ICAO – EUROCONTROLEUROPEAN SEMINAR ON LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY FOR

AERONAUTICALCOMMUNICATIONS Brussels, 27-28 October 2005

ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices

Paul Lamy Chief, Flight Safety Section – ICAO

FSS – Oct. 05

ICAO Aviation Language Proficiency requirements

WhyThe safety concern

HowThe work of the PRICE Study Group

WhatThe ICAO Language proficiency requirements

FSS – Oct. 05

Aviation Language ProficiencyAviation Language Proficiency

Why What is the What is the safety concern(s)safety concern(s) in international civil in international civil

aviation for which the ICAO language proficiency aviation for which the ICAO language proficiency requirements might provide anrequirements might provide an answeranswer??

FSS – Oct. 05

A review of 28,000 safety reportsA review of 28,000 safety reports Over 70% of problems

cited involved message exchange.

Communication errors still represent largest category of problems.

However, only 1% of communications are compromised by inaccuracy.

FSS – Oct. 05

The Trail of WreckageThe Trail of Wreckage Trident/DC-9 mid-air collision, Zagreb -1976Trident/DC-9 mid-air collision, Zagreb -1976 Double B747 runway collision, Tenerife - 1977Double B747 runway collision, Tenerife - 1977 B707 fuel exhaustation, JFK - 1990B707 fuel exhaustation, JFK - 1990 B757 CFIT, Cali - 1995B757 CFIT, Cali - 1995 IL-76/B747 mid-air collision, India - 1996IL-76/B747 mid-air collision, India - 1996 MD83/Shorts 330 runway collision, Paris/CDG -2000MD83/Shorts 330 runway collision, Paris/CDG -2000 MD80/Citation runway collision, Milan – 2001MD80/Citation runway collision, Milan – 2001 Helios Airways – Greece August 2005 (?)Helios Airways – Greece August 2005 (?)

• … … The common element: The common element: CommunicationCommunication

FSS – Oct. 05

Air-Ground CommunicationsAir-Ground Communications

Has been a safety concern for decades Action up to the 90s

Standardized Phraseologies Hope of development of a radiotelephony speech based on a

simplified English Realization that it was not sufficient

A Systemic PerspectiveA Systemic Perspective

OperationsOperations

Design Design

Training Training

SupervisionSupervision

Management Management

Kept under control inKept under control innormal system conditions…normal system conditions…

Reason Model Reason Model

Sources: Docs 9683; 9806Sources: Docs 9683; 9806

A Systemic PerspectiveA Systemic Perspective (cont.)(cont.)

Design Design

Management Management

Training Training

Supervision Supervision

OperationsOperations

……surface in unstable surface in unstable system conditions system conditions (with great damaging (with great damaging potential)potential)

Sources: Docs 9683; 9806Sources: Docs 9683; 9806

A Training PerspectiveA Training Perspective

Mismatches at the operational interfaces = breeding Mismatches at the operational interfaces = breeding grounds for operational errorsgrounds for operational errors

LL

LL

LLSS EE

HH

SHELL ModelSHELL Model

Source: Doc 9683Source: Doc 9683

FSS – Oct. 05

An Operational PerspectiveAn Operational Perspective

ThreatsThreats

Threat ManagementThreat ManagementStrategiesStrategies

Error ManagementError ManagementStrategiesStrategies

ErrorsErrors

Undesired StateUndesired State

Threat and ErrorThreat and ErrorManagement (TEM)Management (TEM)Model Model

Source: Doc 9803Source: Doc 9803

FSS – Oct. 05

Language Proficiency: A ThreatLanguage Proficiency: A Threat

WeatherWeather

MaintenanceMaintenance

GroundGround CrewCrew

CabinCabin CrewCrew

Passenger managementPassenger management ATCATC

TerrainTerrain

SimilarSimilar callcall signssigns

TimeTime pressurepressure

HeavyHeavy traffictraffic

UnfamiliarUnfamiliar airportsairports

AutomationAutomation eventsevents MissedMissed approachesapproaches

FlightFlight diversionsdiversions

SystemSystem

malfunctionsmalfunctions

Source: Doc 9803Source: Doc 9803

Language ProficiencyLanguage Proficiency

FSS – Oct. 05

Therefore, as Safety Practitioners…Therefore, as Safety Practitioners… Language proficiency isLanguage proficiency is

