But your fellow pilots are saying there is a problem, and that it can be fixed and improved.

I am shocked that you have no interest in becoming a better pilot.
You must be perfect!

In my experience arrogance and overconfidence are the most dangerous attributes in a pilot .

Speaking as a paying passenger, I'm rather shocked to see twelve pages of rather churlish handbag-swinging on the subject of whether it's ok for US pilots & controllers to use their own 'relaxed' version of aviation english. The bottom line is you only exist to ferry me and my kin (or my latest ebay order) from a to b, and I want that done in the safest possible way. If my safety is being compromised because half of you are insisting on using non-standard terms then that's not acceptable. Standards exist everywhere and they are there for a reason - so everyone is singing from the same hymn sheet and everyone understands what's going on.

Arrogantly insisting on using local (US) slang that doesn't adhere to ICAO standards is tantamount to deliberately making an extra hole in the 'swiss cheese'. That is completely unacceptable.

Is it not (in Europe):

Descend Flight Level 280 (note no "to")
Descend to altitude 8000 feet

fmgc:

The way they used to do it when I was flying in the Wild West, "Descend and maintain flight level two eight zero."

I don't know why this issue would have come up in the Asiana thread, that crash had nothing to do with ATC terminology.

It's frustration about U.S. English. It's been an issue for 237 yrs and counting.

All y'all Euros need to chill, 'namsayin?

Now tell ya what... Speedbird Two Sixty Spandex, turn left to North, climb it like ya stole it up to Two Three Oh, and call the Center on twenny-eight forty two. He'll have higher for ya. Have a good one now. ;)

Seriously, Mateys... it ain't that hard. Just as you all need to make an adjustment entering US airspace, so do we when we come paying y'all a visit. Eurocontrol sounds pretty dang foreign to us as well (and not very "standard" at times.) The important part is keeping it all in perspective... if we're gonna argue about syllables and decimals, we've got major issues.... nobody here is better than anyone else... group hug... kumbaya!

A major issue for European pilots is that the majority does not have English as their native language.

American English, especially with strong accents, can be difficult to understand over bad VHF because it differs a lot in some regards to what most Europeans learned in school.

Likewise, Europeans will always have some form of accents either weak or strong. I feel it is up to the Americans to accommodate this when European traffic enters the US. Lead by example.

In reverse, I find it highly annoying that Eurocontrol still allows non-English communications. While most Europeans will get the hang of this, for American pilots it must be terrible.

In general, I am of the opinion that the "hosting" party should do their best to accommodate the "visiting" traffic.

aa73,
But that's easy! One would, of course, have to read back in English ;)

root --

Every tried to fly in Scotland? :)

In general , i am of the opinion that English should not be used as a so called common language for ATC exchange, as it creates -and will always creates- a distortion between those who get it as a native language and....the majority represented by rest of the world!. A common LEARNED language like Esperanto will put all actors at the same level of humbleness ...not sure that this last word is understood by native speakers!

A7700:
So your theory is that if Nobody understands ATC equally, we'll all be better off.

As a retired career Mil ATCO, I've learned how Americans speak and handled a 4-ship of Italian F-104s descending through the London TMA. I've coped with mispronunciation, gibberish and unclear emergency messages.

I helped run the Instrument Schools at USAF bases in UK, teaching the new guys how different things are. Our Unit even had a USAFLO to enhance coordination.

If everyone would just slow down, and realise where they are, life gets quite easy. Is that too much to ask? Or do we all sit in a oersonal space?

No.
His theory is that it "will put all actors at the same level of humbleness ...not sure that this last word is understood by native speakers!"

And you kind of inadvertently proved his point (unless you are not a native English speaker) :)

No. Everyone should do like scientists, and switch to Latin! Since it's a dead language and never changes! Very telling, that you brought up Esperanto. It was a language concocted back when the Sun never set on the British Empire, to cut down on the "arrogance of the British", since their language was spoken in many parts of the world, so, this means the real problem many have with this issue, isn't so much the differences within the English language, but that your "self esteem" is hurt, because your language is not the standard. Your melancholy selves would rather everyone be dragged down to your level of misery, than accepting and improving the way things are. Some language had to become the standard. A few slight changes in history, and it could have easily been French, Spanish, Portuguese, or some other language.

There is a feeling you get when you go to England that they all think the worlds English is their English. What a shame it hasn't been that way for at least 300 years now. But we shouldn't be harsh on them - they are European and see the world differently.

Fellow Aviators,

How is this issue any different from a foreign language being spoken in that country's native tongue? When I fly in China I here Chineese being spoken, French in france, Africanz in south Africa.

If you address a contoller in the propper vernacular, you should be replied to in the same. As a habit, when outside the US I repeat ATC instructions verbatim. I routinely ask the people I fly with to avoid the colloquialisms of the US, as they are often met with a repeat of the ATC transmision (or Silence). In some countries the only engilsh the ATC personnel speak are the words required to be spoken and their meanings, nothing else.

It has been my experience that some of the things done outside the US could help inside the US and vive verse.

I'm surprised that in these pages and pages of comments, nobody has mentioned the stupid "Line up and wait" that we've had to adopt in the US as result of the inane ICAO rules. What in the world was wrong with "Taxi into position and hold".? Answer: Nothing.

