yes you are quite right, yet to hear ATC ask for an aircraft to comply with the ATIS and vacate the runway
(Will be interesting to see if it gets removed)
(Will be interesting to see if it gets removed)
Cool as a moosp
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Mostly Hong Kong
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And do they still deduct from your salary if there is a go-around on your watch, like they used to?
That might explain Knutsfords comment about, "the girl in the tower panicking about a spacing on finals of 4.9 miles."
That might explain Knutsfords comment about, "the girl in the tower panicking about a spacing on finals of 4.9 miles."
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Everywhere
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Never judge a controller until you walked a mile in their shoes, or something of the like. Overall good job.
On the other hand, what about the pilots? When asked to slow to 210 from 250 due to traffic 5.5 miles and they take their time, which requires a vector to give spacing. When you are that close, ATC want the speed now, so throw out the anchor.
It can go both ways. Pilots must anticipate the ATC needs and the ATC must consider the capabilities of each aircraft. Also every company has different SOP’s.
It’s all about communication. Ask the pilots to slow down early so they can reconfigure the computers and the pilots can state the missed approach off 25R will be straight ahead (due to thunderstorms) earlier, and not surprising the controllers when the TOGA (Take-Off/Go-Around) buttons are pressed.
Example: Take off 25L heading eastbound (i.e. TPE, JPN). ATC need altitude not forward speed (FL 140 or above at “Trout”), so after leaving “Prawn” at 230 kts, keep the speed at 250kts and climb faster. When you gain enough altitude you will be cleared more direct, then go fast. Then again I may be wrong.
It would be nice to know if we knew everybody’s intentions, but this is not the case.
I remember having controllers in the cockpit for FAM flights, but how many pilots took up the controllers on their invite to sit in the Approach, Director, ATC seat?
When the wx is not suitable, take more fuel to hold and take the pressure off everybody.
Work together and help each other, sorry I forgot, we are Cathay pilots, every man of himself.
Ask the controllers how busy they are at 3-4 AM? Air traffic stops for no one. At that time I am keeping an eye on the circuit breaker panel, but don't tell anyone.
On the other hand, what about the pilots? When asked to slow to 210 from 250 due to traffic 5.5 miles and they take their time, which requires a vector to give spacing. When you are that close, ATC want the speed now, so throw out the anchor.
It can go both ways. Pilots must anticipate the ATC needs and the ATC must consider the capabilities of each aircraft. Also every company has different SOP’s.
It’s all about communication. Ask the pilots to slow down early so they can reconfigure the computers and the pilots can state the missed approach off 25R will be straight ahead (due to thunderstorms) earlier, and not surprising the controllers when the TOGA (Take-Off/Go-Around) buttons are pressed.
Example: Take off 25L heading eastbound (i.e. TPE, JPN). ATC need altitude not forward speed (FL 140 or above at “Trout”), so after leaving “Prawn” at 230 kts, keep the speed at 250kts and climb faster. When you gain enough altitude you will be cleared more direct, then go fast. Then again I may be wrong.
It would be nice to know if we knew everybody’s intentions, but this is not the case.
I remember having controllers in the cockpit for FAM flights, but how many pilots took up the controllers on their invite to sit in the Approach, Director, ATC seat?
When the wx is not suitable, take more fuel to hold and take the pressure off everybody.
Work together and help each other, sorry I forgot, we are Cathay pilots, every man of himself.
Ask the controllers how busy they are at 3-4 AM? Air traffic stops for no one. At that time I am keeping an eye on the circuit breaker panel, but don't tell anyone.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: No longer in Hong kong
Age: 75
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bedder believeit
Having worked quite a long time in HK ATC both Kai Tak and CLK I thought I might put my bit in.
