Disaster narrowly avoided at Paris

[bits44]

Well all this discussion just reinforces what the ICAO wants to accomplish, and that is of course commonality and a clear understanding of terminology used in ATC.

Any Pilot should be able to communicate with any Controller at any Airport and have his or her conversation clearly understood by everyone concerned.

If that means an intense course of education in the English language than so should it be. We can ill afford not to ensure the ultimate level of safety attainable.

The World is shrinking, the Far East is rapidly joining the ranks of International aviation, even China has an intense training course for Aviation employees from ATC to ground handlers in use and understanding of English in Aviation. The safety of everyone in the Industry as well as millions of travellers deserve no less.

KT

[MX727]

Any Pilot should be able to communicate with any Controller at any Airport and have his or her conversation clearly understood by everyone concerned.

If that means an intense course of education in the English language than so should it be. We can ill afford not to ensure the ultimate level of safety attainable.

The World is shrinking, the Far East is rapidly joining the ranks of International aviation, even China has an intense training course for Aviation employees from ATC to ground handlers in use and understanding of English in Aviation. The safety of everyone in the Industry as well as millions of travellers deserve no less.

That's talking! :teach: .....could not have said it better.

Regards,
JAHC

[Knight255]

The problem isn't just pilots speaking english but also using improper terminology. I do not recall any flight of mine where I have heard both controllers and/or pilots using proper radio terminology. (Yes, we Americans are guilty of using slang.) So if, say a French airliner, comes to the U.S. hearing slang, even though it's still english, that doesn't mean they'll understand it!!!! "American 2333 checking in at one-eighty" :shakehead: I hear that crap all the time!! If we are to resolve this problem on both sides of the pond, we need to agree on ONE language for ALL airlines and limit the use of slang to smaller airports where typically only local flights depart/arrive.

[foxtrot_lima_yankee]

Earthman, what is your source of information?You might be right, or you might not.
I confirm, you are right about the first part of the happening you developed, but not that sure about the second part where you state that the back of the plane was spared from the explosion.
My sources are the books "vliegtuigrampen" and "de zwarte doos".
By the way, anyone remembering the crash of the EL-AL B747-F by Amsterdam in Ijsselmeer?
How was the case closed?

[earthman]

Earthman, what is your source of information?You might be right, or you might not.

You're talking to the wrong person, I never said anything about any crash in this thread (yet).

By the way, anyone remembering the crash of the EL-AL B747-F by Amsterdam in Ijsselmeer?
How was the case closed?

It didn't crash into the IJsselmeer, it crashed into highrise appartment blocks. Cause was bad maintenance or something like that. One of the pins keeping an engine in place broke, the engine fell off and hit another engine, which was then also torn off. The crew did not know the extent of the damage to the wing, and on approach after extending the flaps the plane became uncontrollable. The flaps only extended on the left wing, the plane swung to the right and crashed with the right wing into the buildings (it was flying vertical, right wing pointing to the ground).

[jal]

Quote : British crews blamed "arrogant" controllers for speaking French when the aviation language is English.

Ok the official language is English, but it's not because they spoke french that they are arrogant. Maybe they just spoke to a pilot who preffered french and continued in French to a BA. It's very common when you speak e.g. French to a peson you continu speaking
French to someone who speaks Dutch even when you normally speaks Dutch.

Wasn't there a crash in tenerife?? with a KLM plane that was still on the runway and another one took off. Due to the fog they were not awary off that. And it was something with that they wanted to talk three at te same time and because of that nobody heard anything.

O well you will all know this better than I, I only saw it on NGC

I have already mentioned this problem earlier.

As shown in a BBC documentary a few years ago a british plane(not BA) was involved in a deadly accident at CDG because of that stupid use of french as nowadays english is clearly THE international language.

Especially at international airports wherever around the world it is more than
logical to use english in order to avoid any accident due the futile use of a local language.

Passengers safety FIRST.

[Kapitein]

the tower-controllers who knew this decided to let them taxi over the whole length of the runway, then let them take a 180 degrees turn in order to let them take-off from the whole length of the same runway but in the opposite direction.

I want to add something the incident in Tenerife:

Their was no other option, almost every taxiway was blocked by diverted aircrafts from Las Palmas, wich was closed due to a bombexplosion. They had to taxi on to the runway and make a 180 at the end.

The KLM pilot already refuelled the airplane in Tenerife only to win time in Las Palmas, wich was a big mistake. Due to the extra weight of the fuel the plane couldn't climb over the Clipper 747. If he hadn't refuelled the plane it was able to do it. The KLM hit the Clipper with their maingear and crashed.

Back on topic now:

Not only in France they make an exception, in Brazil it's the same thing. In GIG and GRU the ATC spoke Portugese to all the Brazilian pilots. These are also international airports with alot of foreign carriers.
In Argentina same thing, Spanish to all the locals.

I once heard: The problem isn't the flying, but the English.

[KLM671]

In Québec they also speak french to planes, another place, same mistake!

Regards
KLM671 :wave:

[foxtrot_lima_yankee]

WELL EARTHMAN, THIS TIME I CAN CONTRADICT YOU AS THE ENGINES WERE TEARED OFF BY A STALL DUE TO AN OVERLOAD, AND THAT THE BAD MAINTENANCE WAS NOT THE MAIN REASON OF IT. THE CAPTAIN ALSO DECIDED TO TAKE-OFF WITH FULL TANKS BECAUSE OF HIGH GAS PRICES IN ISRAEL. ATC COMMUNICATIONS PROUVE THIS FACT AS THERE IS A REGISTRATION OF 2 CONTROLLERS TELLING EACHOTHER THE PLANE WASN T CLIMBING AN INCH AFTER TAKE-OFF. THE CREW DID KNOW THE IMPORTANCE OF THE TROUBLES AS IT WOULD HAVE TAKEN THE FIRST OFFICER A SECOND TO LOOK OVER HIS SHOULDER TO SEE BOTH ENGINES WERE MISSING AND THAT THE WING WAS SEVERELY DAMAGED. BUT I CONFIRM THAT THE PLANE CRASHED IN AN APPARTMENT BLOCK BY THE IJSSELMEER. THE PLANE WAS CARRYIING TOXIC MATERIALS WHICH WERE HIDED FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES, THE MATERIALS BEING REMOVED DURING THE NIGHT FOLLOWING THE CRASH IN ORDER TO MAKE THESE DISAPPEAR. THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE ACCIDENT WAS CLEARLY MANIPULATED, THE BLACK BOX WAS TOLD NOT TO BE FOUND ANYWHERE, ATC RADAR DATA WERE MODIFIED, POLICE-BAND REGISTRATIONS WERE DELETED ALTHOUGH THESE WERE OF VITAL IMPORTANCE TO THE INVESTIGATION, BECAUSE OF THE BEEP-TONES, SEVERAL POLICEMEN AND FIREMEN WERE FILED ORDERS NOT TO REVEAL ANYTHING ABOUT THE CRASH... AND SO ON... I ONLY WONDERED HOW THE CASE WAS CLOSED AFTER SO MUCH PRESS CRITICS ATTACKED THE INVESTIGATING DUTCH AVIATION AGENCY.

[Moderator Brubiac:
Fox_Lima_yankee, last warning: please don't use capital letters when writing a post. We are not deaf !!! The next time the post will be deleted, usefull info or not. Thanks in advance, Brubiac]

[bits44]

An announcment from the FAA, and the timeline required by ICAO.


http://www.faa.gov/news/news_story.cfm?contentKey=3905