NOTNOT a cultural issue a cultural issue NOTNOT a case of cultural imperialism a case of cultural imperialism• From a safety management perspectiveFrom a safety management perspective

A latent condition with safety damaging potentialA latent condition with safety damaging potential• From a training management perspectiveFrom a training management perspective

A technical skill acquired through conventional trainingA technical skill acquired through conventional training• From an operational management perspectiveFrom an operational management perspective

A threat that increases complexity of aviation operationsA threat that increases complexity of aviation operations

FSS – Oct. 05

Managing language proficiency in aviation safety:Managing language proficiency in aviation safety:A risk management exerciseA risk management exercise

Denial: defensive attitudeRepair: cosmetic acceptance Reform: tackle the safety concern

Aviation Language ProficiencyAviation Language Proficiency

FSS – Oct. 05

IIICAO Aviation Language Proficiency requirementsICAO Aviation Language Proficiency requirements

How to tackle the safety concern?

IL-76/B747 mid-air collision, India – Nov. 1996IL-76/B747 mid-air collision, India – Nov. 1996 32nd ICAO Assembly 1998

FSS – Oct. 05

RESOLUTION A-32 by 32nd Assembly of ICAO 1998RESOLUTION A-32 by 32nd Assembly of ICAO 1998

“…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”

FSS – Oct. 05

PRICE STUDY GROUPPRICE STUDY GROUP Proficiency Requirement In Common English Study

Group Comprised aviation and linguistic experts from

Argentina, Canada, China, France, Russia, Ukraine, the United Kingdom, the United States, EUROCONTROL, IATA, IFATCA, IFALPA and ICAO.

Mandated toReview all aspects of air-ground and ground-ground voice

communicationDevelop requirements concerning English language testingDevelop language proficiency requirements

FSS – Oct. 05

The IssuesThe Issues

Existing provisions at the time Phraseology vs. plain language English only or English and other languages Means to assess language proficiency reliably

FSS – Oct. 05

Previous Annex 10 requirementsPrevious Annex 10 requirementsPhraseologies to be used when

specifiedLanguage

Language of the ground station Hope of developing a universal

radiotelephony speech English should be made available

pending the development of such universal radiotelephony speech

Use of interpreters

FSS – Oct. 05

Previous ICAO language requirementsPrevious ICAO language requirements For controllers: “… speak the languages

designated for use in air traffic control without accent or impediment which could adversely affect communication”;

For pilots:Strangely quiet!

FSS – Oct. 05

Pre-eminent R/T communication problems:Pre-eminent R/T communication problems:

frequency congestion, poor microphone technique, ambiguity, phonetic similarity, incomplete call-signs, confused sequence of

numbers in messages,

strings of instructions, truncated phraseologies, inadequate

acknowledgements, readback errors, hearback errors.

FSS – Oct. 05

How compliant are pilots and controllers?How compliant are pilots and controllers?

“In spite of the efforts made to achieve compliance with agreed international standard procedures, violations are commonplace. It is probably the case that the gap between theory and practice is wider in communication procedures than in any other facet of aviation” (Wiener and Nagel, 1988).

FSS – Oct. 05

Standardized PhraseologyStandardized Phraseology … is insufficient to deal with the full range of situations

requiring R/T exchange.

… but how to complement standardized phraseologies?

FSS – Oct. 05

English vs. universal speech English vs. universal speech More recent research established that….

There is no more effective form of speech than natural languages, and Plain language is the only medium of communication sufficiently reliable,

comprehensive and adaptable for international aviation operations.

English for aviation .. does not belong to a culture; is a tool, used by controllers & pilots as a matter of convenience; has no special inherent qualities; is the most accessible of all second languages.

