Runway incursion incident at CDG 10/01/06?
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brain fade, I am not a pro dual language person. Quite the contrary if you knew me. I just been there so many times and have learned by now that the case is lost and we have to accept that it will most probably be with us until data link replaces RT in some decades.
The " benefits " as you call them are mainly economies in the training issues' If you take Russia, China, South and Central America for instance, , an " English" rating is paid extra, and it is cheaper to train locals in their own language.
The second aspect is the safety one, as in areas where English is hardly used ( see examples of areas above) and badly practiced , it is beleived that doing RT in their mother tongue will increase safety and avoid misunderstandings.
These are old issues dating back from the 50s, and every attempt to modify them has miserably failed so far.
Flash 8 , I am also very well aware of the DAN Air 727 crash in TFN , and dual language was not an issue, bad English was, but that is a separate issue, common until early 80s, especially in Spain. But you have to recognise that after Franco death and the de-militarisation" of ATC there, the situation improved considerably.
Mike Jenvey : yes, not everyone, there were so called " sabotage " attempts on that day that no-one calling himself a professional should be very proud of.
The " benefits " as you call them are mainly economies in the training issues' If you take Russia, China, South and Central America for instance, , an " English" rating is paid extra, and it is cheaper to train locals in their own language.
The second aspect is the safety one, as in areas where English is hardly used ( see examples of areas above) and badly practiced , it is beleived that doing RT in their mother tongue will increase safety and avoid misunderstandings.
These are old issues dating back from the 50s, and every attempt to modify them has miserably failed so far.
Flash 8 , I am also very well aware of the DAN Air 727 crash in TFN , and dual language was not an issue, bad English was, but that is a separate issue, common until early 80s, especially in Spain. But you have to recognise that after Franco death and the de-militarisation" of ATC there, the situation improved considerably.
Mike Jenvey : yes, not everyone, there were so called " sabotage " attempts on that day that no-one calling himself a professional should be very proud of.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Asia
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not advocating dual langage just the opposite in fact, but would like your opinion about the tendency to use more and more datalink for communication.
Eurocontrol for one would like to see CPDLC implemented, it sure lower the risk of mis-communication but what about situational awareness....
Eurocontrol for one would like to see CPDLC implemented, it sure lower the risk of mis-communication but what about situational awareness....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Planet Claire
Age: 63
Posts: 587
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATC watcher. I understand what you say , BUT!, everybody at CDG can speak English (well ATC English anyway).........so.......why not simply speak it at CDG as they do wherever they are going to or have come from!
I mean they can speak French no where except CDG!
I mean they can speak French no where except CDG!
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brain Fade: it is not that simple. the French AIP ( like most AIPs over the world exept those from English speaking countries ) specify which language is to be used on the RT . It is not up to the controllers to decide . In France controllers have to use French is addressed in French. Same for many other countries.
As I said many times already, the problem can be solved overnight in CDG if every pilot contacted ATC in English, as there controllers have to reply in English. It is very much a pilot initiative . The problem in CDG is that it is the home base of AF and the majority of AF pilots are very much opposed to this.
Again same thing for Mexico , Rio or Athens if you want big examples.
Sky 330 : data link is a separate issue that would need a lot of debate.
Basically in the " situation awareness" meaning determining the position of other aircrfat around you based on what you hear over the RT ( I have to be careful now..
) you definitively will loose this with DL but ,as I said before, it is today not required to do so anyway. The interesting thing with DL, is that you could add a small sofware like you have in mobile telephones today, allowing you to choose the language you want to have the end result on your displays.
So in fact it could solve the dual language issue once and for all
As I said many times already, the problem can be solved overnight in CDG if every pilot contacted ATC in English, as there controllers have to reply in English. It is very much a pilot initiative . The problem in CDG is that it is the home base of AF and the majority of AF pilots are very much opposed to this.
Again same thing for Mexico , Rio or Athens if you want big examples.
Sky 330 : data link is a separate issue that would need a lot of debate.