First BusyB. The ATIS should give a half hours warning that a change in RWY status is about to occur, ie from single to dual or vice versa. Sometimes at night when it's busy (around midnight) it might get left behind, because there is so much stuff going on, but it shouldn't.
moosp. If, when you are on final you hear the previous landing(s) given a certain frequency, that should provide a pointer, but as a generalisation, between 5.30pm and through to around 10.30 am the next day, all grnd will be on 122.55. Outside those hours, it will be a split between 121.6 & 122.55, depending where you are parking, and which twy you turn off. But please (unlike United and North West) don't change till instructed. They just about always c---k it up.
Glass Half Empty. Let me assure you that it is far more efficient given the nature of the approach paths into HK (particularly 07L/R) to vector than to let everyone follow the app procedure. Take the example of a "No 1" and we let the a/c fly the procedure, then every other a/c following in a sequence behind until there is a gap will be delayed by probably 2 minutes because of that. That may well accumulate to 20 or so arrivals each delayed by that time, and let me tell you, as time gores by and fuel becomes expensively more difficult to find.....I realise that people reding this will disagree with me, but I can assure you that this is the case. Let's face it, we are doing it day in and day out.
Silberfuchs. It is generally known in ATC that once a/c are put into holding patterns, you pretty much lose control of things from a fine tuning point of view. Sure if a big hammer is needed, like the Wx goes to hell, or there is some sort of emergency, or there is just excessive traffic, then holding is the answer, but generally speaking, vectoring and speed control suit most situations. I couldn't agree more with you re freq congestion, it is getting out of control. When I am instructing locals I spend my whole time telling them not to chase unnecessary read backs that will mean nothing anyway...but, I may as well urinate into a typhoon.
Knutsford. Each controller generally has their part to play in the bit of airspace that they are working, and sometimes what ATCO "A" tells you to do, is incongrous with what ATCO "B" needs. A good example is between Approach (119.1) and Director (119.5) All I can say is that it is not a perfect world, so put up with it. The system is trying to put as many A/c on final at a set distance given all the other factors involved, be they controller experience/competence, Wx, Rwy configuration, wake turbulence issues, airspace considerations and people that just won't play the game and do as they are told/expected. Also re your comment "why is the girl in the Tower", we have over 50 females rated to work in all positions in the tower. Your comment would be like me complaining about "The guy that flies the morning Cathay B747 flight to Tokyo" when there must be well over 200 Captains in CX that would qualify.
Dixi Normus. "Behind landing....behind" is the correct ICAO phraseology and should be used everywhere. The reason being that if the transmission is partly jammed, the word "behind" has a reasonable chance of being heard/understood by the tech crew, and we won't end up with some whizzo taxiing past the holding point with an a/c on short final. And believe me, it does happen.
Mr Bloggs. Thanks for the vote. The days of ATC's riding in the cockpit seemed to have vanished with the twin towers. Let's face it, the reallity these days is that very few new Controllers will get any meaningful jump seat experience. And take the case of HK where we are just training so many new locals all the time, most of whom have had minimal exposure to airline flying and really, probably only passing interest, and this aspect won't improve. I often wonder how many of the kids around now have any idea about different speeds (ground, indicated, true, MACH etc) and their effect on things. Really we are stuck with an environment where the job is increasingly done by numbers, and that's not going to change. It is a shame that we don't get the opportunity to have more drivers in the centre, but that is all pretty wuch a waste of time. I see groups of "Captains courses" being herded around the Tower and centre occassionaly and really the only worthwhile thing is for them to be able to plug in and have a listen to APP/DEP for an hour or so, but that isn't going to happen.
In closing, much of the time the voice that you are hearing is a controller under instruction. We are under enormous pressure here to on train people, and it isn't quick, and it isn't easy. Despite a controller starting to train on terminal radar (App, Dep etc) having been within the system for some six or so years, after 4 months of classroom and sim instruction, they will still take another 6 to 8 months of on the job training to be (hopefully) rated. And that is just the beginning!
