ICAO Language Proficiency Tests
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: EU
Posts: 961
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have just learned by some students in Aeroclubs, that their CAA asked them (by postmail) to get at least a"level 4 ICAO" if they intend to get a professional license after March 2008.
Regrettably some clubs do not have any instructor who speak English (at level 4), instruction is still given in non english language in most countries.
I think for many wanabes, they can make a cross on this career unless they take the time and the effort to learn English.
Regrettably some clubs do not have any instructor who speak English (at level 4), instruction is still given in non english language in most countries.
I think for many wanabes, they can make a cross on this career unless they take the time and the effort to learn English.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: MNL ex CCR ex CLE
Age: 65
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gear...
As a pilot and a 13 year ESL teacher, I can tell you that accent ABSOLUTELY does NOT make any difference...EXCEPT in one case. If the accent is SO strong that the listener is listening more to the ACCENT than to the WORDS of the speaker. When this happens, to quote the movie "Cool hand Luke"..."What we have here, is a FAILURE to communicate"!
Now from experience and this site, I know that this is exactly what happens throughout Asia (among other places), so I (for one) am happy that the ICAO has recognized the problem and is doing something about it.
Stay safe!
As a pilot and a 13 year ESL teacher, I can tell you that accent ABSOLUTELY does NOT make any difference...EXCEPT in one case. If the accent is SO strong that the listener is listening more to the ACCENT than to the WORDS of the speaker. When this happens, to quote the movie "Cool hand Luke"..."What we have here, is a FAILURE to communicate"!
Now from experience and this site, I know that this is exactly what happens throughout Asia (among other places), so I (for one) am happy that the ICAO has recognized the problem and is doing something about it.
Stay safe!
Take me downwind
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: FCO
Age: 54
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So right!
Dear dartagnan,
It's true. Thankfully there are some Aeroclubs/FTO that do realize this and they are doing something about it. One I work for has faced the issue and put its instructors through courses before asking their own student to do the same. Its a start-a positive one.
Isn't this all a safety issue?
PE
It's true. Thankfully there are some Aeroclubs/FTO that do realize this and they are doing something about it. One I work for has faced the issue and put its instructors through courses before asking their own student to do the same. Its a start-a positive one.
Isn't this all a safety issue?
PE
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: LPPT
Age: 58
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PA-28-180, what I'm trying to say here is irrespectively of the various local accents you may encounter, there is a greater skill than knowing perfect flawless London City English, and that is the ability to read a message behind the strange accent (for native English speakers mostly) naturally.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: MNL ex CCR ex CLE
Age: 65
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Gear...
Then I agree with you. In actuallity, HOW we say something means a LOT more than what we say! Much of this problem is mitigated if you can SEE the person your speaking to. In fact, in some cases, when you can see the person speaking you have a good chance to understand the message...even if you do not really speak the language the message is being communicated with. 85% of ALL verbal communication actually has nothing to do with WORDS...it's body language, tone of voice, rate of speech, etc. Given this, it's no wonder, really, why there are communication (NOT r/t) problems in aviation (and other sectors) when you lose much of these important communication cues. Don't believe? Ever owned a dog or cat? Really think that they don't communicate with you? (I DON't mean the "please feed me" dance, either!)
This loss of 'visual communication' cues is one of the major reasons for important business meetings to be handled face to face, instead of over the phone.
Then I agree with you. In actuallity, HOW we say something means a LOT more than what we say! Much of this problem is mitigated if you can SEE the person your speaking to. In fact, in some cases, when you can see the person speaking you have a good chance to understand the message...even if you do not really speak the language the message is being communicated with. 85% of ALL verbal communication actually has nothing to do with WORDS...it's body language, tone of voice, rate of speech, etc. Given this, it's no wonder, really, why there are communication (NOT r/t) problems in aviation (and other sectors) when you lose much of these important communication cues. Don't believe? Ever owned a dog or cat? Really think that they don't communicate with you? (I DON't mean the "please feed me" dance, either!)
This loss of 'visual communication' cues is one of the major reasons for important business meetings to be handled face to face, instead of over the phone.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: ITALY
Age: 59
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Switzerland has smartly solved the problem: before march-08 ALL holders of Swiss licences (with a rating for R/T in english) will be issued (for free !) a level-4 licence, which will be valid for the next 3-years.