FSS – Oct. 05

English: Sole universal aviation language?English: Sole universal aviation language? Would it eradicate all possibility of misapprehension?

No! Would it greatly aid situational awareness?

Yes, but it assumes that everyone has proper English proficiency Yes; but it would not make it complete!

Some transmissions are blocked; Not all aircraft transmit on frequency; Controllers hand-over blocks of airspace to third parties; Crews’ workload disallows constant monitoring.

An erroneous assumption of situational awareness could be prejudicial to safe operations.

FSS – Oct. 05

PRICE SG conclusions (1)PRICE SG conclusions (1) Phraseologies shall be used whenever possible but … … there is no practical alternative to the use of plain language for

the full range of aeronautical R/T communication, and

The use of plain language in the exchange of critical operational information requires:

an understanding of the fundamentals of linguistics, an appreciation of the susceptibility of language to misapprehension, and a commitment to the highest standards of discipline and care.

FSS – Oct. 05

PRICE SG conclusions (2)PRICE SG conclusions (2) The universal availability of at least one

medium of radiotelephony communication is important for safety and efficiency in international air navigation;

The lack of a language common to the aircrew and the ground station could lead to an accident;

There is a need to retain the language used by the station on the ground.

FSS – Oct. 05

PRICE SG conclusions (3)PRICE SG conclusions (3) Parity must exist between pilots and controllers in language

proficiency requirements; thus A single minimum standard is the best solution for the entire

target group; but .. .. it does not mean that the test shall be the same Responsibility shall also be vested in airline operators and ATS

providers for ensuring that staff meet proficiency requirements

FSS – Oct. 05

PRICE SG conclusions (4)PRICE SG conclusions (4)The new provisions will impact heavily the aviation

community but with: Extensive guidance material, Education & awareness programs worldwide, Staff support activities by operators, Increased compliance with ICAO standardized phraseology,

and Highest standards of discipline,

We need and can improve the 1% figure!

FSS – Oct. 05

WhatWhat

Annex 10 Annex 1

General concept Review of the provisions Implementation timeline

Annex 6 Annex 11 PANS-ATM

FSS – Oct. 05

Annex 10 – Volume IIAnnex 10 – Volume II

Chapter 5 addresses voice communications in the aeronautical communication service linking ground stations and aircraft.

FSS – Oct. 05

Annex 10 – Volume IIAnnex 10 – Volume II

Phraseology and Plain Language Para 5.1.1.1- ICAO phraseology shall be used in all situations for

which it has been specified. Only when standardized phraseology cannot serve an intended transmission, plain language shall be used

FSS – Oct. 05

Annex 10 – Volume IIAnnex 10 – Volume II

Language(s) to be used Para 5.2.1.2.1: The air-ground radiotelephony communications

shall be conducted in the language normally used by the station on the ground or in the English language

Para 5.2.1.2.2 The English language shall be available, on request from any aircraft station, at all stations on the ground serving designated airports and routes used by international air services

FSS – Oct. 05

Annex 10 – Volume IIAnnex 10 – Volume II

Provisions no longer in force Interpreters are no longer authorized The Attachment on the development of Radiotelephony speech

for international aviation has been withdrawn

FSS – Oct. 05

Annex 1Annex 1

Licences with language proficiency requirements Aeroplane and helicopter pilots Glider and free balloon pilots Flight Engineers and Flight Navigators Air Traffic Controllers Aeronautical Station Operators

Licences without language proficiency requirements Flight Dispatcher Aircraft Maintenance Engineer

FSS – Oct. 05

General PrinciplesGeneral Principles

Limited to radiotelephony communication The “Speak and Understand” Standard Cover all languages used in radio communication Assessment using a rating scale (level 4) Progressive implementation

27 Nov. 2003

5 March 2008

Rating scale is applied

Shall speak and understand

FSS – Oct. 05

Annex 1Annex 1

• Aeroplane & Helicopter Pilots (PPL, CPL and ATPL)

