Voice is not good enough

[facthunter]

I'm glad Mr Atrick pointed that out. HE currently lives in the epicentre of it . Us descendants of FELONS, instinctively distrust Toffs and Aristocrats because they are inbred. by choice..Nev

[onetrack]

Oh-ho! So it's not jist those wee Asian chappies that hae a wee bit o' trouble wi' the Inglish language!

 

[MEDIA=dailymotion]x74ud38[/MEDIA]

[Nobody]

@OME - I respect your throughts on this as you worked as a true public servant and probably understand the inner working of the machinery of government than most on these fora (I don't know anyone else who worked in the PS on here, except me.. but not enough to have real experience of the place).

 

But, where we have what is claimed to be a hostile regulator that regulates a very small segment of the population, it may be a case of be careful what you ask for. While the public servant arm of CASA may simply seek retribution, can you imagine what could happen when the pollies get involved? They will smell an opportunity - to win votes.. Sounds good, except that they are playing to an aviation (especially GA and recreational aviation) illiterate population. They will feed the main media (mainstream, social, etc) to push a barrow they may have.. .can you imagine it? Foeign pilots a danger to society - close city and large conrubation airports and send them to some dust bowl where they only people the can hurt are themselves...

 

Too far fetched? Look at ASIC.

 

Despite the howls of protestation from the aviation media and the representation made by various representative bodies, these only preach to the converted. Mr & Mrs Smith don't read them nor care.. they take wahtever media distribution to sppon feed them so they don't have to think. Both the incumbent minister and opposition will be looking for votes... do they really care about a tiny part of the population when they can sensationalise things and get the gullible population to fall for it.. .make it look like they have saved their lives yet again from some foreign and internal threat, etc etc. They wil lremind the population at election time to get the votes.

 

Most government bureaucrats want to live a peaceful life free of blame. If there is the chance that they will get the blame for doing something then don't do it. If there is the chance they will get the blame for not doing something then they do it.

 

The bureaucrats like it if no one is using the formal channels to report problems. If there is ever an accident then they can say that there was no warning of the problem. The verbal discussions at CASA meetings are not recorded and so can be dismissed as hearsay. But if there was warning of a problem and an incident occurs they can get the blame....

[Keith Page]

Minister is Michael McCormack, good luck with that.

Yep.. "Good Luck" may you have a win. Most likely not, just a waste of time and energy.

You will get sent off to CASA there is the end of the story.

[M61A1]

Chinese students are usually OK, except that like most students they sometimes make errors or are unsure of their calls.

Yes, most of them are ok, but there a few around here that are completely unintelligible. The transmission is crystal clear but appears to be almost gibberish. Some of them make mistakes and then correct themselves as most us do occasionally. It's ones where you can barely comprehend a single word of the transmission that worry me.

[old man emu]

. It's ones where you can barely comprehend a single word of the transmission that worry me.

 

With minimal training, a person with an aviation ELP level 6 assessment can relatively easily assess another person as being expert or not. However, assessing a person as being at level 5 or below is much more difficult and requires expertise in linguistics. Basically, any native speaker of English who has a basic knowledge of aviation terms will have no difficulty in being assessed at Level 6. Refer to the video in Post #69 above to see what is tested in an ELP assessment.

 

From an approved assessor's website: You will need an English assessment for CASA pilot licences, drone pilot licences or aviation radio operator licences. If you are a recent arrival to Australia or not a ‘native’ English speaker you must have the English assessment by an aviation English specialist.

 

So who is doing the ELP tests? We are all aware of certain questionable organisations operating in the overseas pilot training business. Is it a common practice in this business to fudge required exams in order to push students through?

[facthunter]

Ask yourself. the question. Where a "I've paid my money, now where's my ticket? mentality" applies and diplomatic pressure happens what else would you expect?. In most pilot courses of any seriousness some failures occur and the possibility of not being suitable must exist depending on how appropriate the selection/aptitude assessment is done and I suggest there's practically none acting here. .Nev

[APenNameAndThatA]

I'm waiting to get shouted down, but here goes. What the Casa brochure Be Seen Be Heard Be Safe says as an example call is this.

 

"Parkes traffic, C172, ZTQ one-zero miles

north inbound on descent through 4,200,

estimating circuit at three six, Parkes."

 

The first three bits are simple: Where you are calling, "traffic", what you are and who you are.