Everybody is sure that in the next 3 years everything will 'calm' down, and requisites/schools/examiners etc will be clarified. Swiss CAA expect, in those three years, to certify many instructors as 'english examiners', and the 'renewal' (if the candidate is 'proficient' in English) will be given during a flight proficiency test or skill test or CR/TR test etc.
Everybody is sure that in the next 3 years everything will 'calm' down, and requisites/schools/examiners etc will be clarified. Swiss CAA expect, in those three years, to certify many instructors as 'english examiners', and the 'renewal' (if the candidate is 'proficient' in English) will be given during a flight proficiency test or skill test or CR/TR test etc.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: US
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anybody have the audio of Air China at JFK. I think it sums it up nicely.
Here it is. Courtesy of you tube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWDEIvjwaFU
Here it is. Courtesy of you tube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWDEIvjwaFU
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: France
Posts: 2,315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BI,
You don't need "far-flung places".
Try some UK and US regional accents....
And those can be even more of a problem, because they are "native English speakers" and therefore think they speak intelligeable English.
Not to mention that... as the Air China "incident" at JFK clearly illustrates... they often ignore standard terminology and go to colloquial English, and still expect to be understood by non-native English speakers.
You don't need "far-flung places".
Try some UK and US regional accents....
And those can be even more of a problem, because they are "native English speakers" and therefore think they speak intelligeable English.
Not to mention that... as the Air China "incident" at JFK clearly illustrates... they often ignore standard terminology and go to colloquial English, and still expect to be understood by non-native English speakers.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: MNL ex CCR ex CLE
Age: 65
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BI.
Yes, I realize that the transmission of technical information, i.e., altitude, heading, clearance readbacks are a bit different forms of communication. However, the problem in aviation, is that this is ALL many pilots/atc have been trained for. Anything "outside of the box", i.e. an EMERGENCY (see the initial report of the Thai/Taiwan airline incident over Korea) it quite obviously doesn't work. Pilots/controllers really need to be trained to COMMUNICATE in English. There's only one way to do it, folks...if you want to speak English, SPEAK ENGLISH-and do it as much as you can. Don't know if planeenglish would agree, but this is my experience from teaching anyway.
Also, I have flown in Asia....I know EXACTLY what you mean! Try doing it though in a recip/prop aircraft without a noise cancelling headset!
Yes, I realize that the transmission of technical information, i.e., altitude, heading, clearance readbacks are a bit different forms of communication. However, the problem in aviation, is that this is ALL many pilots/atc have been trained for. Anything "outside of the box", i.e. an EMERGENCY (see the initial report of the Thai/Taiwan airline incident over Korea) it quite obviously doesn't work. Pilots/controllers really need to be trained to COMMUNICATE in English. There's only one way to do it, folks...if you want to speak English, SPEAK ENGLISH-and do it as much as you can. Don't know if planeenglish would agree, but this is my experience from teaching anyway.
Also, I have flown in Asia....I know EXACTLY what you mean! Try doing it though in a recip/prop aircraft without a noise cancelling headset!
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: hotel
Age: 64
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
has somebody an idea what the FAA will be doing?
there are plenty of FAA ATP holders that are non native english speakers, non US citizens and not working in North America
but using the FAA ATP with issued ratings for validation to get another foreign ATP.
If the FAA ATP card states "level 4 english" it would be easier to validate this as well, otherwise one has to go again for an extra test in each country where one validates.
As a contract pilot a pain.
there are plenty of FAA ATP holders that are non native english speakers, non US citizens and not working in North America
but using the FAA ATP with issued ratings for validation to get another foreign ATP.
If the FAA ATP card states "level 4 english" it would be easier to validate this as well, otherwise one has to go again for an extra test in each country where one validates.
As a contract pilot a pain.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Some sunny place with good wine and good sailing
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The French DGAC have chosen to simply combine the ICAO English test with the existing FCL1.200 IFR r/t test. In the existing FCL1.200 test , there are two oral tests, each marked out of 20. In the first test, the candidates just listen to 14 ATC, ATIS or VOLMET messages, which they have to translate to French. The second test consists of a fictitious flight, in which the candidate must carry out an r/t conversation in English with the examiner. At the end of the test, the candidate is given an envelope containing a description (in French) of an emergency situation, which the candidate must then explain in English to the examiner.
