Bad Engrish?

On Sun, 1 Jul 2007 11:31:38 +0200, Wolfgang Schwanke
wrote:

Indeed, there was quite a fuss a year or two ago when controllers at
Charles de Gaulle demanded that American and British pilots speak in
French.

Unless I missed that news item, you may be mixing some facts up. They
are speaking in French to French crews and English to everyone else.

No, they spoke to the English-speaking flight crews in French. That
was the cause of the celebre.

Blue skies! -- Dan Ford

Claire Chennault and His American Volunteers, 1941-1942
forthcoming from HarperCollins www.flyingtigersbook.com

On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 23:29:32 -0700, Shirl
wrote in
:

Shirl:
I admit, I quoted the wrong reg -- that *is* what the reg says,
verbatim, for a US pilot;

Larry Dighera wrote:
Are you able to identify that particular regulation? I am unaware of
an FAA regulation that requires reading and writing English.

61.103 Eligibility requirements
General.
To be eligible for a private pilot certificate, a person must:
[a, b...]
(c) Be able to read, speak, write, and understand the English language.
If the applicant is unable to meet one of these requirements due to
medical reasons, then the Administrator may place such operating
limitations on that applicant's pilot certificate as are necessary for
the safe operation of the aircraft.

Thank you.

In deed it appears that US regulations require an applicant for any
airmans certificate (private, instrument, commercial, ATP, ...) issued
by the FAA to " Be able to read, speak, write, and understand the
English language."*

However, it would seem that "PART 129—OPERATIONS: FOREIGN AIR CARRIERS
AND FOREIGN OPERATORS OF U.S.-REGISTERED AIRCRAFT ENGAGED IN COMMON
CARRIAGE" may be more applicable in the Air China incident. It would
appear that there is no such requirement for English usage by foreign
air crews operating in the US. Instead, foreign air carriers must
provide bilingual ground personnel for handling their traffic:



http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text...1.4.21.0.11.11
§ 129.21 Control of traffic.

Link to an amendment published at 72 FR 31683, June 7, 2007.

(a) Subject to applicable immigration laws and regulations, each
foreign air carrier shall furnish the ground personnel necessary
to provide for two-way voice communication between its aircraft
and ground stations, at places where the Administrator finds that
voice communication is necessary and that communications cannot be
maintained in a language with which ground station operators are
familiar.

(b) Each person furnished by a foreign air carrier under paragraph
(a) of this section must be able to speak both English and the
language necessary to maintain communications with the aircraft
concerned, and shall assist ground personnel in directing traffic.



http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text...tart=1;size=25
Amendment from June 07, 2007

14 CFR--PART 129
View Printed Federal Register page72 FR 31683in PDF format.
Amendment(s) published June 7, 2007, in 72 FR 31683
Effective Date(s): August 6, 2007

46. Revise §129.21 to read as follows:

§ 129.21 Control of traffic.
(a) Subject to applicable immigration laws and regulations, each
foreign air carrier must furnish sufficient personnel necessary to
provide two-way voice communications between its aircraft and
stations at places where the FAA finds that communication is
necessary but cannot be maintained in a language with which
station operators are familiar.

(b) Each person furnished by a foreign air carrier under paragraph
(a) of this section must be able to speak English and the language
necessary to maintain communications with its aircraft and must
assist station operators in directing traffic.


Given the number of foreign air carriers and the numerous FAA
facilities they must communicate with, this regulation seems
unworkable in the event that they should ALL attempt to comply with
it.

*
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text....1.1.2&idno=14

On 2007-06-30 05:34:01 -0700, Thomas Borchert
said:

C,

So what would have been the standard way to ask if he had been cleared
to the ramp?


"Confirm you have been cleared to..." or some such. Anything that is not
recognizable as a question by a change in inflection only.

-- e
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Ah. And his reply would have been so much more clear. "Roger, confirm I
have been cleared to ramp."
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

On 2007-06-28 12:00:26 -0700, Dallas said:


Scary.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWDEIvjwaFU

International pilots on international flights are required under ICAO
to either maintain level 4 proficiency in English or to understand the
language spoken on the ground. Level 4 proficiency is defined by ICAO
as being able to understand language well enough to communicate
promptly with only very rare errors. Level 4 proficiency means you have
to understand the meanings of different pronunciation, intonation, and
rhythm. You have to be able to understand and communicate about unusual
situations. Arguably, asking someone if they are cleared to the ramp is
neither unusual nor unreasonable under these rules. If the pilot does
not understand an instruction, he is supposed to be able to know
English well enough to ask for clarification. There is no way that this
pilot could be considered to speak English at Operational Level 4.

