1. ICAO Aviation Language Proficiency Requirements – The Background
Captain Daniel Maurino
Flight Safety and Human Factors, ICAO
ASPA/ICAO CAR/SAM Regional Seminar
on Safety Management Systems (SMS)
Mexico City, 14 to 16 March 2005 1 1

2. Resolution A32-16 (1998)
“…Council & Commission… strengthen provisions... obligating Contracting States to take steps to ensure that air traffic controllers and flight crews involved in flight operations in airspace where the use of the English language is required, are proficient in conducting and comprehending radiotelephony
communications in the English language”

3. Air-Ground Communications
A long standing safety concern
Conventional wisdom – Two pillars
standardized phraseology
development of R/T speech based on simplified English
Moderate success

4. Pillar #1 – Standardized Phraseology
Insufficient to deal with the full range of situations requiring R/T exchange

5. Pillar # 2 – R/T Based Upon Simplified English
Annex 1, pre-1998
ATCO’s: “… speak the languages designated for use in air traffic control without accent or impediment which could adversely affect communication”
Pilots: nothing

6. Air-Ground Communications Revisited
A32-16 – The need for a fresh view
Development of Standards
strengthening the use of standard phraseology
clarifying usage of English in aviation operations
establishing language proficiency requirements
The Price SG

7. Linguistic Research, circa 1998
Natural languages are most effective form of speech
Natural language is the only form of communication sufficiently
reliable
comprehensive
adaptable
for international aviation operations

8. PRICE Study Group – Premises
Make Standards acceptable to the target group(s)?
Allocate responsibility to airline operators and air navigation service providers?
Optimize interface between Standards and input from commercial training & testing providers?
Frame Standards that can be easily integrated into State regulatory frame works?

9. PRICE SG conclusions (1)
Standardized phraseology – First line of defence
Plain language – Second line of defence [for the full range of aeronautical R/T communication]
Exchange of critical operational information requires
understanding of the fundamentals of linguistics
appreciation of the susceptibility of language to misapprehension
commitment to standards of discipline and care

10. PRICE SG conclusions (2)
Universal availability of one means of radiotelephony communication – important for safety and efficiency
Lack of a language common to flight crew and ground stations – safety concern
Need to retain the language used by stations on the ground

11. PRICE SG conclusions (3)
Similar proficiency requirements for pilots and controllers
A single minimum standard for the entire target group
Airline operators/ATS providers responsible for ensuring target group proficiency requirements

12. PRICE SG conclusions (4)
Heavy impact of the Standards in the aviation
“Do-able” if
extensive guidance material
education & awareness programs worldwide
staff support activities by operators
increased compliance with ICAO standardized phraseology
commitment

13. Clarifying Usage of “Aviation” English
No silver bullet for all R/T communication problems
blocked transmissions
not all aircraft on frequency
controllers hand-over blocks of airspace to third parties
crews workload disallows constant monitoring
Enhances management of the immediate operational context
If everyone is English-proficient
Over blowing the potential of English – boomerang effect

14. “Aviation” English Does not belong to a particular culture
A tool for controllers & pilots [as a matter of convenience]
Has no special inherent qualities
Most accessible of all second languages
can be successfully integrated into training programs in common English

15. Language proficiency requirements
Annex 1 – Personnel Licensing
Annex 6 – Operation of Aircraft
Annex 10 – Aeronautical Communications
Annex 11 – Air Traffic Services 7

16. Annex 1 Personnel Licensing
Demonstrate the ability to speak and understand the language used for radiotelephony communications
The Rating Scale and Holistic Descriptors
The “speak and understand” ability shall be demonstrated to level 4 of the ICAO rating scale

17. Annex 1 Implementation Notes
Language proficiency requirements apply to pilots engaged in international flights
Recurrent testing shall be required for those below level 6
every 3 years for level 4
every 6 years for level 5
Grandfather clause for licences issued before 5 March 2004
5 March 2008

18. Annex 1
Other Aspects
Manual on the Implementation of ICAO Language Proficiency Requirements (Doc 9835)
Review of progress in the implementation of the Language proficiency Standards in 2006
Consequences of non-compliance with the language proficiency Standards

19. Annex 6 – Operation of Aircraft, Parts I and III
Operators shall ensure that flight crews speak and understand the language used for radiotelephony communications
Standards related to Language proficiency in Annexe 6 and 11 are more limited in scope but are nevertheless important

20. Annex 10 Aeronautical Telecommunications
Plain language shall be used only when standardized phraseology cannot serve an intended transmission
Communications shall be conducted in the language normally used by the station on the ground or in the English language
English shall be available, on request from any aircraft station, at all airports and routes used by international air services
Standards related to Language proficiency in Annexe 6 and 11 are more limited in scope but are nevertheless important

21. Annex 11 Air Traffic Services
Air traffic service providers shall ensure that air traffic controllers speak and understand the language used for radiotelephony communications
English shall be used for communications between air traffic control units except when another language is mutually agreed
Standards related to Language proficiency in Annexe 6 and 11 are more limited in scope but are nevertheless important

22. ICAO Audits The ICAO Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme
Language proficiency Standards in Annexes 1, 6, 10 and 11 starting in 2005

23. Language Proficiency: The Trail of Wreckage
Trident/DC-9 mid-air collision, Zagreb -1976
Double B747 runway collision, Tenerife
B707 fuel exhaustation, JFK
B757 CFIT, Cali
IL-76/B747 mid-air collision, India
MD83/Shorts 330 runway collision, Paris/CDG -2000
MD80/Citation runway collision, Milan …
The common element: English language proficiency
Source: ADREP

24. From an SMS Perspective: A Hazard
Passenger management
ATC
Cabin Crew
Terrain
Weather
Similar call signs
Maintenance
Time pressure
Ground Crew
Flight diversions
Slide will appear with the cockpit and title only.
ONE MOUSE CLICK will start the animation and automatically show many of the LOSA observer threats.
This is a good opportunity to compare the list that the class developed with those that were specifically looked for on the observations.
Heavy traffic
System
malfunctions
Unfamiliar airports
Automation events
Missed approaches