LKF, here I come
First BusyB. The ATIS should give a half hours warning that a change in RWY status is about to occur, ie from single to dual or vice versa. Sometimes at night when it's busy (around midnight) it might get left behind, because there is so much stuff going on, but it shouldn't.
moosp. If, when you are on final you hear the previous landing(s) given a certain frequency, that should provide a pointer, but as a generalisation, between 5.30pm and through to around 10.30 am the next day, all grnd will be on 122.55. Outside those hours, it will be a split between 121.6 & 122.55, depending where you are parking, and which twy you turn off. But please (unlike United and North West) don't change till instructed. They just about always c---k it up.
Glass Half Empty. Let me assure you that it is far more efficient given the nature of the approach paths into HK (particularly 07L/R) to vector than to let everyone follow the app procedure. Take the example of a "No 1" and we let the a/c fly the procedure, then every other a/c following in a sequence behind until there is a gap will be delayed by probably 2 minutes because of that. That may well accumulate to 20 or so arrivals each delayed by that time, and let me tell you, as time gores by and fuel becomes expensively more difficult to find.....I realise that people reding this will disagree with me, but I can assure you that this is the case. Let's face it, we are doing it day in and day out.
Silberfuchs. It is generally known in ATC that once a/c are put into holding patterns, you pretty much lose control of things from a fine tuning point of view. Sure if a big hammer is needed, like the Wx goes to hell, or there is some sort of emergency, or there is just excessive traffic, then holding is the answer, but generally speaking, vectoring and speed control suit most situations. I couldn't agree more with you re freq congestion, it is getting out of control. When I am instructing locals I spend my whole time telling them not to chase unnecessary read backs that will mean nothing anyway...but, I may as well urinate into a typhoon.
Knutsford. Each controller generally has their part to play in the bit of airspace that they are working, and sometimes what ATCO "A" tells you to do, is incongrous with what ATCO "B" needs. A good example is between Approach (119.1) and Director (119.5) All I can say is that it is not a perfect world, so put up with it. The system is trying to put as many A/c on final at a set distance given all the other factors involved, be they controller experience/competence, Wx, Rwy configuration, wake turbulence issues, airspace considerations and people that just won't play the game and do as they are told/expected. Also re your comment "why is the girl in the Tower", we have over 50 females rated to work in all positions in the tower. Your comment would be like me complaining about "The guy that flies the morning Cathay B747 flight to Tokyo" when there must be well over 200 Captains in CX that would qualify.
Dixi Normus. "Behind landing....behind" is the correct ICAO phraseology and should be used everywhere. The reason being that if the transmission is partly jammed, the word "behind" has a reasonable chance of being heard/understood by the tech crew, and we won't end up with some whizzo taxiing past the holding point with an a/c on short final. And believe me, it does happen.
Mr Bloggs. Thanks for the vote. The days of ATC's riding in the cockpit seemed to have vanished with the twin towers. Let's face it, the reallity these days is that very few new Controllers will get any meaningful jump seat experience. And take the case of HK where we are just training so many new locals all the time, most of whom have had minimal exposure to airline flying and really, probably only passing interest, and this aspect won't improve. I often wonder how many of the kids around now have any idea about different speeds (ground, indicated, true, MACH etc) and their effect on things. Really we are stuck with an environment where the job is increasingly done by numbers, and that's not going to change. It is a shame that we don't get the opportunity to have more drivers in the centre, but that is all pretty wuch a waste of time. I see groups of "Captains courses" being herded around the Tower and centre occassionaly and really the only worthwhile thing is for them to be able to plug in and have a listen to APP/DEP for an hour or so, but that isn't going to happen.
In closing, much of the time the voice that you are hearing is a controller under instruction. We are under enormous pressure here to on train people, and it isn't quick, and it isn't easy. Despite a controller starting to train on terminal radar (App, Dep etc) having been within the system for some six or so years, after 4 months of classroom and sim instruction, they will still take another 6 to 8 months of on the job training to be (hopefully) rated. And that is just the beginning!
