Phraseology Is Vital for Aviation

¶ … Phraseology is Vital for Aviation Pilots & Controllers

Proper pilot/controller phraseology proves to be a vital aspect in the aviation community.

Proper Phraseology (~4 pages)

Basic Concept of Pilot/Controller Phraseology

Traffic, eleven o'clock, one zero miles, southbound, converging...," one of a myriad of phrases that mirrors some of the current words and phrases (phraseology) pilots and air traffic controllers routinely use, also reflects the idea pilots/controllers need to be able to read, speak, write, and understand (communicate) to effectively understand each other. The development of international air traffic control (ATC) rules to address language and pilots' needs to communicate dates back to 1922. According to current Federal Aviation Regulations, pilots certificate applicants must be able to read, speak, write, and understand English (Ruiz, 2004, ¶ 2). Also, as Lintner and Buckles (1992) note: "The [ATC] system cannot work unless pilots and controllers can communicate effectively and understand each other" (Lintner and Buckles, as cited in Ruiz, ¶ 2). Ruiz notes that about 254 of 872 reported operational errors (violations of aircraft separation minima) that occurred during1990 resulted from some kind of communication concern. Although writing skills may not be mandated during some of the most critical stages of a pilot's work, they do prove to be significant during specific times. Today, oral communication skills as well as, computer literacy as related to flight automation prove particularly vital.

In addition to air traffic controllers and pilots needing to understand each other, aircraft maintenance technicians, dispatchers, line service personnel, flight attendants, agents, and others must also be able to clearly convey pertinent information to each other and/for appropriate people at the right, as the safety of each flight ultimately, relies on effective communication between the parties involved with that flight (Ruiz, 2004).

B. ATC Rules During the early history of aviation, the limited number aircraft were flying nullified the need for ground-based control of aircraft. In Europe, however, because aircraft frequently flew into other countries, it became necessary for the development of some kind of standard rules in this area. During 1919, "the International Commission for Air Navigation (ICAN), was created to develop 'General Rules for Air Traffic.' Its rules and procedures were applied in most countries where aircraft operated" (Air Traffic Control, N.d., ¶1). The United States (U.S.) decided not to sign the ICAN Convention at this time, however the U.S. later, after the Air Commerce Act of 1926, developed a set of air traffic rules period at this time, legislation authorized "the Department of Commerce to 'establish air traffic rules for the navigation, protection, and identification of aircraft, including rules as to safe altitudes of flight and rules for the prevention of collisions between vessels and aircraft'" (Air Traffic Control, N.d., ¶ 2)

The first rules brief and basic, instructed pilots not to begin their takeoff until "there is no risk of collision with landing aircraft and until preceding aircraft are clear of the field" (Ibid.). Along with the increase in air traffic, a number of airport operators realized such simple, general rules would not adequately prevent collisions. Consequently, based on visual signals, numerous individuals in the profession began to provide a form of air traffic control (ATC). During this time, controllers stood on the airfield and waved flags to communicate with pilots. Today, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), defines the following objectives of air traffic control to include:

Preventing collisions between aircraft in flight

Preventing collisions between aircraft on the maneuvering area of an airport and obstructions on that area

Expediting and maintaining an orderly flow of air traffic

Providing advice and information useful for the safe and efficient conduct of flights

Notifying appropriate organizations regarding aircraft in need of search and rescue aid, and assisting such organizations as required (Air Traffic Control, N.d. Air Traffic Control link section)

Figure 1 portrays the air traffic control center at Memphis, Tennessee during 1965.

A www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Dictionary/ATC/DI108G1.htm"

Figure 1: Memphis Air Traffic Control Center (1965) (Air Traffic Control, N.d. Air Traffic Control link section).

Along with organizing and expediting the flow of traffic, the ATC system primarily aims to prevent a collision between aircraft operating in the system, and provide support for National Security and Homeland Defense. The ATC system also possesses the capability to facilitate other services; however these may be restricted by certain limitations, including "the volume of traffic, controller workload, frequency congestion, and quality of radar, higher priority duties. The physical inability to scan and detect particular situations in this category may also hinder or capabilities of the ATC system at times (Air Traffic..., 2008, p.2). Controllers may only provide additional service procedures to the extent higher priority duties and other circumstances permitted, however the controller may not consider providing additional services as optional, but rather a required practice, when his/her work situation permits. In accordance with the procedures and minima air traffic control service must be provided unless a deviation mandates conformity with "ICAO Documents, National Rules of the Air, or special agreements where the U.S. provides air traffic control service in airspace outside the U.S. And its possessions or: Other procedures/minima...in a letter of agreement, FAA directive, or a military document.... or..." (Air Traffic..., 2008, p. 2). A deviation occurs when it is required assist an aircraft after an emergency occurs.

