No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Miscommunications in Air Traffic Control
... ATCOs and pilots can make mistakes in communication because of the following issues: absent-mindedness and slips, ambiguity, callsign confusion, homonyms and homophony, noise, hearing issues, number problems, open microphones, readback error, similarity of Standard Instrument Departures (SIDs), Standard Terminal Arrivals (STARs) and waypoints, speed of delivery and pauses, and vigilance [4]. The most frequent type of mistake was incomplete call sign (61.3%), followed by incomplete clearance or information (12.5%) and syntax errors (11.4%) [5]. ...
... Other potential factors that can influence miscommunication include phonemes, intelligibility, speech and memory, and qualitative information in speech [4]. Using regression models, researchers found that the most important factors affecting communications include length and context/complexity of the message, aircraft entrance into a sector, transfer of communication, and radio frequency congestion [5]. ...
... For ATCOs, three of the most significant reasons for miscommunication are: forgetting the previously issued clearance, incomplete clearance or information, and the unconformity of issuing the clearance/instruction [4]. For pilots, however, the two most significant reasons for communication errors are inappropriate operation and violating the rules [6]. ...
View Video Presentation: https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2022-3832.vid This study analyzes transcribed controller-pilot communication messages using a Natural Language Processing (NLP) method by exploring similarities and differences between miscommunication and regular communication messages. Transcribed messages are derived from 42 thirty-minute voice communication recordings from 33 sectors across five Air Route Traffic Control Centers. NLP functions such as sentiment analysis, topic recognition, and part-of-speech tagging are used to analyze a large database of communication messages. The initial findings indicate no significant difference in the sentiment scores between the two groups of messages. Miscommunication and regular communication messages are overwhelmingly neutral and trend positive rather than negative. In addition, the main topic modelling produced similar results: a set of main topics was the same for miscommunication and regular communication messages. These findings are in line with the nature of the ATC language, which is well-structured, non-personal, and limited to well-defined phraseology that uses strict communication protocols. Analysis of audio recordings of miscommunications indicates that the volume and pitch of controller’s speech have very little variation, suggesting that controllers’ emotions are stable. This emotional stability is a very important trait in the human-centered world of air traffic control, since controllers must be in full control of their emotions, especially during critical situations.
... For instance, it is possible that the phonological attributes of Aviation English itself may be the source of some confusion. More specifically, aviation radiotelephony has been described as difficult to understand because it is rapidly produced and lacks prosodic cues (i.e., intonational and rhythmic changes) that English speakers are accustomed to using to divide a speech stream into meaningful units (McMillan, 1998;Prinzo, Hendrix, & Hendrix, 2011). These phonological characteristics may lead to misunderstandings, particularly for novice Aviation English users. ...
... Prosody (intonation and rhythm) influences language intelligibility in general (Cutler & Carter, 1987;Cutler, Mehler, Norris, & Segui, 1992;Mattys, Jusczyk, Luce, & Morgan, 1999;Tajima, Port & Dalby, 1997) and has been described as being crucial for Aviation English intelligibility, in particular (McMillan, 1998;Prinzo, Hendrix, & Hendrix, 2011). Several studies point out the relationship between Aviation English miscommunication and prosody, including a study of international pilot/ATCO communications by Prinzo, Hendrix, & Hendrix (2008) which found that pronunciation (including rhythm and intonation) contributed to problems in communication. ...
... In our examination of pitch range as a measure of intonation, Aviation English pitch range was smaller than that of Standard English, supporting impressionistic claims from previous studies that Aviation English lacks intonation (McMillan, 1998;Philps, 1991;Prinzo et al., 2011). The ICAO regulations directly indicate the goal of reduced intonation by suggesting that, in order to facilitate cross-cultural Aviation English communication, native English speaker pilots should "focus on keeping their intonation neutral (emphasis mine) and calm" (ICAO, 2010, page 5-5). ...
Aviation English is a codified register of English used by international pilots and controllers, derived from postwar American radiotelephony. Although regulations require proficiency in Aviation English, little has been done to describe it. The current study seeks to add to the literature by describing the prosodic profile, or rhythm and intonation, of American Aviation English as compared to Standard American English. Specifically, we examine corpora of air traffic controller speech and professional radio broadcasters' speech. This study demonstrates that Aviation English has a more restricted pitch range, is faster, and exhibits less variable vowel durations and more variable consonant durations than Standard English. These prosodic differences from Standard English may create difficulties for Aviation English users, and indicate inaccuracy in the assumption that attaining proficiency in conversational English is sufficient for proficiency in Aviation English.
... For instance, it is possible that the phonological attributes of Aviation English itself may be the source of some confusion. More specifically, aviation radiotelephony has been described as difficult to understand because it is rapidly produced and lacks prosodic cues (i.e., intonational and rhythmic changes) that English speakers are accustomed to using to divide a speech stream into meaningful units (McMillan, 1998;Prinzo, Hendrix, & Hendrix, 2011). These phonological characteristics may lead to misunderstandings, particularly for novice Aviation English users. ...
... Prosody (intonation and rhythm) influences language intelligibility in general (Cutler & Carter, 1987;Cutler, Mehler, Norris, & Segui, 1992;Mattys, Jusczyk, Luce, & Morgan, 1999;Tajima, Port & Dalby, 1997) and has been described as being crucial for Aviation English intelligibility, in particular (McMillan, 1998;Prinzo, Hendrix, & Hendrix, 2011). Several studies point out the relationship between Aviation English miscommunication and prosody, including a study of international pilot/ATCO communications by Prinzo, Hendrix, & Hendrix (2008) which found that pronunciation (including rhythm and intonation) contributed to problems in communication. ...