LKF, here I come
Cool as a moosp
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Mostly Hong Kong
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bedder, many thanks for that explanation. Most of the pilot/ATC frustrations are of the nature of "why do they do that?" when the reason is rational but not communicated between the two parties. When we hear of your reasons for doing things it becomes "Oh fine, now I know I can accomodate that".
I guess cost is given as the cause of the lack of communication opportunites between ATC and Pilots, but that is a fallacy as one good article from ATC(like the ones Phil Parker wrote for our in-house magazines) can save fuel and go-arounds.
CX's Corporate Safety section is well wired with people and expertise. They are the way to communicate with CX pilots as they are trusted and respected, and we read their output.
I guess cost is given as the cause of the lack of communication opportunites between ATC and Pilots, but that is a fallacy as one good article from ATC(like the ones Phil Parker wrote for our in-house magazines) can save fuel and go-arounds.
CX's Corporate Safety section is well wired with people and expertise. They are the way to communicate with CX pilots as they are trusted and respected, and we read their output.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: .
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hong Kong ATC's are in my opinion very professional. However there is one local ATC chap who confuses the hell out of me by bracketing his instructions with the flight number, for example
" der dragon xxx, descend der, flight level xxx, heading der, xxx, for dragon xxx". So the last thing I hear is our flight number and the two or three instructions involving numbers are further back up the queue in my head. I'm sure this could be the reason his frequency is more cluttered with people asking for confirmation of instructions.
" der dragon xxx, descend der, flight level xxx, heading der, xxx, for dragon xxx". So the last thing I hear is our flight number and the two or three instructions involving numbers are further back up the queue in my head. I'm sure this could be the reason his frequency is more cluttered with people asking for confirmation of instructions.
BB,
Thanks for your response but I suspect you misunderstood me.
Either departing or arriving I would find it useful to know when single rwy ops are going to be implemented or whether they are in use. At present we get no info on this unless someone mentions it over the RT. It would give an idea of whether delays are to be expected in both cases. Notams are not always the appropriate way to find out at short notice and may be in error.
Thanks for your response but I suspect you misunderstood me.
Either departing or arriving I would find it useful to know when single rwy ops are going to be implemented or whether they are in use. At present we get no info on this unless someone mentions it over the RT. It would give an idea of whether delays are to be expected in both cases. Notams are not always the appropriate way to find out at short notice and may be in error.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 672
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In general, after flying around in Asia, it is a pleasure to switch over to HK control. It does show that there are different experience levels however, as one controller can be very different to the next and as has been explained, this is not something I expect to change anytime soon.
Many of the small issues have already been mentionned and explained above, however there does seem to be more of a case of the left hand not talking to the right hand in HK than I experience in other places. I know that each ATCO looks at their piece of airspace but sometimes slowing to 250 in descent then being told high speed or VV results in a inefficient profile for us, sometimes exaccerbated by the low crossing heights at MANGO and MELON.
I know there are many women ATCOs but there is a local lady who has obviously been living in the UK for a long time who micromanages things to the extent it makes everyone much more busy, clutters up the frequency and generally elevates everyones stress levels. Are lots of 10-20kt speed reductions really neccessary? No-one else seems to do it.
generally speaking however, a job well done considering the number of carriers with questionable english standards. Got to love those UK and North American controllers with the sarcastic comments!!
Many of the small issues have already been mentionned and explained above, however there does seem to be more of a case of the left hand not talking to the right hand in HK than I experience in other places. I know that each ATCO looks at their piece of airspace but sometimes slowing to 250 in descent then being told high speed or VV results in a inefficient profile for us, sometimes exaccerbated by the low crossing heights at MANGO and MELON.