C. Pilot's Rules

III. Proper Phraseology - (~7 pages)

In" Perceptions of communication training among collegiate aviation flight educators," Lorelei E. Ruiz (2004) reports that aviation leaders noted that the words pilots and controllers choose may greatly affect a flight outcome.. Research notes that considerable deficiencies exist regarding the abilities of pilots and controllers to communicate, and contends that writing and verbal skills need to be routinely taught in the aviation community, Classes need to include spelling, grammar, punctuation, and speaking.

Even native English-speaking students-especially, as well as American students graduating from of high schools routinely appear inadequately prepared verbally and mathematically for any academic pursuit that challenges them, and-need some type support to help them improve their language proficiency (Ruiz, 2004, ¶ 3). When and individual speaks in a way that contradicts another person's perception of how a credible speaker ought to sound, the one listening may be less likely to tune in to and/or pay attention to what the person says. "Bruce E. Gronbeck, a professor of communication studies at the University of Iowa, teaches students various dialects to fit different situations. Experts call this practice "code switching." Without code switching, students may be typecast as ditzy or dumb. When a pilot or controller do not possess proper understanding and working knowledge of standard aviation phraseology, his/her worries may quickly expand to encompass matters of safety, life, and it. (Ruiz, 2004). a. Types of Phraseology

1.Control Instructions

In aviation, "Watchers" routinely observe pilots, with a mutual goal of safety and efficiency.. The Watchers, according to Thomas P. Turner (2007) in "Someone to watch over you observations from air traffic controllers on what GA pilots do right, and wrong, in the ATC system," are also known as air traffic controllers. Turner (2007) reports that a number of traffic controller related a number of improvements that need to implemented to better ensure safety, as well as better fit into the flow of traffic, obtain the best possible information while en route, and potentially expedite the handling and requests. Aviation's Watchers discussed radio communication most frequently serves as the link between aircraft and ATC. A number of comments the controllers contributed related to radio technique. A common ATC complaint focused on the pilot who transmits on a new frequency prior to listening; consequently "stepping on" other transmissions. One veteran controller compared this practice to one personally be interrupting another during a conversation (Turner, 2007 ¶4) the impatient pilot who makes a radio call, yet does not receive an immediate reply is known as a corollary. When a corollary receive an immediate response, he/she retransmits almost immediately, attempting to receive an answer.

Because air traffic controllers traditionally work more than several frequencies simultaneously, they may have heard the pilot's initial call and plan to respond, as they are also communicating with another pilot, they may be slow to respond.

Even when a controller is working only a small geographic area there may be military traffic on UHF frequencies that require ATC attention. Sometimes pilots think it's an excuse for missing a radio call" (Turner, 2007, ¶7). The opposite often proves true many times as controllers frequently communicate "on the land line" with other controllers to coordinate other airplane movements or attempt to satisfy special requests.) Using standard phraseology and making a point to remain professional and polite, according to Turner (2007) proves to be the best way to deal with such situations. In addition to frequency congestion, another hazard relating to poor communication technique frequently resurfaces.

One controller confirmed what numerous pilots suspect, that "pilots who sound like amateurs will be moved out of the way" (Turner, 2007, ¶ 9) for the more professional- sounding aviators. For a pilot to receive expeditious handling and have his/her requests filled more promptly, he/she needs to ensure his/her radio presentation remains professional.

2. Approach Clearances

According to the article, "Back door IFR: When stratus happens and you didn't file, you'll need to sweet talk your way into the system. Here are some practical tips to do that safely" (2006 obtaining an IFR clearance, literally on the fly, does not constitute not a to be taken for granted privilege.

Approximately 15 years ago, U.S. pilots almost lost a significant portion of this flexibility, when the FAA's legal department proposed procedural changes in FAA Order 7110.65 Air Traffic Control, potentially requiring pilots to request such "pop-ups" to be permitted "to climb under VFR to whatever minimum IFR, vectoring or en route altitude applied to the area in question" (Back door IFR... 2006, ¶ 30).