Basically in the " situation awareness" meaning determining the position of other aircrfat around you based on what you hear over the RT ( I have to be careful now..
) you definitively will loose this with DL but ,as I said before, it is today not required to do so anyway. The interesting thing with DL, is that you could add a small sofware like you have in mobile telephones today, allowing you to choose the language you want to have the end result on your displays.So in fact it could solve the dual language issue once and for all
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: France
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looking in the wrong direction!
Risk factors are well known:
Huge trafic leading to saturation of Airports (departure, arrival, taxi).
ATC workload..........
You meet it in many places in the world and not only CDG.
Runway incursion at LAX are also frequent.
I have evidence of ATC mistakes in JFK, where dual language wasn't a factor, and still aircrafts were cleared at same time to land/take off/cross the active runway.
The way people here turn it to focus only on French language use in RT is appalling, it seems they fancy all problems would be solved if only these bloody Frenchmen would leave their mother language in the dustbin and speak English, the one and only aviation language.
Then French speakers stand up and instead of a discussion about safety we have a chauvinistic exchange which leads nowhere.
I found very interesting to read the Canadian post which depicted the economic importance of language in Quebec: priority seems to be given to pilots fluent in French to be hired in the Belle Province airlines.
Seems you hit it: the very same people who argue for generalisation of English in non-English speaking territory, would next complain about bad English speakers - sorry I did it myself when flying in USA! - .
Why don't we adress first to risk's factors and struggle against airports saturation or ATC workload...........not to speak about pilots hours of flight and sector's numbers.
Huge trafic leading to saturation of Airports (departure, arrival, taxi).
ATC workload..........
You meet it in many places in the world and not only CDG.
Runway incursion at LAX are also frequent.
I have evidence of ATC mistakes in JFK, where dual language wasn't a factor, and still aircrafts were cleared at same time to land/take off/cross the active runway.
The way people here turn it to focus only on French language use in RT is appalling, it seems they fancy all problems would be solved if only these bloody Frenchmen would leave their mother language in the dustbin and speak English, the one and only aviation language.
Then French speakers stand up and instead of a discussion about safety we have a chauvinistic exchange which leads nowhere.
I found very interesting to read the Canadian post which depicted the economic importance of language in Quebec: priority seems to be given to pilots fluent in French to be hired in the Belle Province airlines.
Seems you hit it: the very same people who argue for generalisation of English in non-English speaking territory, would next complain about bad English speakers - sorry I did it myself when flying in USA! - .
Why don't we adress first to risk's factors and struggle against airports saturation or ATC workload...........not to speak about pilots hours of flight and sector's numbers.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No one is arguing that problems arise elsewhere, the issue is that there is a guaranteed potential for problems that could be fixed easily. If this helps prevent one accident then it's a good thing.
Changing procedures to ensure there are NEVER any incursions or mistakes anywhere should of course be done, but which do you think would be easiest to implement straight away?
It would be one step along a long and difficult road, but it's a step worth taking, especially if the only reaon anyone can come up with for NOT doing is to assuage ego's. Not a brilliant piece of active safety management IMHO.
Changing procedures to ensure there are NEVER any incursions or mistakes anywhere should of course be done, but which do you think would be easiest to implement straight away?
It would be one step along a long and difficult road, but it's a step worth taking, especially if the only reaon anyone can come up with for NOT doing is to assuage ego's. Not a brilliant piece of active safety management IMHO.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: next to sidestick
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with brain fade, I fail to see the benefits of dual language R/T. And shock horror... I AM french!! Knowing what's going on around you is paramount and is a safety net. Fellow controllers need to understand that we, pilots, need to construct a mental image of what is going on around us, simply because it helps prevent gross misunderstandings.