... In our examination of pitch range as a measure of intonation, Aviation English pitch range was smaller than that of Standard English, supporting impressionistic claims from previous studies that Aviation English lacks intonation (McMillan, 1998;Philps, 1991;Prinzo et al., 2011). The ICAO regulations directly indicate the goal of reduced intonation by suggesting that, in order to facilitate cross-cultural Aviation English communication, native English speaker pilots should "focus on keeping their intonation neutral (emphasis mine) and calm" (ICAO, 2010, page 5-5). ...
Aviation English is a codified register of English used by international pilots and controllers, derived from postwar American radiotelephony. Although regulations require proficiency in Aviation English, little has been done to describe it. The current study seeks to add to the literature by describing the prosodic profile, or rhythm and intonation, of American Aviation English as compared to Standard American English. Specifically, we examine corpora of air traffic controller speech and professional radio broadcasters’ speech. This study demonstrates that Aviation English has a more restricted pitch range, is faster, and exhibits less variable vowel durations and more variable consonant durations than Standard English. These prosodic differences from Standard English may create difficulties for Aviation English users, and indicate inaccuracy in the assumption that attaining proficiency in conversational English is sufficient for proficiency in Aviation English.
Keywords: Aviation English, prosody, speech rhythm, speech rate, radiotelephony
... For instance, it is possible that the phonological attributes of Aviation English itself may be the source of some confusion. More specifically, aviation radiotelephony has been described as difficult to understand because it is rapidly produced and lacks prosodic cues (i.e., intonational and rhythmic changes) that English speakers are accustomed to using to divide a speech stream into meaningful units (McMillan, 1998;Prinzo, Hendrix, & Hendrix, 2011). These phonological characteristics may lead to misunderstandings, particularly for novice Aviation English users. ...
... Prosody (intonation and rhythm) influences language intelligibility in general (Cutler & Carter, 1987;Cutler, Mehler, Norris, & Segui, 1992;Mattys, Jusczyk, Luce, & Morgan, 1999;Tajima, Port & Dalby, 1997) and has been described as being crucial for Aviation English intelligibility, in particular (McMillan, 1998;Prinzo, Hendrix, & Hendrix, 2011). Several studies point out the relationship between Aviation English miscommunication and prosody, including a study of international pilot/ATCO communications by Prinzo, Hendrix, & Hendrix (2008) which found that pronunciation (including rhythm and intonation) contributed to problems in communication. ...
... In our examination of pitch range as a measure of intonation, Aviation English pitch range was smaller than that of Standard English, supporting impressionistic claims from previous studies that Aviation English lacks intonation (McMillan, 1998;Philps, 1991;Prinzo et al., 2011). The ICAO regulations directly indicate the goal of reduced intonation by suggesting that, in order to facilitate cross-cultural Aviation English communication, native English speaker pilots should "focus on keeping their intonation neutral (emphasis mine) and calm" (ICAO, 2010, page 5-5). ...
Abstract
Aviation English is a codified register of English used by international pilots and controllers, derived from postwar American radiotelephony. Although regulations require proficiency in Aviation English, little has been done to describe it. The current study seeks to add to the literature by describing the prosodic profile, or rhythm and intonation, of American Aviation English as compared to Standard American English. Specifically, we examine corpora of air traffic controller speech and professional radio broadcasters’ speech. This study demonstrates that Aviation English has a more restricted pitch range, is faster, and exhibits less variable vowel durations and more variable consonant durations than Standard English. These prosodic differences from Standard English may create difficulties for Aviation English users, and indicate inaccuracy in the assumption that attaining proficiency in conversational English is sufficient for proficiency in Aviation English.
... The situation is complicated by the fact that pilots on international flights must interpret various forms of radio communication that vary in different parts of the world [3]. The study, conducted by Bureau of Air Safety Investigation showed that communication problems were identified as one of the influential factors on flight safety, especially in the case of foreign (non-English speaking) crew. ...
... Moreover, the pilots who took part in studies considered insufficient level of foreign language competence the main problem in their activity: 35 (20%) out of 175 respondents pointed to communication problems as a determining factor of flight safety [3]. ...
... Uplinger) of this issue highlight the need to study the special terminology of ATC together with a plain language with which it is used in the context of professional communication. Only in such conditions it is possible to avoid ambiguity or to clarify and solve the problems in unexpected situations [3]. ...
In the globalized world and rapid development of technical progress aviation industry has been gaining more importance for humanity and requires a deeper understanding of the English language, its basic characteristics and mechanisms of functioning. Purpose: The aim of the article is to study the influence of the proficiency of English on flight safety, to consider the main communication problems of non-English speaking aviation personnel, highlight possible directions for training English-speaking personnel. In the article the author tries to show the disadvantage at which non-English speaking airline staff work in case of emergency. The article highlights the issue about high level aviation English proficiency necessary to avoid communication problem. Methods: F or the research scientific general methods have been used which are main ways of studying scientific sources, and comparative method for synchronic comparison of events in the different regions. Results: The author concludes that at the same time it is necessary for aviation personnel to master plain language for understanding context of communication, to minimize uncertainty and improve understanding between the controller and pilot. Discussion: It stresses the idea that the language proficiency level that exceeds the minimum standards according to ICAO, contributes significantly to the reduction of communication problems and in such a way ensures safety.
... Although the teaching of standard conversational English does include using pauses in appropriate places, as well as intonation to emphasise important or relevant information, these non-verbal features are not used by ATC in the way they are in normal conversation. In fact, the lack of intonation, rhythm and pauses which are typical of rapid radio communication in the aviation environment are known to be particularly problematic since no visual cues are present (McMillan, 1998;Prinzo, 2008). Thus, we want to suggest that the issue is in fact just as much a comprehension problem which involves both ATC and pilots as a language production problem for EL2 speakers. ...