 

The next bits are complicated.

 

1. Distance away.

2. Bearing (from their perspective).

 

3. What you are doing overall: "inbound" or "overflying".

 

4. What you are doing for altitude, if anything: climbing, descending.

5. Current altitude.

 

6. "Estimating"

7. What you are going to do, again: "circuit" or "overhead"

8. "At"

9. Time.

 

Then, the place is simple.

 

If you were really supposed to say who you were talking to, who you were, where you were, what you were doing, time and place again, you would say.

 

Parks traffic, C172, ZTQ, 10 miles north 4500 feet, descending, inbound for circuit (or not "circuit" because if you are inbound, a full stop is assumed) estimating at 36, Parks. Which I think would be better. But improving on the rules is the last thing that I would want do do.

 

What is going on? Is there some reason it is like this? I don't want to improve on the rules. Saying what people expect you to say, when they expect you to say it, is much more important than improving on the standard procedures in one's one idiosyncratic way.

[old man emu]

Saying what people expect you to say, when they expect you to say it, is much more important

 

That's true of any conversation where accent and syntax cause problems. Context is also important. In trade, it is possible to converse where accent distorts the exchange because both parties are concentrating on the same subject.

 

The same goes for situations where there are two words for the same thing. Spanner is the standard term used in British English, while wrench is typically used in American English. A double-end spanner is referred to as an open-end wrench by the Americans. Or ask a young person to select a 1/4" diameter bolt. Confusion, but tell them its about 6 millimetres and they'll go straight to it.

[Flightrite]

The rules are B& W in the Regs, that's not the issue, just that a lot of pilots are lazy and unprofessional at the Pvt Level, RPT drivers and ultralight drivers alike! I try to avoid CTAF's on the w/e's on nice days, the risks go thru the roof! The accent issue is only part of it. I put some of the blame on instructors and checkers, (BFR's) they let so much poor skills go thru to the keeper! I've said this numerous times, it's way too easy to get a pilots license and keep it, it shows thee poor R/T and almost non existent airmanship out there daily!

[M61A1]

I'm waiting to get shouted down, but here goes. What the Casa brochure Be Seen Be Heard Be Safe says as an example call is this.

 

"Parkes traffic, C172, ZTQ one-zero miles

north inbound on descent through 4,200,

estimating circuit at three six, Parkes."

 

The first three bits are simple: Where you are calling, "traffic", what you are and who you are.

 

The next bits are complicated.

 

1. Distance away.

2. Bearing (from their perspective).

 

3. What you are doing overall: "inbound" or "overflying".

 

4. What you are doing for altitude, if anything: climbing, descending.

5. Current altitude.

 

6. "Estimating"

7. What you are going to do, again: "circuit" or "overhead"

8. "At"

9. Time.

 

Then, the place is simple.

 

If you were really supposed to say who you were talking to, who you were, where you were, what you were doing, time and place again, you would say.

 

Parks traffic, C172, ZTQ, 10 miles north 4500 feet, descending, inbound for circuit (or not "circuit" because if you are inbound, a full stop is assumed) estimating at 36, Parks. Which I think would be better. But improving on the rules is the last thing that I would want do do.

 

What is going on? Is there some reason it is like this? I don't want to improve on the rules. Saying what people expect you to say, when they expect you to say it, is much more important than improving on the standard procedures in one's one idiosyncratic way.

I think you misunderstand the issue here.

The transmissions appear to be correct format and would be just fine if you could actually understand the very heavy accent and mispronounced words.

[APenNameAndThatA]

I think you misunderstand the issue here.

The transmissions appear to be correct format and would be just fine if you could actually understand the very heavy accent and mispronounced words.

I'm pretty sure that I twigged that the accents were the main issue.

[PaulMilo2]

I fly Mangarore which has a high number of engrish speaking students and you do become accustomed to it. That said, I often have a lot of trouble deciphering the anglo students as well and must admit to stuffing up the odd call myself when I have been focussed on one thing or another.

 

If i think I need to know what was said and could not understand the call (aussie or asian), I have no issue asking them to say again, sometimes asking that they say again s l o w l y. If there is an instructor on board, they will often chime in and always seem to correct mistakes as they occur.

 

I'm not sure that this is really the huge problem it is sometimes made out to be - esp if you are maintaining good situational awareness as you can often work out what call you are expecting and join the dots to a degree, and let's face it, we used to fly without radios and were not continually bumping into each other.