I'm sorry but this is nonsense. As pilots if we feel there is a disagreement between ATC instructions/clearances, we will querry ATC unless safety is clearly being compromised, and immediate action is necessary. And your comment about TCAS shows that you have very little understanding of how it is used in day to day operations. I also fail to understand how using the TCAS to spot other traffic is dangerous. It does help to gain visual contact with what's around us and no pilot with an ounce of professionalism would rely solely upon it to comply with visual seperation clearances if this is what you are implying.
I do not understand why my french counterparts are making such a fuss of this issue. If there is a chance that english only R/T would be beneficial to safety then it has to be implemented, and we, the french must set our stupidly chauvinistic issues aside. As for the french speaking canadians fighting to keep french R/T, well, I would hardly describe the language they speek as french in the first place ! "quebequois" and french are very different both in pronounciation and vocabulary.
This illustates the typical french mentality regarding the use of english. They would be quite happy to learn a language that isn't spoken anywhere or by anybody (esperanto), as long as it is not english!! Sorry but this is sheer stupidity
.
I am afraid this is another typical example of the kind of attitude many french people have. It must be some kind of inferiority complex since we are no longer the world power that we used to be (have we ever been one in the first place?). But to ignore the fact that there is a safety problem at CDG on these grounds is criminal, and has already played a part in one death. Even the BEA, which is not always, well, independant, shall we say has concluded that english should be the only language at CDG. The failure to recognise our errors is present in all levels of society, and the belief that we are right and the others our wrong is already leading the country in a brick wall, so I have very little hope of seeing english only R/T in major airports in France anytime soon
. As we say in France "droit dans ses bottes, quoi qu'il arrive"
I don't hear the Dutch, the Germans, the Scandinavians making much fuss about english R/T. Even some spanish airlines are implementing it! I don't see why we couldn't.
Originally Posted by ATC watcher
Basing your situation awareness, and acting upon it , based on what you hear on the R/T can be as dangerous as using a TCAS display to spot other traffic.
I do not understand why my french counterparts are making such a fuss of this issue. If there is a chance that english only R/T would be beneficial to safety then it has to be implemented, and we, the french must set our stupidly chauvinistic issues aside. As for the french speaking canadians fighting to keep french R/T, well, I would hardly describe the language they speek as french in the first place ! "quebequois" and french are very different both in pronounciation and vocabulary.
Originally Posted by A7700
The only safe aviation language should be building up, and learned by EVERYBODY in the loop so that each party should take care of the other party with the same level of skill. An update version of Esperanto could reach the requirement.
.
Originally Posted by A7700
In fact,the generic problem is not the use of English in aviation; it's the aggressive domination of the US totalitarisme, with the little poodle barking behind...Let's speak english or we will send you a carpet of B52'
. As we say in France "droit dans ses bottes, quoi qu'il arrive"I don't hear the Dutch, the Germans, the Scandinavians making much fuss about english R/T. Even some spanish airlines are implementing it! I don't see why we couldn't.
Paxing All Over The World
Non pilot speaking.
brain fade asks:
brain fade asks:
- I know Air France would prefer 'English only'.
- I know dual language ops occasionally kill people.
- I know CDG ATC know dual language ops occasionally kill people.
- Shall we wait for the 'Big One', or stop it now?
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ZBMAN, nice to see that with RCC forums close, the best are coming to PPRuNe , but here the rules are slightly different. But you will find out. welcome all the same .
Just replying on the technical stuff, not the political ones you (and A7700 ) made.
TCAS displays :
Unfortunately I do Know quite well how TCAS displays are used in day to day operations by some crews and this is what I mentionned this. I am glad to hear that you personally will not use it to spot " electronically" what you are supposed to spot " visually" in order to perform visual separation, however you asume others do like you and I can assure you otherwise.
The ICAO ACAS rules are clear on this point, but nevertheless ,for instance, Agencies like the FAA still beleive you can safely do intrail climbs/descent with the device, so it is not surprising, some pilots believe this is open field.
For your info, TCAS is not ADS-B and azimuth detection is quite poor.
On the dual language use , if you had read my posts correctly, you will see that I personally also think it is high time to use English only everywhere there is international traffic . I was just quoting existing rules to explain why States do not do this.