The proposal additionally extended to particular clearances being withheld; contending that controllers may be held responsible when pilots hit terrain or obstructions at a low altitude. Previously, a pilot was held responsible to know his/her position and avoid obstacles and terrain. In the past, the majority of controllers did not favor of this change.

AOPA asserted that as long as a pilot knew his/her location, it was not an unsafe circumstance. (Back door IFR... 2006, ¶ 32) in deteriorating weather, pilots may not have received an IFR clearance without a climb, potentially discouraging pilots from obtaining help, and in turn, increasing the accident rate. This change would adversely affected operations at numbers of airports; hindering their flight's flexibility, as well as the utility of IFR flight.

3. Traffic Information

The following depicts an example of proper phraseology for traffic advisories, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation. According to the Federal Aviation Administration: Unless an aircraft is operating within Class a airspace or the pilot requests omission controllers are to, issue traffic advisories to all aircraft (IFR or VFR) on their frequency when, in the controller's judgment, the pilot's proximity "may diminish to less than the applicable separation minima" (Air Traffic..., 2008, p.18),

Where no separation minima applies, such as for VFR aircraft outside of Class B/Class C airspace, or a TRSA, issue traffic advisories to those aircraft on your frequency when in your judgment their proximity warrants it. Provide this service as follows:

a. To radar identified aircraft:

Azimuth from aircraft in terms of the 12-hour clock, or When rapidly maneuvering aircraft prevent accurate issuance of traffic as in 1 above, specify the direction from an aircraft's position in terms of the eight cardinal compass points (N, NE, E, SE, S, SW, W, and NW). This method shall be terminated at the pilot's request.

Distance from aircraft in miles.

Direction in which traffic is proceeding and/or relative movement of traffic. When requested by the pilot, issue radar vectors to assist in avoiding the traffic, provided the aircraft to be vectored is within your area of jurisdiction or coordination has been effected with the sector/facility in whose area the aircraft is operating.

When requested by the pilot, issue radar vectors to assist in avoiding the traffic, provided the aircraft to be vectored is within your area of jurisdiction or coordination has been effected with the sector/facility in whose area the aircraft is operating.

If unable to provide vector service, inform the pilot. (Air Traffic..., 2008, p.18)

The following portrays an example of proper phraseology between controller and pilot:

Traffic, eleven o'clock, one zero miles, southbound, converging, Boeing Seven Twenty Seven, one seven thousand"(Air Traffic..., 2008, p.19)

Traffic, twelve o'clock, one five miles, opposite direction, altitude unknown."

Traffic, ten o'clock, one two miles, southeast bound, one-thousand feet below you."

The next section portrays an example of proper phraseology from controller to pilot when traffic the controller has issued is not reported in sight:

a) the traffic is no factor.

A b) the traffic is no longer depicted on radar.

Proper Phraseology:

Traffic No Factor/No Longer Observed, or (Number) O'clock Traffic No Factor/No Longer Observed, (Direction) Traffic No Factor/No Longer

Observed. (Air Traffic..., 2008, p.20)

B. Aviation phraseology may be found in the following two locations:

2. Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM)

Once a pilot becomes radar identified, he/she will receive a clearance. To confirm that the directives ATC relates to the pilot constitutes the "real" message, according to the Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM), a clearance normally possess the following components: (Back door IFR... 2006, ¶ 23)

The clearance authorizes flight to a specific location, generally the airport of where the aircraft intended to land. In some instances, as particular locations, a short-range clearance procedure may be used, whereby the controller issues a clearance "to a fix within or just outside of the terminal area, and pilots are advised of the frequency on which they will receive the long-range clearance direct from the center controller" (Back door IFR... 2006, ¶ 24). The controller may issue headings to fly, as well as altitude restrictions to split a flight from other air traffic in the airport's terminal area. If the volume of traffic warrants the need to do so, the airport's departure and arrival procedures are published (Back door IFR... 2006, ¶ 25).