... Earlier studies of communication in the aviation environment have shown that prosody (intonation, stress and rhythm) plays an important role in radio communication. McMillan (1998) found that speed of delivery and (lack of) pauses were a significant cause of readback errors and that 'The rapid speed at which controllers deliver instructions is probably the most common miscommunication complaint received from pilots' (Mc-Millan, 1998, p.46). Prinzo (2008) also found that readback errors were more common when ATC communications were complex and not broken into segments. ...
... In addition, future research should be more precise about the details/factors surrounding communication problems, for instance, distinguishing between 'Approach to land' and 'Approaching an airfield or a terminal area', i.e. during a navigation flight. Finally, while pauses, intonation, stress and rhythm have been identified as factors contributing to communication difficulties (McMillan, 1998;Prinzo 2008), future research should not be limited by these findings --in other words, be inclusive not exclusive. ...
This paper reports on the preliminary stages of a project designed to investigate communication problems in General Aviation and assess the utility of language technologies as a means of mitigation. The study presented in this paper is the first of a three-part study, in which we aim to investigate the extent to which the English language proficiency of pilots whose native language is not English (EL2) impacts on their ability to effectively communicate with Air Traffic Control (ATC), and its potential impact on safety outcomes. In a preliminary survey, we distributed a questionnaire to General Aviation pilots at various flight training organisations and collected self-reported instances of miscommunication between themselves and ATC. In addition, we asked pilots to rank, in order of difficulty, five typical radio communication tasks. The results indicated that pilots who are English native speakers and EL2 pilots give a similar ranking of difficulty to the radio communicative tasks, and that both EL2 and native speakers rank understanding other pilots as the most challenging task.
... Although teaching standard conversational English includes using pauses in appropriate places, as well as intonation to emphasize important or relevant information, it is well-documented that these non-lexical features are not used by ATC in the way they are in normal conversation. Indeed, the lack of intonation, rhythm and pauses which are typical of rapid radio communication in the aviation environment are known to be particularly problematic since no visual cues are present (McMillan, 1998;Prinzo, 2008;Nevile, 2008). This is particularly a problem at busy GA training airports where a high number of EL2 pilots are learning to fly at the same time they are learning R/T. ...
... The responses to Question 7 (ATC not understanding Pilot) provided typical examples of EL2 pilots' difficulties, as shown in (23 Answers such as (22a) and (24b) confirm earlier studies (e.g. McMillan, 1998;Prinzo, 2008) about the problems associated with the rapid rate of speech and the amount of information in one transmission from ATC, while (24c) shows the perception of difficulties due to EL2 pilots' language proficiency. In summary, the second study confirmed the results of the first (Estival and Molesworth, 2009), namely that the most challenging type of communication for pilots is not with ATC, but with other pilots, and that pilots, irrespective of native language or qualifications, find communicating with other pilots difficult. ...
... However, we also found that understanding other pilots is reported as the task that poses the greatest challenge to pilots, irrespective of their native language or licence qualification. By contrast, pilots consistently reported that communicating with ATC was the least challenging communication task, which may be explained in part by the intensive training provided to ATC and by the standardized phraseology now regularly employed (Cushing, 1994;Hutchins and Klausen, 1996;McMillan, 1998). Nevertheless, a large number of the examples of miscommunication provided by the pilots surveyed also pointed to the rapid speech and terminology used by ATC as contributing factors. ...
Communicating effectively via the radio in General Aviation (GA) is a challenging task for most pilots. This is even more challenging for non-native speakers of English (EL2) who are required to master not only a second language but ' Aviation English' to communicate with both Air Traffic Control (ATC) and other pilots. In two pilot studies conducted in Eastern Australia, we investigated the ability of GA pilots, both native and non-native speakers of English, to effectively communicate with ATC and with other pilots over the radio, in order to assess the contribution of native language to incidents of miscommunication and the impact it may have on air safety. The results revealed that indeed communication is difficult for EL2 pilots as well as for native pilots. Irrespective of native language, pilots found communicating with one another the most challenging task while communicating with ATC was found to be the least challenging. These results are discussed from an operational perspective.
... Tragically, as a result of this stress-related misinterpretation of two as to, four crew died. Even more troubling is that, according to McMillan (1998), this specific confusion is common in aviation. Given that sobering fact, I leave it to you ? the next time you are in an airplane ? to ponder how comparable intelligible is to beautiful or primitive. ...
... In the first place, some intelligibility breakdowns lack a straightforward phonetic explanation. McMillan (1998), for instance, reports another aviation accident in which an air traffic controller instructed a pilot to " Take taxiway right " (p. 44). ...
... Communication procedures typically involve four steps (McMillan, 1999): ...
To take advantage of projected benefits afforded by Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) In enabled Aircraft Surveillance Applications (ASAs), the use of call sign has been proposed as the method for pilots and controllers to refer to other (third party) aircraft on a common voice frequency. However, using these “third party call signs” (TPCS) to talk about (rather than talking to) other aircraft on the same frequency introduces a potential for confusion for controllers and pilots. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Surveillance and Broadcast Services (SBS) program office identified TPCS as a program risk and initiated an activity to examine the topic. This Human-in-the-loop (HITL) simulation is part of that effort.
The simulation was intended to evaluate TPCS voice communications alternative candidates proposed by subject matter experts participating in the SBS activity and to provide research results that establish a basis for narrowing down the alternatives. It employed pilots, en route controllers, and terminal controllers as participants and evaluated the TPCS candidates within the context of two ASAs during an arrival and approach operation. Three TPCS formats and two placements were evaluated within the context of a traffic advisory and an Interval Management clearance. The study was framed around three central research objectives. These objectives and a summary of the corresponding results are presented below.