We agree that Separation is ground based at the moment, right ? .
ATC is based on a set of rules and on the asumption that everyone follows the rules as written. A pilot in IFR expect this from a Controller, and controllers expect this aslo from pilots. Monitoring instructions given to other aircrfat are not part of those rules.
If you modify your instructions based on what you hear on the R/T not made for you, you even act against the rules, and this can be dangerous, as you do not have the global picture.
As to spotting potential " ATC errors" on the R/T, this is also not required by the rules.( although it makes sense, we do all agree on that )
That is why a lot of States in the world ( including France )do not plan to change their ways.
A final remark : The French language used in Quebec might slighltly differ from Metropolitan French , but the R/T phraseologies are using the same words. ( Tabernacle !!!)
Just replying on the technical stuff, not the political ones you (and A7700 ) made.
I'm sorry but this is nonsense. As pilots if we feel there is a disagreement between ATC instructions/clearances, we will querry ATC unless safety is clearly being compromised, and immediate action is necessary. And your comment about TCAS shows that you have very little understanding of how it is used in day to day operations. I also fail to understand how using the TCAS to spot other traffic is dangerous. It does help to gain visual contact with what's around us and no pilot with an ounce of professionalism would rely solely upon it to comply with visual seperation clearances if this is what you are implying.
Unfortunately I do Know quite well how TCAS displays are used in day to day operations by some crews and this is what I mentionned this. I am glad to hear that you personally will not use it to spot " electronically" what you are supposed to spot " visually" in order to perform visual separation, however you asume others do like you and I can assure you otherwise.
The ICAO ACAS rules are clear on this point, but nevertheless ,for instance, Agencies like the FAA still beleive you can safely do intrail climbs/descent with the device, so it is not surprising, some pilots believe this is open field.
For your info, TCAS is not ADS-B and azimuth detection is quite poor.
On the dual language use , if you had read my posts correctly, you will see that I personally also think it is high time to use English only everywhere there is international traffic . I was just quoting existing rules to explain why States do not do this.
We agree that Separation is ground based at the moment, right ? .
ATC is based on a set of rules and on the asumption that everyone follows the rules as written. A pilot in IFR expect this from a Controller, and controllers expect this aslo from pilots. Monitoring instructions given to other aircrfat are not part of those rules.
If you modify your instructions based on what you hear on the R/T not made for you, you even act against the rules, and this can be dangerous, as you do not have the global picture.
As to spotting potential " ATC errors" on the R/T, this is also not required by the rules.( although it makes sense, we do all agree on that )
That is why a lot of States in the world ( including France )do not plan to change their ways.
A final remark : The French language used in Quebec might slighltly differ from Metropolitan French , but the R/T phraseologies are using the same words. ( Tabernacle !!!)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: next to sidestick
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ZBMAN, nice to see that with RCC forums close, the best are coming to PPRuNe , but here the rules are slightly different. But you will find out. welcome all the same .
however you asume others do like you and I can assure you otherwise.
For your info, TCAS is not ADS-B and azimuth detection is quite poor.
(I think!
)
If you modify your instructions based on what you hear on the R/T not made for you, you even act against the rules, and this can be dangerous, as you do not have the global picture.
From what you say I think we both agree that that english only should be used at major airports. I only disagree about some of the things you say about the attitude of pilots with regards to ATC instructions. Just to make sure you know that the vast majority of us will not try to screw you up
. And if we do, it's not on purpose!
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a little bit of irony, but very pleased nevertheless to have you on board
The high standards you regard TCAS operations is laudable but unfortunately not what I see in everyday ops.
If you want to test this, Ask around your colleagues if " monitor vertical speed " is an RA for instance , or ask yourself if you never heard the sentence " We' got them on TCAS" after being given traffic information, or even while performing visual APP, just to name a few of the most common problems .
As to the dual language, indeed we agree " sur le fond " but , the battle is lost, you and I know it.
