by Captain Shem Malmquist<\/p>\n
Pilots should \u201cavoid the use of slang\u201d in international communications. \u00a0For those\u00a0pilots that will fly some international trips during their career, it is worthwhile to explore what that statement really means.\u00a0 The challenges of international flying include more complicated IFR procedures, country differences, lack of radar coverage, and generally less ATC \u201csupport\u201d than domestic pilots are used to.\u00a0 All of these issues are often complicated by the limited English abilities of controllers (and pilots) who are from countries where English is not the native tongue.\u00a0 Even in those countries where English is spoken, their version of English is often dramatically different than what Americans are used to.<\/p>\n
In all countries, Air Traffic Control English is a language unto itself, where precise meanings of words are defined within the ATC framework to avoid ambiguity and general miscommunication.\u00a0 Therefore, safety dictates that pilots stick to correct phraseology only, without adding extraneous verbiage.\u00a0 Additionally, using non-ICAO standard phraseology in the international arena does little for our professional image.<\/p>\n
Pilots and controllers who speak only limited English are often only familiar with the English words as defined in PANS-OPS Document 4444, Chapter 12<\/a>.\u00a0 As they are limited to these words and meanings, it is very easy for us to confuse them by using other words that are not defined, or using terms they are familiar with in a different context.\u00a0 An example from the world of computers are the words \u201cbug\u201d and \u201cvirus\u201d.\u00a0 All computer people know the definition of these words as they pertain to computers, but many non-English speakers have no idea that there are other definitions of these words.<\/p>\n The phraseology used by U.S. ATC is unique to the U.S.\u00a0 The rest of the world is actually more or less standardized to the ICAO meanings and phrases (well, the UK likes terms such as \u201cflight level one hundred\u201d or \u201cflight level two hundred\u201d or \u201cset course to\u201d etc., but those are fairly easy for us to understand).\u00a0 For example, such terms as \u201clevel\u201d, which is taken to mean the same as \u201cmaintaining an altitude\u201d in the U.S., is, instead, used as a shortened version of Flight Level in most of the world outside the U.S.\u00a0 A controller in many areas of the world might only understand the word \u201clevel\u201d in the context of \u201cflight level\u201d, and have no concept that the word also means that you are flying at a constant altitude.\u00a0 \u00a0I heard clear example of this sort of miscommunication\u00a0 in an ATC response to a pilot saying \u201clevel 4000\u201d in a region where the transition level was FL90.\u00a0 The controller replied \u201croger, QNH 1010, transition level FL90\u201d, which resulted in several back and forth responses between the pilot and the controller.\u00a0 Listening in it was clear to us that the controller assumed that the crew had not switched over to the local altimeter setting, so was actually reporting \u201cmaintaining flight level 40\u201d, obviously an incorrect altitude reference when below the transition level.<\/p>\n In another example, Air Traffic Controllers will know what the symbol \u201cO\u201d is, and that the phonetic of that symbol is \u201cOscar\u201d, yet they may not have any idea what you mean if you say \u201cOh\u201d when you mean to say \u201cZero\u201d.\u00a0 Similarly, they are not taught what \u201cfifty-one\u201d means, but they will certainly understand \u201cfive-one\u201d.\u00a0 The digits zero through nine are in the PANS-OPS \u2013 higher numbers are not.\u00a0 Although some foreign controllers do know more than this basic English, using terms other than these is just inviting confusion.<\/p>\n Here are a few more examples:<\/p>\n \u201cPoint\u201d.\u00a0 In PANS-OPS a \u201cpoint\u201d is a position, i.e, a compulsory or non-compulsory reporting point, not a word to be used instead of \u201cdecimal\u201d.\u00a0 Along with this, \u201ctwo four point seven\u201d (or worse, \u201ctwenty-four point seven\u201d) is not a flight level or altitude.