Safety : Lost in Translation

Sheer babble to stony Silence—The tower or aerial radio-telecommunications centre in the aviation industry has heard and deciphered it all. Sometimes amusing and at other times gut wrenching, with fatal consequences, communication in aviation, whether verbal or non verbal, has always been a critical component of flight safety. According to a study, between 1976 and 2000, more than 1,100 passengers and crew lost their lives in aviation accidents attributed to faulty use of English and aviation phraseology. Analysis of 28,000 safety reports revealed that over 70 per cent of the problems were attributable to flawed message exchange.

Communication errors continue to figure in the largest category of reported problems. Aviators and Air Traffic Controllers (ATCOs) can recall experiences ad infinitum. The English language is highly amenable to word play. Double entendre expressions, whether intended to be amusing or simply unintended, can sometimes snowball into a serious operational hazard. The following transcript of communications between an Air Traffic Controller and an aircraft on final approach highlights the point. With one aircraft lined up on the runway for take-off, the tower directed another approaching aircraft to Go around. The captain of the approaching aircraft responded by directing his co-pilot to request permission to Hold by which he meant, in the vernacular, to request permission to continue the approach. In reply, the controller directed the crew to Just go ahead and hold. It was a confusing exchange that terminated in a fatal collision on the runway when the approaching aircraft proceeded with the landing.

The 1977 Tenerife disaster, downing of the Korean airliner near Sakhalin and the mid-air collision between Saudi Arabian Airlines’ Boeing 747 and Kazak Airlines’ Ilyushin IL-76 near Delhi are clear instances of how poor English communication skills can lead to disasters. UK’s Mandatory Occurrence Reporting Systems cites 134 language related problems in a period spanning less than six years. Notwithstanding an impressive accident safety rate, this is one industry that is always aware of the need for further improvements. Inability to communicate with clarity in plain English and the use of non-standard aviation phraseology are now major safety concerns in international aviation.

Development of ICAO Guidelines
Concern over the role of language in airline accidents led to the 1998 ICAO Assembly Resolution A32-16 in which the ICAO Council was urged to direct the Air Navigation Commission to consider this matter as high priority and complete the task of strengthening the existing provisions. Previously, two recommended practices in Annex 10 and a standard in Annex 1 comprised the provisions relating to the use of language.

Annex 10 recommended that English be made available whenever the crew was unable to communicate in the language used by the station on the ground, and there was an attachment to this Annex dealing with specific language issues. Annex 1 stipulated that ATCOs demonstrate knowledge of the language or languages nationally designated for use in air-ground communications. The focus was on clear, concise and unambiguous radiotelephony without strong regional accent or impediment.

Effective March 2008, the ICAO has a broad set of minimal English Language Standards and Recommended Practices to be followed worldwide. The need for development of language proficiency led the ICAO to convene a Proficiency Requirements in Common English Study Group in 2000. This group comprised operational pilots, air traffic controllers, representatives of regulatory bodies and linguistic experts with background of aviation or aviation English. This group’s mandate was to assist the Air Navigation Commission on language competency issues, including:
  • A comprehensive review of existing provisions concerning all aspects of air-ground and ground-ground voice communication in international civil aviation primarily to identify deficiencies and shortcomings.
  • Development of ICAO provisions concerning standardised English language testing requirements and procedures.
  • Development of minimal skill level requirements in common usage of the English language.

The group submitted its recommendations in late 2001. In March 2003, the ICAO adopted Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) for aviation English. SARPs can be divided into three categories:
  • Definition of the languages that can be used for radiotelephony communications.
  • Establishment of proficiency skill level requirements as a licensing prerequisite.
  • Laying down the responsibility of service providers and operators to promote and maintain proficiency Level 4 and above amongst their crew.

The SARPs in Annex 10 lay the foundation for the language proficiency requirements stipulating that English be made available for international radiotelephony communications. This Annex specifically stipulates the use of ICAO phraseology, clarifies that both phraseology and plain language proficiency are required and strengthens the provisions that English be made available.

A set of Holistic Descriptors for meeting Language Proficiency Requirements and Rating Scales for such proficiency assessments are stated in Annex 1 and these apply equally to native and nonnative speakers of English.

Holistic Descriptors: In simple terms, a proficient speaker is required to communicate effectively in voice-only and in face-to-face situations on common, concrete and work-related topics with accuracy and unaccented clarity in a dialect which is intelligible to the aeronautical community. Speakers are also expected to use appropriate communicative strategies to exchange messages as well as recognise and resolve misunderstandings by checking, confirming or clarifying information in a general or work-related context. Apart from the above, speakers should successfully be able to manoeuvre the linguistic challenges presented by a complication or unexpected turn of events that occurs within the context of routine work or communicative task with which they are otherwise familiar with.