The high standards you regard TCAS operations is laudable but unfortunately not what I see in everyday ops.
If you want to test this, Ask around your colleagues if " monitor vertical speed " is an RA for instance , or ask yourself if you never heard the sentence " We' got them on TCAS" after being given traffic information, or even while performing visual APP, just to name a few of the most common problems .
As to the dual language, indeed we agree " sur le fond " but , the battle is lost, you and I know it.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: France
Age: 58
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by brain fade
While waiting to go off on 27L this morning ATC cleared an AF A340 to go- in French naturally. Then it cleared another (British) a/c to cross the same runway (in English). I missed it myself actually but my trusty FO picked it up. Next thing the Tower chap told the A340 to stop, in French. He must have been at a good speed by now. When we took off a few mins later there were two huge black skid marks freshly painted on the runway.
I could have this story wrong and if so please disregard. It seemed to me like a near miss tho', partially caused by dual language ops at CDG.
Anyone know more?
I could have this story wrong and if so please disregard. It seemed to me like a near miss tho', partially caused by dual language ops at CDG.
Anyone know more?
..."THEY" refuse to consider that dual ops language is unsafe !....
Please insist for unique language....in the name of flight safety.........and may be we'll defeat some sort of archaic lobbyism down here !...
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: France
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dual language Fuzz
Hi guys ,
Being a french native speaker I do use french R/T procedures when operating into "french speaking airspace"
I agree it is not easy for those who do not speak the language and whish to follow what others are doing.Nevertheless it always comes down to France and french while there are many other places in the world where another language is used (South America>Spanish, Brazil>Portugueuse,China ,Former USSR etc...) and does not seem to ever come in the complaints ! Would it somehow be the old English-French rivalry ?
I operate often into China or Thailand I simply do not understand what they say and quite often have to ask them to say again several times.I am not the only one but I see no complaints about that part of the world only about France ! Why ?
I have been into the UK many times and there there is no care taken when issuing clearance during busy times throwing VOR phonetic names through the air and it is expected that everybody understands and reacts in no time . Same applies to the US where "fly heading North and speed south" (HDG 360 Speed 180 ) is not an uncommon practice there again although it is English none native speakers will not understand what's going on . But that's no problem the English native speakers will feel very confortable in that environment,so pardon my french ;-) but we should all pay a little more attention and not always focus on the French and its dangers while the other 80% of the planet speak also their own language including the "english speakers" JOYEUX LANDINGS !
Being a french native speaker I do use french R/T procedures when operating into "french speaking airspace"
I agree it is not easy for those who do not speak the language and whish to follow what others are doing.Nevertheless it always comes down to France and french while there are many other places in the world where another language is used (South America>Spanish, Brazil>Portugueuse,China ,Former USSR etc...) and does not seem to ever come in the complaints ! Would it somehow be the old English-French rivalry ?
I operate often into China or Thailand I simply do not understand what they say and quite often have to ask them to say again several times.I am not the only one but I see no complaints about that part of the world only about France ! Why ?
I have been into the UK many times and there there is no care taken when issuing clearance during busy times throwing VOR phonetic names through the air and it is expected that everybody understands and reacts in no time . Same applies to the US where "fly heading North and speed south" (HDG 360 Speed 180 ) is not an uncommon practice there again although it is English none native speakers will not understand what's going on . But that's no problem the English native speakers will feel very confortable in that environment,so pardon my french ;-) but we should all pay a little more attention and not always focus on the French and its dangers while the other 80% of the planet speak also their own language including the "english speakers" JOYEUX LANDINGS !
Psychophysiological entity
It seems odd to me that this is all still going on.
Having mentioned the Queen hosting the French at Windsor Castle, I was amused to note that a professor of French was seated center stage...well almost.
In 1980 ish, I overshot CDG in the early hours, having suffered an hydraulics failure. On the downwind leg, I explained the problem and at some stage requested facilities to cover the landing. I asked if my wheels could be monitored for fire, though I can't remember the logic to this now.