• Air Traffic Controllers and Aeronautical Station Operators

• Flight Engineers

• Free balloon and glider pilots

•Flight Navigators

FSS – Oct. 05

Language proficiency in Annex 1Language proficiency in Annex 1

shall demonstrate the ability to speak and understand the language used for radiotelephony communications (Standard 1.2.9.1)

after 5 March 2008, the “speak and understand” ability shall be demonstrated to level 4 of

the ICAO rating scale (Standard 1.2.9.4 and Appendix) recurrent testing will be required for those below level 6

(recommendation: every 3 years for level 4 and every 6 years for level 5)

previous Standard on the use of radiotelephony procedures and phraseology still applies

Aeroplane & helicopter pilots (PPL, CPL and ATPL)

Air traffic controllers and aeronautical station operators

FSS – Oct. 05

Language proficiency in Annex 1Language proficiency in Annex 1

should demonstrate the ability to speak and understand the language used for radiotelephony communications.

Previous Standard on the use of radiotelephony procedures and phraseology still applies for flight engineers

Free balloon and glider pilots

Flight engineers

FSS – Oct. 05

Language proficiency in Annex 1Language proficiency in Annex 1

If required to use a radio telephone on-board, flight navigator shall demonstrate the ability to speak and understand the language used for radiotelephony communications

Previous Standard on the use of radiotelephony procedures and phraseology still applies for all Flight Navigators

Flight navigators

FSS – Oct. 05

Implementation notesImplementation notes

Standard 1.2.9.1 will apply only on 5 March 2008 for aeroplane and helicopter pilot who have a licence issued before 5 March 2004

No “grandfather” clause for Air Traffic Controllers and Aeronautical Station Operators

Language proficiency requirements applies to pilots who are engaged in international flights and ATCO/ASO providing services to international flights

Pilots shall demonstrate proficiency in at least one of the language(s) offered in the airspace that is used

ATCO/ASO shall demonstrate proficiency for each of the language(s) offered in the airspace in which they are providing service

FSS – Oct. 05

Other AspectsOther Aspects

The Rating Scale and Holistic Descriptors are contained in the Appendix and the Attachment to Annex 1

Consequences of non-compliance with the language proficiency Standards For pilots For Air Traffic Controllers and aeronautical Station Operators

Guidance on the implementation of the Standards has been published in the Manual on the Implementation of ICAO Language Proficiency Requirements (Doc 9835)

FSS – Oct. 05

Other AspectsOther Aspects

Some good reasons to start evaluating language proficiency using the ICAO rating scale before 5 March 2008:

a) for recruitment purposes

b) for benchmarking purposes

c) to be prepared for the 5 March 2008 deadline ICAO will review the progress in the implementation of the Language

proficiency Standard in 2006

FSS – Oct. 05

Other AnnexesOther Annexes

Annex 6: (Parts I and III) operators shall ensure that flight crew speak and understand the language used for radiotelephony communications

Annex 11: Air traffic service providers shall ensure that air traffic controllers speak and understand the language used for radiotelephony communications

English language shall be used for communications between air traffic control units except when another language is mutually agreed

PANS-ATM: ATS and other ground personnel will be expected to use plain language to the level specified in the ICAO language proficiency requirements contained in Annex 1

FSS – Oct. 05

Review by the CommissionReview by the Commission

The Air Navigation Commission will undertake a review of the implementation of the language proficiency provision in 2006: Assessment of the level of implementation (actual and planned) Review of the difficulties faced during the implementation Corrective measures if necessary and assistance No significant changes are to be expected in view of the safety

concern

FSS – Oct. 05

AuditAudit

The ICAO Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme The comprehensive audit programme starting in 2005 will cover all

the language proficiency Standards of Annexes 1, 6, 10 and 11 Compliance Checklists: the State will have to identify the level of

implementation of each provision contained in ICAO Annexes before the Audit. The ICAO auditor will validate the information submitted prior to the on-site audit

During the actual audit, the auditor will assess the steps States have taken to address the new language requirements using a standard protocol

FSS – Oct. 05

ICAO – EUROCONTROLEUROPEAN SEMINAR ON LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY

FOR AERONAUTICALCOMMUNICATIONS

End