1. The first objective was to determine whether deviating from the use of current day call sign format phraseology was necessary for pilots and controller to reference a Third Party Aircraft (TPA). The simulation found no evidence to suggest that deviating from current phraseology is necessary to reduce Third Party Pilot (TPP) confusion. Additionally, controllers generally preferred the use of current phraseology (Telephonic format), though pilots preferred the pronunciation of the individual letters (Letters format) in the airline designator. In some cases, the Letters format helped pilots more accurately identify the TPA on their Cockpit Display of Traffic Information (CDTI) traffic display than the current Telephonic format. As such, and despite reported controller misgivings, there may be advantages for deviating from the current Telephonic call sign format to convey TPCS.
2. The second objective was to determine whether user acceptability and performance trade-offs existed between the chosen TPCS alternatives. Pilots showed a subjective preference for the Letters format, likely because it helped them better identify the TPA on the CDTI traffic display. A third format, termed “Delimiter,” was evaluated and consisted of placing the word “reference” between the airline designator and numeric flight identification. The Delimiter format was consistently rated poorly and associated with the most performance issues for both pilots and controllers. Overall, the Letters format appeared to be superior to the Delimiter format and it is not recommended that Delimiter formats be explored any further.
3. The third objective was to determine the user acceptability and performance trade-offs related to the placement of TPCS within the controller clearance or advisory (i.e. earlier versus later). Simulation results show that TPCS in the later position was more acceptable and had fewer performance issues than in the earlier position. The improved performance could be because the later position allowed for a more natural and logical flow, and provided the least deviation from how pilots and controllers currently convey information in voice communications.
An appropriate phraseology solution needs to minimize the potential for TPPs on the frequency to become confused about transmissions referring to them, as well as allow pilots and controllers to establish a clear awareness of the aircraft being referenced. Based on the results of this simulation, two possible approaches with respect to TPCS format are recommended for the next and final activity in the SBS effort. Assuming that TPP confusion will be rare and solvable as it occurs, one approach is to allow controllers to use a Telephonic format as the normal method of conveyance, with the option to use the Letters format when the controller believes there may be pilot confusion about the airline three letter designator. The pilot would be expected to reply with the format used by the controller. However, if situations arise where the controller uses the Telephonic format and the pilot has confusion about which TPA is being referred to, the pilot could reply with a question asking for clarification of the TPA using the Letters format to resolve any ambiguity.
A second approach, that proactively mitigates the potential for TPP confusion, involves a required controller deviation from the current phraseology for TPCS. Despite less controller acceptability than the Telephonic format, simulation results suggest that the Letters format showed performance advantages for pilots and controllers in some instances. For this approach, follow-on research to further explore the acceptability of mandating the use of the Letters format for TPCS, particularly with controllers, is recommended.
For either approach, TPCS placement should be carefully considered to maintain a natural flow and minimize the deviations from current phraseology for the individual clearance, instruction, or advisory in which it is expected to be used. In addition, a safety analysis may be desirable to fully understand the likelihood and impact of TPP confusion, which will always remain a possibility in voice communications.
... Research on the multiple factors that may impact communication in the occupational context of international aeronautical radiotelephony has been conducted extensively (e.g., CUSHING, 1994;EUROCONTROL, 2004EUROCONTROL, , 2006FLIGHT SAFETY FOUNDATION, 2000;GRAYSON;BILLINGS, 1981;MCMILLAN, 1998;MORRISON;WRIGHT, 1989;MORROW;RODVOLD, 1998;ORASANU;DAVISON;FISCHER, 1997;PRINZO;BRITTON, 1993;etc). Most of these factors were obtained from analyses of incident reports, recordings of pilot-controller interactions, discourse analysis of incidents and accidents transcriptions, or from experimental simulation-generated taxonomies and categorizations. ...
... Ambiguity has been identified as a source of miscommunication in air traffic control [34]. Ambiguity is such a problem even for humans that some have attempted to build controlled natural languages by restricting language use to a wholly unambiguous subset of an existing natural language [16]. ...
Ambiguity is pervasive at multiple levels of linguistic analysis effectively making unam-biguous communication impossible. As a consequence, natural language processing systems without true natural language understanding can be easily "fooled" by ambiguity, but crucially , AI also may use ambiguity to fool its users. Ambiguity impedes communication among humans, and thus also has the potential to be a source of failure in AI systems.
... The main task of the target user is the transfer of controller commands to the pilot and the read-back check [30,31]. Currently, these commands are mostly transmitted via radiotelephony (R/T) using standard phraseologies according to ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization, Montreal, QC, Canada) specifications [32]. ...
TriControl is a controller working position (CWP) prototype developed by German Aerospace Center (DLR) to enable more natural, efficient, and faster command inputs. The prototype integrates three input modalities: speech recognition, eye tracking, and multi-touch sensing. Air traffic controllers may use all three modalities simultaneously to build commands that will be forwarded to the pilot and to the air traffic management (ATM) system. This paper evaluates possible speed improvements of TriControl compared to conventional systems involving voice transmission and manual data entry. 26 air traffic controllers participated in one of two air traffic control simulation sub-studies, one with each input system. Results show potential of a 15% speed gain for multimodal controller command input in contrast to conventional inputs. Thus, the use and combination of modern human machine interface (HMI) technologies at the CWP can increase controller productivity.
