Perhaps the greatest threat to aviation - after gravity - is language. There's not much we can do about gravity, but there is something we can do about language to improve aviation safety. The short-term solution is rather simple: we must all agree on a common aviation language, then, we must enforce its use.
Right now, English is favored but not mandated. There's no law preventing a controller from speaking French in Montreal or Finnish in Helsinki. It's perfectly legal, although not necessarily wise, for a pilot to speak Spanish in Miami or English in Havana. It's a polyglot world we live in and aviation is no exception. Globalization is, after all, both the parent and child of aviation. If we fly, we shrink the world and make borders less relevant. Politically, we may oppose globalization; practically, we in aviation have no choice but to embrace it
So, which language shall we use? The obvious first answer is English. It is currently "hot" as the world's second language; although Chinese and Arabic - neither attractive aviation choices for a number of reasons - are starting to make inroads. English has problems, though, which make it a
less-than-perfect choice. Esperanto, Latin or a relatively simple Romance language like Spanish might make nice choices, or perhaps we could come up with an entirely new "aviation-exclusive" tongue. The fact is, however, that to change to another language now would require training almost the entire aviation community in the new language, thus insuring an even lower level of proficiency than is presently the case with English. So for now, I suggest we agree with
ICAO and accept English as the lingua franca of the skies.
This leaves us with the issue of enforcement. There are no legal penalties for poor phraseology. There is no world body capable of issuing corrective orders to pilots or controllers who use poor English aviation phraseology . . . or use no English at all.
There should be, and it ought to be ICAO.
In the meantime, each nation ought to pass legislation and their aviation authorities (like the
FAA and JAA) ought to pass rules and joint aviation requirements mandating that proper English phraseology be used by all pilots and controllers who participate in their airspace. They should identify and correct communication problems in the same way they do pilot deviations and controller errors. Pilots and controllers who fail to meet standards should be banned from use of the airspace. This is a serious problem and it demands rigorous solutions.
The long-term solution is automation. Pilot/controller Data Link programs will be designed that rely on symbols and simple, easily translatable phraseologies. Pilots and controllers will be able to display clearances in the language of their choice and errors will eventually be eliminated. Once again, as with so many endeavors, the best way to serve humanity is to take humans out of the loop.
(play for real money backgammon)
Bravenet Blog 
Blog Community
Get a Free Blog
Manage your Blog
bravenet.com