We popped out of cloud at around 200' and landed with no flaps or steering. We used all of the runway trying to keep straight with breaks only working on one side...and no form of anti-skid of course. On stopping we got out expecting some kind of reception. After rushing to pin the U/C we looked about us. Nothing. Nada, Zip as they say.
The next bit is the stuff of Peter Seller's films. After flashing lights at the tower. ( the wing was raining hydraulic fluid, and I was not willing to power the A/C up) still nothing...not for a quarter of an hour. Then a CV ? splutters up, and out gets the tallest policeman that you have ever seen. He buttoned up his tunic and put his hat on. He then asked, in quite good English and in the most serious tone, why I had parked there.
In Toulouse, there were students from many countries, including China, India, Africa etc etc...they could all speak quite good English. The course was a total.....words still fail me after several years, but rip-off comes to mind. "Praaaase t/de booooton" and "You have to ANNNUNCE!!" (An amalgam of ‘announce' and ‘annunciate' I suppose. ) Some of my colleagues were even shouted at. ( they wouldn't have done that to me twice!) This course cost multi thousands, and awkward questions were fended off with dismissive noises and shrugs.
If they did not want a world market for their aviation product, and were just dealing with visitors, that would be fine. But they are selling aviation in every form. To not speak the international aviation language is just blatant arrogance, and plain b00dy dangerous in the field.
Having mentioned the Queen hosting the French at Windsor Castle, I was amused to note that a professor of French was seated center stage...well almost.
In 1980 ish, I overshot CDG in the early hours, having suffered an hydraulics failure. On the downwind leg, I explained the problem and at some stage requested facilities to cover the landing. I asked if my wheels could be monitored for fire, though I can't remember the logic to this now.
We popped out of cloud at around 200' and landed with no flaps or steering. We used all of the runway trying to keep straight with breaks only working on one side...and no form of anti-skid of course. On stopping we got out expecting some kind of reception. After rushing to pin the U/C we looked about us. Nothing. Nada, Zip as they say.
The next bit is the stuff of Peter Seller's films. After flashing lights at the tower. ( the wing was raining hydraulic fluid, and I was not willing to power the A/C up) still nothing...not for a quarter of an hour. Then a CV ? splutters up, and out gets the tallest policeman that you have ever seen. He buttoned up his tunic and put his hat on. He then asked, in quite good English and in the most serious tone, why I had parked there.
In Toulouse, there were students from many countries, including China, India, Africa etc etc...they could all speak quite good English. The course was a total.....words still fail me after several years, but rip-off comes to mind. "Praaaase t/de booooton" and "You have to ANNNUNCE!!" (An amalgam of ‘announce' and ‘annunciate' I suppose. ) Some of my colleagues were even shouted at. ( they wouldn't have done that to me twice!) This course cost multi thousands, and awkward questions were fended off with dismissive noises and shrugs.
If they did not want a world market for their aviation product, and were just dealing with visitors, that would be fine. But they are selling aviation in every form. To not speak the international aviation language is just blatant arrogance, and plain b00dy dangerous in the field.
I Have Control
Join Date: May 2004
Location: North-West England
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
La belle France....mais.....
Cracking country for wine, women, countryside and cuisine.
Sadly France is 3rd world for aviation.
I have operated directly for Air France out of CDG and ORY for TLA at the time of the Concorde accident. The nationalistic attitudes towards non-French crews, English language, and all-round cooperation were LAMENTABLE. Sadly, arrogance seems to be a trait which manifests itself most strongly in aviation. As a fluent French-speaker, I have a reasonable insight into this malaise.
The bad experiences of French ATC are many, during my aviation career. For example, I formerly worked for Streamline, and once found myself vectored onto final approach at CDG, despite the Flight Plan giving Le Bourget as our destination. With no other traffic in the sky, so no big risk. But the attitude of the CDG controller was that no blame could be attached to himself, once I convinced him that our headings were obviously in error.