... Studies of aviation accidents and incidents reveal that 70% of aviation mishaps are a result of communication problems and nearly three-quarters of these accidents and incidents are a result of human error (Wells and Rodrigues, 2003). Some of the contributing factors are pilot fatigue, controller workload, stress, the use of nonstandard phraseologies, language, group interaction and crew resource management , decision making and information processing, memory and message length, and so forth (Cushing, 1994; McMillan, 1998; Mohd, 2007; Tiewtrakul, 2007). Cushing (1994) elaborates on how language-based problems have contributed to miscommunication between pilots and controllers. ...
Oral communication is documented as the weakest link in air traffic control interactions and one of the primary causes of aviation accidents and incidents. The language of air traffic control communication is characterised by the use of prescribed phraseologies, and when these are missing, plain language becomes a dominant feature. During plain language use mitigation is recorded as a feature of communication and described as an attribute of communication in crews classified as high in safety performance. The present study departs from this observation and seeks to examine the linguistic features for rapport management in air traffic control in non-routine situations in the Malaysian context. Managing the pilot–controller relationship is categorised as one of the dominant communicative functions in air traffic control and a category that is associated with the use of politeness markers. An examination of the language functions in this category and their associated forms vis-à-vis features of politeness are considered useful for training in air traffic communication. Pragmatics is used in this study as the approach to discourse analysis and Spencer-Oatey’s (2000b) understanding of politeness as ‘rapport management’ is employed as the framework for data analysis. The study draws on both audio-recordings of radiotelephony communication in role-play situations involving expert Malaysian controllers taking on roles as pilot and controller, as well as transcripts of real-life radiotelephony communication between Malaysian controllers and international pilots. The findings show that the interactions are primarily oriented to rapport-maintenance. The linguistic devices for rapport management include justifications, terms of address, conventionally polite expressions such as ‘please’, modals, and conditional language use. Rapport management is shown to help foster shared mindfulness and team thinking between controllers and pilots.
... Radio communication requires pilots and controllers to share a common channel; this can create problems with overlapping communications that typically drown both parties out with a painful "squeal." Communication between pilots and controllers uses standardized phraseology in order to reduce ambiguity, increase clarity and suppress possible sources of error (McMillan, 1998). ...
Cognitive complexity is a limiting factor on the capacity and efficiency of the Air Traffic Control
(ATC) system. A multi-faceted cognitive ethnography approach shows that structure, defined as
the physical and informational elements that organize and arrange the ATC environment, plays an
important role in helping controllers mitigate cognitive complexity. Key influences of structure
in the operational environment and on controller cognitive processes are incorporated into a
cognitive process model. Controllers are hypothesized to internalize the structural influences in
the form of abstractions simplifying their working mental model of the situation. By simplifying
their working mental model, these structure-based abstractions reduce cognitive complexity.
There are still language-related safety issues in international aeronautical radiotelephony communications. This article revisits the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) language policy, a set of language proficiency requirements mainly reflected in the ICAO Rating Scale (Pronunciation, Structure, Vocabulary, Fluency, Comprehension, and Interaction). Although the ICAO Rating Scale has been used globally to assess professional aviation speakers’ communicative language proficiency for two decades now, it remains unclear what role the six ICAO criteria have played in high-stakes aviation English tests. We thus conducted an independent study based on secondary data analysis. We applied the Winsteps Rasch Rating Scale Model to 358 Chinese pilots’ test scores on an aviation English test in China. The results suggest that the six criteria carried considerably different relative values in contribution to test outcomes and that Interaction was different from the other five criteria. This exploratory study provides an example of how the ICAO assessment criteria were used in a locally developed aviation English test; its findings can have implications for supporting and implementing a language policy for global harmonization.
Aviation English (AE) is a distinct register of English used by pilots and air traffic controllers. As it is one of the contributing factors to aviation safety, ICAO and its Member States' aviation authorities require the airspace users to have the proficiency in using AE effectively. In recent years, the training and testing have gained more attention, but little work has been done to describe its linguistic features. The study set out to describe AE from the perspective of systemic functional linguistics with an aim to illustrate its linguistic features as compared to conversational English (CE). To achieve this goal, the corpora of CE and AE communications between native English speakers from the United States were respectively constructed and then scrutinized to demonstrate that AE has a significant difference from CE in functional-semantic aspects. The findings of this study reveal how distinct AE with CE in terms of speech functions. Some pedagogical implications were then proposed for enhancing AE training to cultivate the students' competence in semantics and interaction.
This study investigates the most occurring communication errors and causal factors that occur in Air Traffic Control (ATC) Nepal. Qualitative survey approach was implemented with 95 air traffic controllers and MCDA analysis method was used for the study. This analysis showed that incorrect readback/hear back, missing clipping, truncation of call sign, and failure to request clarification when in doubt, were the most occurring communication errors. Similarly, air traffic congestion, malfunction of communication equipment, and human factors were most influencing causal factors behind those errors. Future research should include in depth statistical analysis and pilot's point of view for more better insights.
The article deals with the peculiarities of professional activity of aviation personnel working for multinational aviation companies and socio cultural factors influencing their work. It is stressed that socio and cross cultural issues may be the reason for misunderstanding in professional and everyday communication. Miscommunications may broadly be applied to a range of verbal communications problems ranging from misunderstandings, such as those due to ambiguity, language structure, to more technical problems. The authors underline that those misunderstandings may be due to cultural differences. Special attention is paid to professional radio communication between an air traffic controller and pilot, which is very important for promotion of flight safety. Studies indicate that miscommunication is a pervasive problem in air traffic control and, although infrequent when considered as a percentage of daily transactions, nevertheless, has been a causal factor in numerous fatal accidents. The conclusion is made about the importance of social factors influencing the choice of certain lexical units and functional styles in radio communication.