"Line up and wait" sounds more like the status of life in the UK, where people apparently like to queue up like sheep. Or more like the story of my life.

ICAO - remember, these are the people who brought you METAR -- another useless improvement over the SA and other reports we had in the US previously.

Please ICAO, keep your "improvements" on the other side of the pond...

Just be happy that when we call the center in the states, they don't respond with "Pass your message" :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Acroguy

So you join PPRUNE in 2007, wait 6 years to formulate a pithy, meaningful, thought provoking post of substance..... and that's it? What you need old son is a nice cuppa tea. :D

4 words.

4 syllables.


5 words.

9 syllables.


I know which I prefer :ugh:

Do the 'Merikans still use Inches of Mercury or have they caught on that the Hectopascal is now all the rage? :rolleyes:

If ever there is an industry that needs international standards, it is aviation.

Prior to the change, you would hear clearances such as "Taxi into position runway 1, keep it moving, be ready to go following the Learjet crossing right to left."

After the change, what is the controller supposed to do, issue a clearance like, "Line up and wait, keep it moving...?" Yep, that's really clear. I have never heard a clearance like the first one since the change.

As to ICAO standard English in Europe, I have done quite a bit of flying in the south of France -- always with a French pilot since there is not a word of English to be heard...

Cows get bigger,

We'll move over to millibars when everyone STANDARDIZES on one transition altitude, may I suggest FL180 and 17,000'?

Yes, I would be happy with that. :0 However, millibars seemed to have disappeared a year or two back. :cool:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but there ARE international standards. Trouble is, the US doesn't follow them! :E

UK and Ireland consult on a common transition level

GF, get ready for the hectopascal...

At least we all have "fish finders" these days if one was to mis set the sub scale...

And then of course the real reason -"hold" can be mistaken for "roll"

"Taxi into position and roll?" Are you kidding?

That was never in anybody's controller syllabus...

I thought the reason for the change was that virtually all countries use "hold" (in a ground manoeuvring context) to mean "do not enter the runway"? It's an important enough instruction that it should not have any other uses in a similar context, just as "take off" is replaced with "departure" in all R/T except the actual delivery of the take off clearance.

It maybe only 3 countries using inches, vice millibars, but the USA has just short of 50% of all flying, which counts for something. Canada uses proper inches, too.

It's just a flip of the switch, anyway.

Acroguy
 

So Imagine trying to understand that call, possibly made in a heavy US regional accent and pushed out at high speed, in your second language! I find it hard enough and "English" is my first language. you then say:-

As if we should all agree that it's a sad loss!? Standardisation of wording and pronuncuation is not there to make it pleasant, chatty and relaxed for some, but to make it unequivocably clear to all.

As regards French speaking French in France, I agree - unacceptable.

I would say that that is extremely straightforward English, with no odd nouns or verbs and should be understood by anybody claiming to understand even rudimentary English. If any professional pilot doesn't understand that clearance, then God help us all...

The total clearance would probably be more like: " Taxi into position runway 1, traffic landing runway 28, keep it moving -- be ready to go after the Learjet crossing right to left, company on a two mile final for runway 28"

And, in my experience, tower clearances such as these are not typically delivered at high speed. High speed is usually an approach specialty...

ICAO allow in cases where an aircraft is not crossing an international border, they can speak the local lingo. I know this is not the case in France IE AFR and TSC frequently speak French. Unacceptable. As for "Line up and wait" , it's clear, and takes less time to say. When your freq is busy this is an asset, that's why I personally prefer it

So what is the clearance when the tower needs an immediate takeoff for traffic? "Line up and wait, cleared for immediate takeoff, no delay?"

Is is possible that those operating in other parts of the world have no appreciation of how hard US ATCO's are pushing traffic over here?

What's the difference between a hectopascal and a millibar? :confused:

acroguy,

Please stop embarrassing us Americans who fly overseas and are under enough embarrassment for our radio "techniques". "Line up and Wait" was a simple improvement. Why would an ATCO say "into position and hold, cleared for immediate"?

pigboat, a couple of syllables, I'd guess and a salute to a forgotten Frenchman like most scurvy metric ideas. :cool: :p

I promise to stop contributing to this thread, but I never said the old clearance was "position and hold, cleared for immediate". I said the clearance used to be "taxi into position, cleared for an immediate...". The point being, what is the point of the word "wait" if the clearance is going to be for an immediate?

I also promise to stop being embarrassed for the UK guys who apparently are flabbergasted at being cleared to land 7-8 miles from the airport here in the US. Imagine that. Maybe ICAO could learn something.

In that case, why not, "cleared for immediate take-off" and drop "into position"? Standard ICAO aviation English requires no more time, just a ommitment to using it properly.

@acroguy
 

There is no doubt that the job done by ATC in many places the world round is impressive. Likewise the ability of ORD etc to shift huge total No's if AC from their runways. To them, I doff my hat.

Your assertation that long-winded sentences are necessary to achieve high flow rates is simply WRONG. Purely as an example, London Gatwick achieves the highest flow-rate (by movements per hour) of any commercial airport runway in the world. They have a truly international clientele, and trust me, you Never hear the motivational speaking you have advocated bracketed around the somewhat camouflaged clearance.

I think you are fighting for what you like and prefer, not seeing the big picture. Patriotism, (and I am proud of my country) has no place in Flt Safety.