Recent experiences with French ATC make me beware of their non-professionalism, and most importantly, the prevalent attitude of avoiding responsibility. Near-miss with 2 military jets in formation over the Bay of Biscay being the latest dangerous incident. No agreement to report the episode, simply a nonchalant attitude that the military 2-ship had "probably forgotten to utilise their transponders." Very sad.
I despair.
Sadly France is 3rd world for aviation.
I have operated directly for Air France out of CDG and ORY for TLA at the time of the Concorde accident. The nationalistic attitudes towards non-French crews, English language, and all-round cooperation were LAMENTABLE. Sadly, arrogance seems to be a trait which manifests itself most strongly in aviation. As a fluent French-speaker, I have a reasonable insight into this malaise.
The bad experiences of French ATC are many, during my aviation career. For example, I formerly worked for Streamline, and once found myself vectored onto final approach at CDG, despite the Flight Plan giving Le Bourget as our destination. With no other traffic in the sky, so no big risk. But the attitude of the CDG controller was that no blame could be attached to himself, once I convinced him that our headings were obviously in error.
Recent experiences with French ATC make me beware of their non-professionalism, and most importantly, the prevalent attitude of avoiding responsibility. Near-miss with 2 military jets in formation over the Bay of Biscay being the latest dangerous incident. No agreement to report the episode, simply a nonchalant attitude that the military 2-ship had "probably forgotten to utilise their transponders." Very sad.
I despair.
Roy Hudd:
Several years ago our 100-seat jet was mysteriosly vectored to final approach at Hurlburt AFB, instead of Eglin AFB (VPS, with Fort Walton Beach terminal), by Pensacola Approach Control. THe north/south runways have the same alignment. There are several military bases in the area, but civilian traffic goes to just one AFB. We had numerous small deviations around some smaller cloud build-ups.
Luckily the layouts/ramp parking areas of these two bases are opposite.
Can the International Federation of Airline Pilots tell the AF pilots that safety must come first, and no more excuses?
How about ICAO?
Several years ago our 100-seat jet was mysteriosly vectored to final approach at Hurlburt AFB, instead of Eglin AFB (VPS, with Fort Walton Beach terminal), by Pensacola Approach Control. THe north/south runways have the same alignment. There are several military bases in the area, but civilian traffic goes to just one AFB. We had numerous small deviations around some smaller cloud build-ups.
Luckily the layouts/ramp parking areas of these two bases are opposite.
Can the International Federation of Airline Pilots tell the AF pilots that safety must come first, and no more excuses?
How about ICAO?
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: North of CDG
Posts: 1,043
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very interesting to read ATCWatcher and ZBMAN cleverly contribute to this thread in Shakespeare's language when they are both French (then again, so am I...)
Having been trained from scratch in English (not only in the UK, but also in the US, South Africa and Ireland), it is patently obvious to me that there should be one (and ONLY one) R/T language whenever commercial operations are involved. As has been mentioned before, the benefits far outweigh the disadvantages, and national pride should have nothing to do with flight safety. Full stop.
One quick anecdote: while ferrying a light aircraft from England to southern Germany three years ago, I contacted Paris Info in French when mid-Channel and the lady ATCO kept replying in English! I assume it was because the aircraft I was flying was G-reg. Then again, when I transferred to Lille Info, the ATCO there was only too happy to carry on in French. My route then took me into Belgian and Luxembourg airspace, where ATC talked to me in English, then back into French airspace (French spoken with Metz ATC), then into Germany (English again).
Inconsistent or what?
Having been trained from scratch in English (not only in the UK, but also in the US, South Africa and Ireland), it is patently obvious to me that there should be one (and ONLY one) R/T language whenever commercial operations are involved. As has been mentioned before, the benefits far outweigh the disadvantages, and national pride should have nothing to do with flight safety. Full stop.