Communications between pilot and air traffic controller (ATCO) are carried out via radiotelephony, without visual contact between the interlocutors. ICAO, a specialized agency of the United Nations, is responsible for the security of international civil aviation. ICAO’s official documents (ICAO, 2004, 2009, 2010) mention the importance of English pronunciation in the intelligibility of pilot-ATCO communication. In 2017, Brazilian researchers analyzed the extent to which two international Aeronautical English (AE) textbooks, used in an ATCO training course in Brazil, address the pronunciation difficulties considered typical among Brazilians (CRISTÓFARO-SILVA, 2012). The analysis, based on the concepts of intelligibility, English as a Lingua Franca and the ‘Lingua Franca Core’ (JENKINS, 2000, 2002, 2005), showed that the analyzed books do not portray several of these difficulties. In this article, we first point out international air accidents and incidents in which pronunciation was one of the contributing factors, then, based on the Lingua Franca Core, we discuss the causes of some Brazilian pronunciation difficulties, aiming to increase teachers’ and students’ awareness and to contribute to pronunciation teaching in the field of AE. In addition, we problematize the non-critical use of textbooks by teachers and the inadequate training in English Language Phonology.
Large disasters such as Chernobyl, Bhopal and Tenerife are linked to communicational problems. Studies have found that in 70% to 80% of the aviation incidents, communicational problems were a contributing factor. These findings suggest that communication plays a large role in the safety of aviation operation. Studies have presented the frequency of communicational problems that contributed to accidents, but they do not refer to types of communication and kinds of interactions. With this thesis, contributing factors, regarding communication, were identified, by typologising the kinds of interactions (distance, actors involved, flow of information, communication media).
The analysis of the collection of 103 contributing factors from 31 accident/incident reports, would reveal which kinds of interactions are most frequently present. Interactions between ATC controllers and other human actors in aviation operation were often found as contributing factors. Human-document interactions and human-machine interactions are found frequently, indicating that humans in aviation operation have issues understanding the tools they use.
In this paper, we advance some of the results of a study aimed at identifying the contributions of smartphones as a support for multiple systems of representation in continuing teacher training. The participants are three teachers of primary school. The still-image tools on smartphones enable the representation and communication of situations experienced in classrooms using photography. Taking photos of classroom situations that are considered difficult by these teachers, and later viewing these photos to help them reflect on what occurred in the classroom using photo-elicitation processes, enables us to evaluate the possibilities that smartphones offer to represent and communicate meanings, beliefs and ideas on problematic situations using images, while weighing up diverse alternatives for professional action. They further enable analysis of trends concerning the type of image captured and the meanings associated to them.
Presents guidance on behaviour at sea with the primary aim of improving safety and pollution avoidance. Draws on large body of psychological research. Aimed at seafarers on ship, on-shore managers, ship designers and maritime regulatory bodies.
There is a tendency to regard man-made disasters as being due to some rare species of monumental blunder. Here it is argued that only the less forgiving circumstances of their occurrence distinguish these catastrophic errors from the familiar slips and lapses of every day life. It therefore pays us to make a close study of these normally banal mistakes. Not only do they inform us about the systematic biases that contribute to human error, they also provide valuable clues to the normally hidden mechanisms tbat govern our thought, words and deeds.
This chapter addresses selected information-processing issues as they pertain to an air traffic controller's work. The selected issues relate to the demands on the controller by the technology and the operational context, communication events, the need to maintain situation awareness, and the requirement to provide accurate and timely instructions to pilots. These issues are discussed from the perspective of a human factors professional engaged in the design–development cycle of the air traffic control (ATC) system. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
The primary purpose of this article is to discuss the Australian statutory law applying to civil aviation. There will also be some consideration of one or two unresolved questions involving the application of com-mon law rules, selected not only because of their intrinsic interest, but also because they are partly affected by Federal and State Acts of Parlia-ment. Part I deals with them. Part II of the article is given over to an examination of the control and regulation of air navigation in Australia, a subject made complex by a division of constitutional legislative power between the Commonwealth and the States that does not allow the Commonwealth to assume complete legal responsibility for domestic civil aviation. In Part III there will be a description of the structure and regulation of the Australian air transport industry. Here the Common-wealth has played a role entirely unique in the world aviation scene in which, through a series of Acts of Parliament and executive agreements, it has maintained in ' regulated competition' two, and only two, major domestic air carriers. The final part of this article, Part IV, will be devoted to the statutory regulation of the legal position of an air carrier operating in Australia, so far achieved mainly by the application of the principles of two international private law multilateral agreements, the Warsaw and Rome Conventions, to Australian domestic aviation. This part also supplements the analysis of the common law problems discussed in Part I. An appendix lists Federal and State Acts directly relating to civil aviation. I -AIRCRAFT AND THE COMMON LAW The flight of aircraft has raised many interesting questions in distinctive areas of common law, including contract, tort, crime, property and conflict of laws. Some, as will be seen, have been determined by the passing of legislation but others remain for further consideration. The questions are not for the most part new but they assume a new significance by reason of the development and exploitation of aircraft as a means of transport. Two matters only will be discussed-private property rights in the airspace and the application of the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur to air-craft. Both are substantially affected by Federal and State statute law.
Contents: The meaning of human factors Human error Fatigue, body rhythms and sleep Fitness and performance Vision and visual illusions Motivation and leadership Communication: Language and speech Attitudes and persuasion Training and training devices Documentation Displays and controls Space and layout The aircraft cabin and its human payload Education and application Appendices References Index.