ICAO Rating Scale for Operational Level*4
A speaker will be rated at Operational Level*4 if the following
criteria are met:
Pronunciation: (Assumes a dialect and/or accent intelligible to the
aeronautical community.)
Pronunciation, stress, rhythm, and intonation are influenced by the
first language or regional variation but only sometimes interfere with
ease of understanding.

Structu
(Relevant grammatical structures and sentence patterns are determined
by language functions appropriate to the task.)
Basic grammatical structures and sentence patterns are used creatively
and are usually well controlled. Errors may occur, particularly in
unusual or unexpected circumstances, but rarely interfere with meaning.

Vocabulary:
Vocabulary range and accuracy are usually sufficient to communicate
effectively on common, concrete, and work-related topics. Can often
paraphrase successfully when lacking vocabulary in unusual or
unexpected circumstances.

Fluency:
Produces stretches of language at an appropriate tempo. There may be
occasional loss of fluency on transition from rehearsed or formulaic
speech to spontaneous interaction, but this does not prevent effective
communication. Can make limited use of discourse markers or connectors.
Fillers are not distracting.

Comprehension:
Comprehension is mostly accurate on common, concrete, and work-related
topics when the accent or variety used is sufficiently intelligible for
an international community of users. When the speaker is confronted
with a linguistic or situational complication or an unexpected turn of
events, comprehension may be slower or require clarification strategies.

Interactions:
Responses are usually immediate, appropriate, and informative.
Initiates and maintains exchanges even when dealing with an unexpected
turn of events. Deals adequately with apparent misunderstandings by
checking, confirming, or clarifying.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

Mxsmanic wrote:
Thomas Borchert writes:

Which one, for someone flying in US airspace, with a foreign
certificate in a foreign-registered aircraft?

ICAO covers all.

Clueless.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Thomas Borchert writes:

Which one, for someone flying in US airspace, with a foreign
certificate in a foreign-registered aircraft?

ICAO covers all.

If ICAO covers all, and my airport doesn't have an ICAO identifier, I guess
it doesn't exist.

Or could it be that you are mistaken (again)

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Cubdriver usenet AT danford DOT net writes:

Indeed, there was quite a fuss a year or two ago when controllers at
Charles de Gaulle demanded that American and British pilots speak in
French.

Are you confusing France and Québec?

Last time I checked, CDG was in France.

Guess you're wrong again.

"Shirl" wrote in message
...
Shirl:
The reg is that you can speak, read, write, and understand English.

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
Are you able to cite the regulation to which you refer that requires
reading and writing English?

"El Maximo" wrote:
That would involve admitting to a mistake. It will never happen. He'll
either ignore the request entirely, or answer a question you didn't ask.

El Maximo, I was the one (Shirl) who said that about the reg. I did not
see the request until this moment -- I wasn't ignoring it.

Shirl,

I apologise for confusing you with Mr-Know-it-all. I'll try to pay better
attention.

Cubdriver wrote:
On Sun, 1 Jul 2007 11:31:38 +0200, Wolfgang Schwanke
wrote:

Indeed, there was quite a fuss a year or two ago when controllers at
Charles de Gaulle demanded that American and British pilots speak in
French.
Unless I missed that news item, you may be mixing some facts up. They
are speaking in French to French crews and English to everyone else.

No, they spoke to the English-speaking flight crews in French. That
was the cause of the celebre.

Blue skies! -- Dan Ford

Claire Chennault and His American Volunteers, 1941-1942
forthcoming from HarperCollins www.flyingtigersbook.com

Actually it was the opposite, they wanted French crews to use English
instead of French as they were used to, big opposition by French pilots
and the requirement was dropped.

C,

Ah. And his reply would have been so much more clear. "Roger, confirm I
have been cleared to ramp."


No idea. Fact is, the controller didn't use standard phraseology.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)