One quick anecdote: while ferrying a light aircraft from England to southern Germany three years ago, I contacted Paris Info in French when mid-Channel and the lady ATCO kept replying in English! I assume it was because the aircraft I was flying was G-reg. Then again, when I transferred to Lille Info, the ATCO there was only too happy to carry on in French. My route then took me into Belgian and Luxembourg airspace, where ATC talked to me in English, then back into French airspace (French spoken with Metz ATC), then into Germany (English again).
Inconsistent or what?
More than just an ATCO
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Up someone's nose
Age: 75
Posts: 1,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fouga, as you pointed out, my ex-colleague ATC watcher is French, furthermore he has been extremely active in the field of aviation safety, probably to the detriment of his career.
Multi lingual ATC is lethal (The Trident/DC9 accident over former Yugoslavia as an example). I was forced to do it early in my career and was surprised that my poor French did not increase the number of airmisses reound EBBR.
I also had a considerable fright, years ago, at Caen, when cleared onto the runway, in English, I heard someone cleared to land, in French, and stood on the brakes just as another aircraft landed in front of me.
I feel the problem is that when a reasonable standard has been reached in a second language the brain tends to compartmentalise and it is possible to "divorce" the consequences of instructions given.
Mode S and data linking should go some way to solving the problem
Multi lingual ATC is lethal (The Trident/DC9 accident over former Yugoslavia as an example). I was forced to do it early in my career and was surprised that my poor French did not increase the number of airmisses reound EBBR.
I also had a considerable fright, years ago, at Caen, when cleared onto the runway, in English, I heard someone cleared to land, in French, and stood on the brakes just as another aircraft landed in front of me.
I feel the problem is that when a reasonable standard has been reached in a second language the brain tends to compartmentalise and it is possible to "divorce" the consequences of instructions given.
Mode S and data linking should go some way to solving the problem
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: N 43° 39' 54'' E 7° 12' 53''
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by RoyHudd
Cracking country for wine, women, countryside and cuisine.
Sadly France is 3rd world for aviation.
The bad experiences of French ATC are many, during my aviation career. For example, I formerly worked for Streamline, and once found myself vectored onto final approach at CDG, despite the Flight Plan giving Le Bourget as our destination. With no other traffic in the sky, so no big risk. But the attitude of the CDG controller was that no blame could be attached to himself, once I convinced him that our headings were obviously in error.
Sadly France is 3rd world for aviation.
The bad experiences of French ATC are many, during my aviation career. For example, I formerly worked for Streamline, and once found myself vectored onto final approach at CDG, despite the Flight Plan giving Le Bourget as our destination. With no other traffic in the sky, so no big risk. But the attitude of the CDG controller was that no blame could be attached to himself, once I convinced him that our headings were obviously in error.
Originally Posted by Ignition Override
Several years ago our 100-seat jet was mysteriosly vectored to final approach at Hurlburt AFB, instead of Eglin AFB (VPS, with Fort Walton Beach terminal), by Pensacola Approach Control. THe north/south runways have the same alignment. There are several military bases in the area, but civilian traffic goes to just one AFB. We had numerous small deviations around some smaller cloud build-ups.
Luckily the layouts/ramp parking areas of these two bases are opposite.
Luckily the layouts/ramp parking areas of these two bases are opposite.
EHHHMMM, or should I say that this proves without a doubt that The USA are a third world country for aviation ???Let me think
Originally Posted by RoyHudd
Recent experiences with French ATC make me beware of their non-professionalism, and most importantly, the prevalent attitude of avoiding responsibility. Near-miss with 2 military jets in formation over the Bay of Biscay being the latest dangerous incident. No agreement to report the episode, simply a nonchalant attitude that the military 2-ship had "probably forgotten to utilise their transponders." Very sad.
I despair.
I despair.
Second, if you're fluent in french perhaps you should take a look at the "RCA4compatibilité CAM/CAG" and you'll probably realize that filing an airprox with military jets probably would make you feel better but that's pretty much it... And there's no need for the controller to try and avoid responsability as when not in contact in controlled airspace the responsability is on the military side...