Human error continues to be implicated in the vast majority of aviation accidents. Yet, most accident investigation and reporting systems are not currently designed around any theoretical framework of human error. One reason may be the discontinuity between classical theories of human error and the practical application of these theoretical approaches in accident investigation. The Taxonomy of Unsafe Operations presented here bridges the gap between theory and practice by providing field investigators with a user-friendly, common-sense framework from which accident investigations can be conducted and human causal factors classified. This taxonomy draws upon traditional models of human error to account for human accident causal factors, including the condition of operators and supervisory error. A detailed description of the taxonomy is provided, as well as a discussion of the benefits it provides the field of accident investigation and prevention.
The author first considers air traffic control systems and human factors in relation to them; man as a system component and the relevance of various human attributes are then discussed. Man's functions in air traffic control are described, together with desirable characteristics of his physical working environment. Having considered what controllers do, their facilities and their working environment it is possible to suggest how they should be selected and trained, what might be desirable attributes in controllers and what they need to know. The relevance of various aspects of their conditions of employment is examined, together with characteristics of the controller as an individual. Questions of measuring controllers and of conducting human factors research on air traffic control problems are then discussed. The human factors aspect of other functions within air traffic control systems are briefly examined and the text concludes with suggestions for progress in applying human factors to air traffic control.
There is a tendency to regard man-made disasters as being due to some rare species of monumental blunder. Here it is argued that only the less forgiving circumstances of their occurrence distinguish these catastrophic errors from the familiar slips and lapses of every day life. It therefore pays us to make a close study of these normally banal mistakes. Not only do they inform us about the systematic biases that contribute to human error, they also provide valuable clues to the normally hidden mechanisms tbat govern our thought, words and deeds.
Air traffic controllers (ATC) are called on to sort out and project the paths of an ever-increasing number of aircraft in order to ensure the goals of minimum separation and safe, efficient landing and takeoff operations. This chapter focuses on a certain aspect of this taxing job: situation awareness (SA) of controllers who must maintain up-to-date assessments of the rapidly changing location of each aircraft (in 3-dimensional space) and their projected future locations relative to each other, along with other pertinent aircraft parameters (destination, fuel, communications, etc.). Controllers historically have called this the picture—their mental model of the situation on which all of their decisions hinge. Providing controllers with an accurate, complete, and up-to-date picture of the situation may prove to be daunting challenge as the environment in which they work becomes even more complex and demanding.
Topics discussed in this chapter are: SA requirements for air traffic control; theoretical underpinnings of SA; SA and controller performance; SA and controller workload; SA and ATC automation; SA and the operational concept; and measuring and evaluating situation awareness. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
The Tenerife air disaster, in which a KLM 747 and a Pan Am 747 collided with a loss of 583 lives, is examined as a prototype of system vulnerability to crisis. It is concluded that the combination of interruption of important routines among interdependent systems, interdependencies that become tighter, a loss of cognitive efficiency due to autonomic arousal, and a loss of communication accuracy due to increased hierarchical distortion, created a configuration that encouraged the occurrence and rapid diffusion of multiple small errors. Implications of this prototype for future research and practice are explored. Peer Reviewed http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/68716/2/10.1177_014920639001600304.pdf
An attempt is made to illuminate the problems associated with deficiencies in the information transfer process of both intracockpit and air/ground communications. Possible steps are suggested as a means of enhancing the flow of information in the aviation system.
Safety related problems are reported which occur as a consequence of information transfer deficiencies that arise when air/ground communications are (or should be) used as a resource in inflight emergency situations. The system factors, the human errors, and the associated causes of these problem are defined.
Aviation medicine has researched many important facts on pilots, but little on direct relationships between controllers, aviation medicine and air safety. The unsuspecting flying public accepts a 'blind faith' in aircraft and pilots, unaware that aircraft are controlled within 'suspect' ATC systems. The deceptive simplicity of controlling air traffic in apparently limitless skies belies the complexity of man-machine ATC systems operated in ever-crowded airspace, sometimes with antiquated equipment and indifferent communications. The indivisible operational controller/pilot team strives to meet similar ICAO medical standards and operate within the limitations of non-standardised recorded air traffic. Despite controllers' intensive stress at air disasters and 'almost' air disasters, air traffic must continually be controlled for air safety; but, countless human lives (and insurance dollars) saved are possibly camouflaged within the smoke screen of ATC. In New Zealand aviation, the Accident Compensation Corporation is statutorily responsible for air-safety, but accident investigators need controllers' expertise. Has a climate of complacency evolved towards air safety such that New Zealand's Erebus and other air disasters could have been avoided? Controllers are that crucial link in aviation with personal medical fitness vital to the air safety of the unsuspecting flying public. Controllers' dedicated aim for complete air safety in ATC shall benefit from greater understanding within aviation medicine and in-depth medical research.
Boeing 747-136 G-AWNJ Report of the incident near Nairobi Airport
Accident Investigation Branch (1975) Boeing 747-136 G-AWNJ Report of the
incident near Nairobi Airport, Kenya, on 3 September 1974. Aircraft
Accident Report 14/75. Department of Trade, HMSO, London.
Safety File: visual separation
- Airservices Australia
Airservices Australia (1997a) Safety File: visual separation. The Airservices
Bulletin,
Vol.1, No.3, pp 14-15
Australian academia needs to play a greater role in air safety challenges: Lee
- Airservices Australia
Airservices Australia (1997b) Australian academia needs to play a greater role in air
safety challenges: Lee. The Airservices Bulletin, Vol.1, No.3, pp 30-31.
.
- Airservices Australia
Airservices Australia (1995) Manual of Air Traffic Services. Amendment List 22,
16 July 1998. Canberra.
The awkward alliance: the controller/pilot team
- R Besco
Besco, R. (1997) The awkward alliance: the controller/pilot team. The Journal of Air
Traffic Control. December, pp 24-31.