\u00a0 There is, however, a flight level \u201ctwo four seven\u201d.\u00a0 The use of the word \u201cpoint\u201d has no place in international communication outside of a geographical position.<\/p>\n \u201cLooking for lower\u201d.\u00a0 Should net an interesting response in some of the back-water places you might fly to.\u00a0 Correct PANS-OPS term is \u201cRequest descent\u201d.<\/p>\n \u201cWith you\u201d.\u00a0 This phrase has no place in international or domestic operations, as many controllers will tell you. Along with \u201cchecking in\u201d, these terms grate on many controllers (just the messenger here!) but if their English is weak outside of the basic PANS-OPS, it may just confuse them.<\/p>\n \u201cLevel\u201d.\u00a0 As discussed above this is a standard shortened version of the term \u201cflight level\u201d.\u00a0 If you want to tell them you are\u00a0at\u00a0<\/em>an altitude, use the word \u201cmaintaining\u201d, or just omit it altogether.<\/p>\n In the U.S. a runway number can be a single digit, such as \u201crunway 7 left\u201d but outside the U.S. the numbers are normally all two-digit, so the correct term would be \u201czero seven left.\u201d\u00a0 \u00a0This should be indicated on the approach plate, where the runway designation will show as 07L as opposed to 7L.<\/p>\n Clearances outside the U.S. allow ATC to clear an aircraft to do something behind another aircraft, where ATC will state \u201cline up and wait runway 07 behind the landing aircraft, behind,\u201d specifically stating the word \u201cbehind\u201d twice for emphasis.\u00a0 You are expected to read it back that way.<\/p>\n Attempt to avoid extra verbiage in general.\u00a0 It may be nice to say \u201cgood morning\u201d or \u201cany chance of\u201d and the like, but in using those terms you are assuming that the controller (or ground maintenance on the headphones) understands more than basic ICAO English.\u00a0 Some do, some don\u2019t.\u00a0 I recently heard a U.S. carrier asking a Chinese controller for \u201cride reports\u201d.\u00a0 The controller had absolutely no idea what he was asking, and we could hear the frustration in the ensuing exchange on the part of both parties.\u00a0 Be careful also with the terms \u201cto\u201d and \u201cfor\u201d in the context of altitudes.\u00a0\u00a0 While these terms are defined in the PANS-OPS, they contain obvious ambiguity.\u00a0 Omitting them might be worthwhile if there is any doubt, i.e.\u00a0 \u201c4000 climbing 5000\u201d or \u201cFL1-4-5 descending FL8-0\u201d.<\/p>\n While it would be nice if all non-U.S. controllers were truly fluent in English, the fact is that most are not.\u00a0 It is not unreasonable for them to expect us to stick to the narrow scope of English that is in the official publications. Instead of being frustrated that most of the world\u2019s controllers do not really know English, just be thankful that the French did not get their way on the choice of languages for aviation!<\/p>\n Those pilots who fly international should read and be familiar with the ATC phraseology section of the PANS-OPS, which is contained in route manuals, i.e.,\u00a0 Jepp ATC sections or similar, or from the PANS-OPS Document 4444, Chapter 12<\/a>.\u00a0 Those new to international can also learn by listening to the radio techniques of more experienced pilots, whether they be from their own company or airlines such as Cathay Pacific or British Air.\u00a0 If you have trouble reverting from ICAO to domestic phraseology, keep in mind that a U.S. controller will always understand what you mean when you use an ICAO term, such as \u201cdecimal\u201d, but the converse is not true.<\/p>\n Radio technique may seem a small thing, but experienced pilots use correct radio technique because it increases the safety of the operation as well as preventing a great deal of unnecessary frustration.\u00a0 You also sound like you know what you\u2019re doing!<\/p>\n =======================================<\/p>\n \t\t\t<\/p><\/div>\n <\/p>\n![\"aoa-book-image1\"](\"https:\/\/airlinesafety.blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/02\/aoa-book-image1.jpg?w=640\")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"Unknown's](\"https:\/\/1.gravatar.com\/avatar\/71222e839936336880e5ead5cc76aa2fcca467386a8082d8acec7a434b719bca?s=60&d=identicon&r=G\")