To pass the FCL1.200 and earn level 4 English, the candidate must obtain a minimum of 10 in each test.
To earn level 5, the candidate must obtain minmum 14 in each test.
To earn level 6, the candidate must earn minimum of 18 in each test.
I find the logic behind these tests weak because it would be quite possible for a native English speaker to fail the tests as it relies on a knowledge of French to pass. Moreover, there will be a lot of candidates with very minimal English who are awarded level 6, because the English part of the tests is very easy and not really representative of real life r/t.
Even more absurdly, the DGAC exempt completely all candidates who have done their ATPL theory in English from the FCL1.200 altogther. So just because a candidate has answered a few multiple choice questions in English, they consider his spoken English to be adequate for international IFR flight....
Yet somebody like myself, who is a native English speaker, CAA FRTOL holder, and DGAC licence holder, and who has taken IRSE and IRME flight tests using English r/t - is obliged to take the FCL1.200!
To pass the FCL1.200 and earn level 4 English, the candidate must obtain a minimum of 10 in each test.
To earn level 5, the candidate must obtain minmum 14 in each test.
To earn level 6, the candidate must earn minimum of 18 in each test.
I find the logic behind these tests weak because it would be quite possible for a native English speaker to fail the tests as it relies on a knowledge of French to pass. Moreover, there will be a lot of candidates with very minimal English who are awarded level 6, because the English part of the tests is very easy and not really representative of real life r/t.
Even more absurdly, the DGAC exempt completely all candidates who have done their ATPL theory in English from the FCL1.200 altogther. So just because a candidate has answered a few multiple choice questions in English, they consider his spoken English to be adequate for international IFR flight....
Yet somebody like myself, who is a native English speaker, CAA FRTOL holder, and DGAC licence holder, and who has taken IRSE and IRME flight tests using English r/t - is obliged to take the FCL1.200!
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You don't need "far-flung places".
Try some UK and US regional accents....
And those can be even more of a problem, because they are "native English speakers" and therefore think they speak intelligeable English.
Try some UK and US regional accents....
And those can be even more of a problem, because they are "native English speakers" and therefore think they speak intelligeable English.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: EPKT
Age: 44
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've just passed ELPAC exam and got level 5. 
But this test obviously prefers fast-typers. I consider myself as a really fast one, while I still hardly typed all I wanted to while answering some questions.
The scenario is: you get eg. 5 seconds after the question for typing. Good answer needs not more then 2-3 words. But on some questions you're not sure what information is most crucial, so you want to type everything you heard just to prove you heard it. You can spend 4 seconds choosing which words to write - and type them within a second. Or you may type all 5 seconds long and fill the box with anything that could satisfy the marker (that's what I preffered). Slow-typers have no such comfort and many of them fail this part of ELPAC. And still, Eurocontrol claims the test was positively tested with slow-typers
But this test obviously prefers fast-typers. I consider myself as a really fast one, while I still hardly typed all I wanted to while answering some questions.The scenario is: you get eg. 5 seconds after the question for typing. Good answer needs not more then 2-3 words. But on some questions you're not sure what information is most crucial, so you want to type everything you heard just to prove you heard it. You can spend 4 seconds choosing which words to write - and type them within a second. Or you may type all 5 seconds long and fill the box with anything that could satisfy the marker (that's what I preffered). Slow-typers have no such comfort and many of them fail this part of ELPAC. And still, Eurocontrol claims the test was positively tested with slow-typers
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: EU
Posts: 961
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what it has to do with english conversation?
I got a 30 minutes test of english conversation face to face with an english teacher, and she evaluated me at level 4 (at least).
My test has been fair and correct.
Now if they test people with different technics, I would prefer to be tested with the system which would give me more points and without any stress.
I got a 30 minutes test of english conversation face to face with an english teacher, and she evaluated me at level 4 (at least).
My test has been fair and correct.
Now if they test people with different technics, I would prefer to be tested with the system which would give me more points and without any stress.