[antonts]

So who is doing the ELP tests? We are all aware of certain questionable organisations operating in the overseas pilot training business. Is it a common practice in this business to fudge required exams in order to push students through?

 

I got my 6 in Camden (Alto Cap) - they have ELP assessor, and it is very basic assessment, not a full scale exam. At least for citizens, I am not sure how they cope with international students.

[KRviator]

I had to go to a TAFE center to get mine, and like yours, it was extraordinarily basic. I can easily see how Engrish speaking students can bluff their way through in that context, while still being completely unintelligible in an operational environment where they have to talk and fly.

[turboplanner]

What is going on? Is there some reason it is like this? I don't want to improve on the rules. Saying what people expect you to say, when they expect you to say it, is much more important than improving on the standard procedures in one's one idiosyncratic way.

 

It just happens that I tracked down standard phraseology this morning, and where to find it from a starting point of Airservices to ICAO - here's the link, Post#7 for the links to the phraseology.

 

https://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/learning-key-words-in-class-d.72583/

[M61A1]

I had to go to a TAFE center to get mine, and like yours, it was extraordinarily basic. I can easily see how Engrish speaking students can bluff their way through in that context, while still being completely unintelligible in an operational environment where they have to talk and fly.

It just happens that I tracked down standard phraseology this morning, and where to find it from a starting point of Airservices to ICAO - here's the link, Post#7 for the links to the phraseology.

 

https://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/learning-key-words-in-class-d.72583/

As mentioned previously....They appear to use standard phraseology and most of them are just fine, BUT....there appears to be some that slip through the cracks somehow. Perhaps they are being assessed rather leniently, I don't know why. I'll say it again.....It's not what they are saying or when or the number of mistakes, it's the fact that what they are saying is not recognisable as English, and it's nothing to do with the radio. What they transmit is perfectly clear, just not comprehensible.

To get an idea of what they sound like say a standard transmission without letting your lips touch together at any time.

[turboplanner]

As mentioned previously....They appear to use standard phraseology and most of them are just fine, BUT....there appears to be some that slip through the cracks somehow. Perhaps they are being assessed rather leniently, I don't know why. I'll say it again.....It's not what they are saying or when or the number of mistakes, it's the fact that what they are saying is not recognisable as English, and it's nothing to do with the radio. What they transmit is perfectly clear, just not comprehensible.

To get an idea of what they sound like say a standard transmission without letting your lips touch together at any time.

Yes I got off track. Given that most of these people are being trained as airline pilots and will be operating daily in Asia and all round the world, there are grounds for a training module on English pronunciation and enunciation of the standard phraseology.

[kgwilson]

Everything is in the VFRG Sections 1.35 to 1.41. Standard phrases and pronunciation etc is also published on the CASA website HERE.

[facthunter]

You would be better to rely on the local Published advice as there have always been little differences of practice in say the USA and here.. The standard from where I see it has gone down in the last 30 odd years and that's NOT what's wanted for the safest ops. It's not sissy to do it by the book. Nev

[marshallarts]

My last flight at the controls was in 1994 - when (and why) did we change from callsign first to callsign last when responding to ATC? I've always thought callsign first makes much more sense. But what would I know?

[Flightrite]

It reduces confusion by announcing yr call sign last. EG.

ATC: turn left HDG 345' .......you say left HDG 345, Sunstate 340.

If said the other way around in a very busy dynamic fluid environment confusion may be experienced. You get the directive out quickly whilst yr short term memory is active.

[facthunter]

A lot "key" the PTT a bit late at the start and cut it off and if one thinks "was THAT for ME and WHO was it?" the repeat saves you. I think it's an OK idea. Geez F R if your memories like that, you better get it on paper first and fast. Actually that's not as silly as it sounds. Your "New"assigned level had to be put IN before you read it back Muck it up and THEY don't think it's amusing. (That's understandable. You might clobber someone.) Nev

[Old Koreelah]

...Geez F R if your memories like that, you better get it on paper first and fast...

The Scratchpad in OzRunways is handy for that.

[turboplanner]

The Scratchpad in OzRunways is handy for that.

In Metropolitan airspace there's often not enough time for that. A real RPT pilot doing the workload daily can train himself, just like a singer learns when to take a breath.