Air traffic controller liability-the Australian perspective
- D Boughen
Boughen, D. (1994) Air traffic controller liability-the Australian perspective.
Aviation Law Association of Australia and New Zealand Annual Conference.
ATC specialist team co-ordination
- C Bowers
- E Blickensderfer
- B Morgan
Bowers, C., Blickensderfer, E. and Morgan, Jr., B. (1998) ATC specialist team
co-ordination. In Smolensky, M. and Stein, E. (eds.) Human Factors in Air
Traffic Control, pp 215-236. Academic Press, San Diego.
Communicating in Aviation. Swiss Reinsurance Company
- C Brauner
Brauner, C. (1994) Communicating in Aviation. Swiss Reinsurance Company,
Zurich.
Vectors to Spare: The Life of an Air Traffic Controller
- M Brenlove
Brenlove, M. (1993) Vectors to Spare: The Life of an Air Traffic Controller. Iowa
State University, Ames.
Eight' in international callsigns
Bureau of Air Safety Investigation (1998b) 'Eight' in international callsigns. Asia-Pacific Air Safety, June, Issue 18, p 28.
Air traffic clearances: what you heard may not be correct
- B Byron
Byron, B. (1997) Air traffic clearances: what you heard may not be correct. Asia-Pacific Air Safety, July, Issue 15, pp 14-16. BASI, Canberra.
The French National College of Civil Aviation. The Controller
- D Casanova
Casanova, D. (1992) The French National College of Civil Aviation. The Controller,
December, p 15.
Report on the Canadian Aviation Safety Board's Special Investigation into Air Traffic Control Services in Canada
Canadian Aviation Safety Board (1990) Report on the Canadian Aviation Safety
Board's Special Investigation into Air Traffic Control Services in Canada.
Report No. 90-SP001. Transport Canada, Montreal.
Human Factors in Aviation
- E Edwards
Edwards, E. (1985) Human Factors in Aviation. Part 1. Aerospace, June/July,
pp 3-17.
.
Air traffic controller training: a new model
- S Fisher
- I Kulick
Fisher, S. and Kulick, I. (1998) Air traffic controller training: a new model.
In Smolensky, M. and Stein, E. (eds.) Human Factors in Air Traffic Control,
pp 273-298. Academic Press, San Diego.
New approach to ATC English proficiency
- H Goertz
Goertz, H. (1997) New approach to ATC English proficiency. Journal of Air Traffic
Control, July-Sept., pp 46-50.
Information transfer between air traffic control and aircraft: communications problems in flight operations
- R Grayson
- C Billings
Grayson, R. and Billings, C. (1981) Information transfer between air traffic control
and aircraft: communications problems in flight operations. In Billings, C.
and Cheaney, E. (eds.) Information Transfer Problems in the Aviation System.
NASA Technical Paper 1875. NASA, California.
Presentation of a Swedish study program concerning recruitment, selection and training of student air traffic controllers: the MRU Project Phase 1
- R Haglund
Haglund, R. (1994) Presentation of a Swedish study program concerning recruitment,
selection and training of student air traffic controllers: the MRU Project
Phase 1. In Wise, J. Hopkin, V. and Garland, D. (eds.) Human Factors of
Advanced Aviation Technologies, pp 142-161.
Is the direct track really worth the risk?
- R Hamilton
Hamilton, R. (1991) Is the direct track really worth the risk? BASI Journal. No.8,
June, pp 9-10. Bureau of Air Safety Investigation, Canberra.
A systematic approach to aviation safety research
- I Henley
- M Wiggins
- P Anderson
Henley, I., Wiggins, M. and Anderson, P. (1997) A systematic approach to aviation
safety research. The Airservices Bulletin, Vol.1, No.4, pp 28-29.
An ATC question...the world's worst practice? Australian Aviation
- M Job
Job, M. (1997) An ATC question...the world's worst practice? Australian Aviation,
November, pp 51-52.
Beyond Aviation Human Factors
- D Maurino
- J Reason
- N Johnston
- R Lee
Maurino, D., Reason, J., Johnston, N. and Lee, R. (1995) Beyond Aviation Human
Factors. Avebury Aviation, Aldershot, England.
Language and Communication
- G Miller
Miller, G. (1951) Language and Communication. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Speak no evil, hear no evil
- D Morrow
Morrow, D. (1997) Speak no evil, hear no evil. Air Traffic Management,
September/October, pp 16-28.
Communications issues in air traffic control
- D Morrow
- M Rodvold
Morrow, D. and Rodvold, M. (1998) Communications issues in air traffic control.
In Smolensky, M. and Stein, E. (eds.) Human Factors in Air Traffic Control,
pp 421-456. Academic Press, San Diego.
Man and machine. The Controller
- P Muller
Muller, P. (1996) Man and machine. The Controller. March, pp 28-32.
Safety Management in the Cockpit
- C Ott
Ott, C. (1988) Safety Management in the Cockpit. Swiss Reinsurance Co., Zurich.
Creating space for learning in air traffic control: back to the future?
- C Owen
Owen, C. (1995) Creating space for learning in air traffic control: back to the future?
Australian Aviation Psychology Symposium, Manly, 20-24 November.
Applied Aviation Psychology: Achievement, Change and Challenge
- J Pariès
Pariès, J. (1996) Human factors aspects of the Mont Sainte-Odile accident.
In Hayward, J. and Lowe, A. (eds.) Applied Aviation Psychology:
Achievement, Change and Challenge. Proceedings of the Third Australian
Aviation Psychology Symposium. Avebury Aviation, Sydney.