I know there are many women ATCOs but there is a local lady who has obviously been living in the UK for a long time who micromanages things to the extent it makes everyone much more busy, clutters up the frequency and generally elevates everyones stress levels. Are lots of 10-20kt speed reductions really neccessary? No-one else seems to do it.
generally speaking however, a job well done considering the number of carriers with questionable english standards. Got to love those UK and North American controllers with the sarcastic comments!!
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Not far
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When there are known extensive delays thru Dotmi, there has to be a better way to sequence the flow rather than waiting till doors are closed, "Ready" call given, then advised of an extensive delay. Believe me, the pax reaction to a 2+ hr delay is not good
Some kind of advance notice of slot time perhaps? Fully appreciate the delay is externally driven, but there must be a better way for all involved.
Have to concur with the comments re approach vectors to 07, being held high, slowed down then shortened up generates very high workload (can hear the cynicism!!)
When requesting taxi after pushing back from W50, W48, the instruction is quite often to contact the other SMC freq for taxi. With a view to reducing the aforementioned surplus transmissions, why not include the freq txf in the pushback instruction? Eg "Strangled Lizard 892 push back red, 121.6 when ready to taxi"
My HKD1.20's worth, cheers to all.
Some kind of advance notice of slot time perhaps? Fully appreciate the delay is externally driven, but there must be a better way for all involved.Have to concur with the comments re approach vectors to 07, being held high, slowed down then shortened up generates very high workload (can hear the cynicism!!)
When requesting taxi after pushing back from W50, W48, the instruction is quite often to contact the other SMC freq for taxi. With a view to reducing the aforementioned surplus transmissions, why not include the freq txf in the pushback instruction? Eg "Strangled Lizard 892 push back red, 121.6 when ready to taxi"
My HKD1.20's worth, cheers to all.
Cool as a moosp
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Mostly Hong Kong
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the point that has been raised at a users committee a couple of times, the chatter on Zone 120.6 can get wearing. I appreciate that you use it for training and so absolute correct procedure is being taught, but sometimes the repeated references to traffic in the ICARA's can defeat the purpose of Zone and Information.
If someone is trying to lift/deposit a dodgey load with his/her Lama off a pinnacle in a hooligan of a wind, the last thing they need is being required to answer to traffic information on a transit that is two miles and 1500 feet away. I know your are only following the ICAO procedures, but perhaps we should file a Hong Kong exception report and just handle Zone and Information as the controllers and pilots want it. ie see and be seen and use the mode C a bit more.
If someone is trying to lift/deposit a dodgey load with his/her Lama off a pinnacle in a hooligan of a wind, the last thing they need is being required to answer to traffic information on a transit that is two miles and 1500 feet away. I know your are only following the ICAO procedures, but perhaps we should file a Hong Kong exception report and just handle Zone and Information as the controllers and pilots want it. ie see and be seen and use the mode C a bit more.
I am with Silberfuchs on the holds....and I am also sick of all the vectors.
Bedder....I take all your points but humbly submit that you should do some work on using the holds as a more efficient method of crisis management, at least during the rush hours.
In the old days when we could read the tea leaves and think ahead we used to do it ourselves.
Study the data and work out how to use the holds...ultimately IMHO it would lower the stress levels for everyone.
That said...given the cards you are dealt, I doff my hat.
There is too much static on the ground but given the fact that, for most these days, English is not the lingua franca, I do not see how this this can be avoided.
As my old man used to impart...say what you mean and mean what you say...in as few words as possible.
Bedder....I take all your points but humbly submit that you should do some work on using the holds as a more efficient method of crisis management, at least during the rush hours.
In the old days when we could read the tea leaves and think ahead we used to do it ourselves.
Study the data and work out how to use the holds...ultimately IMHO it would lower the stress levels for everyone.
That said...given the cards you are dealt, I doff my hat.
There is too much static on the ground but given the fact that, for most these days, English is not the lingua franca, I do not see how this this can be avoided.
As my old man used to impart...say what you mean and mean what you say...in as few words as possible.