The clearance must include some reference to a route to be flown, even if it's "direct."Due to traffic, it is frequently necessary for ATC to specify an altitude or flight level or route different from that requested. Clearances can also include the data necessary to identify where you're supposed to be going, like when a controller spells the name of a fix. (Back door IFR... 2006, ¶ 26)

C. Why Proper Phraseology is Important

1. Understanding

Successful aviation communication requires more than possessing a knowledge of basic English and ATC phraseology. Effective aviation communication also mandates that the pilot and controller possess the capability to think in English. Many pilots who speak English as their second language, according to Dr. Marjo Mitsutomi, a linguistics expert with the University of Redlands in California "are not rooted in general language competence. They can only use what is memorized" (Mitsutomi, as cited in News Briefs, 2000, ¶ 4) Mitsutomi, who has taught English to speakers of foreign languages for more than 15 years, notes that in everyday circumstances, individuals who possess limited language skills may utilize standard procedures and memorized phrases to communicate without experiencing an major problems. However, Mitsutomi stresses, life happens.

When confronted with unique circumstances, miscommunication with/by a person with limited language proficiency may actually compromise safety. Mitsutomi, also a pilot purports: Flying and communications go together." (Mitsutomi, as cited in News Briefs, 2000, ¶ 4)

The culturally loaded information. Mitsutomi and the FAA's O'Brien issued a "call for action" at last week's national runway safety summit. An Aviation English Council should be formed, with experts from a broad section of the aviation community. This task force should develop and propose English language proficiency standards and a means of testing to the FAA and to ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) by December 2000, with prototype testing to begin in 2001. (News Briefs, 2000, ¶ 5)

2. Standardization

Addressing Human Factors Issues Could Help Improve Runway Safety FAA could further improve runway safety by addressing human factors issues, which aviation safety experts identified as the primary cause of incursions. To address these issues, FAA could encourage the development of new technology, revise additional procedures, and adopt best practices. A system that provides a direct warning to the cockpit being developed by Honeywell and the Sensis Corporation, called the Runway Incursion Cockpit Alerting System, is designed to work at airports equipped with ASDE-X and functioning safety logic. NTSB officials said that FAA could move faster to approve technology that provides runway incursion warnings directly to the cockpit. However, FAA officials said the cockpit warning system would need to be thoroughly reviewed before being approved for use, a process they said could take at least 2 years (Dillingham, 2008, ¶ 1).

3. Accident Prevention Runway incursions are a major aviation safety issue, with the number of incursions increasing. In fact, the worst aviation disaster in history (the collision between two Boeing 747s at Tenerife, Canary Islands) was a runway incursion. Complex runway and taxiway layouts, large numbers of aircraft, controlled take-off times, weather, time of day, taxiway and runway closures, airfield construction, and inadequate airfield diagrams are all challenges that must be managed so that runway incursions can be avoided. (Preventing runway..., 2007, ¶ 2)

The FAA has produced a paper that they refer to as "10 Ways to Help Prevent Runway Incursions."I've listed their 10 ways below (in italics) and took the liberty of adding my two cents. (Preventing runway..., 2007, ¶ 5)

The FAA's ten ways to help prevent runway incursions:

1. See the "Big Picture."Monitor both ground and tower communications when possible. Of course the objective here is to improve your situational awareness by knowing what other aircraft are doing and the instructions they are receiving. (Preventing runway..., 2007, ¶ 6)

2. Transmit Clearly. Make your instructions complete and easy to understand. Pilots must know and use standard phraseology. Using non-standard radio "jargon" is both frustrating (to those that have to deal with it) and dangerous, especially internationally! (Preventing runway..., 2007, ¶ 7)

3. Listen Carefully. Listen to your clearance. Listen to what you read back. Do not let communications become automatic. Listen carefully to your clearance with your headset on. Insure the other pilot also is on headset to receive the clearance. If you and the other pilot don't hear the exact same clearance, clear up any ambiguity with clearance delivery. Utilize other competent crew members to back up ground operations. If you have a pilot in the jump seat, put him to work! (Preventing runway..., 2007, ¶ 8)

4. Copy Clearances. Clearances can change. Keep a note pad and copy your clearance. If needed, refer to your notes. If you haven't been writing down clearances and you are still flying, you are better than me! (Preventing runway..., 2007, ¶ 9)

5. Situational Awareness. Know your location. If unfamiliar with an airport, keep a current airport diagram available for easy reference. It is critical to print out airfield diagrams for all destinations and alternate airfields with which you are not familiar. (Preventing runway..., 2007, ¶ 10)

6. Admit When Lost. If you get lost on an airport, ask ATC for help. Better to damage your pride than your airplane. A delicate ego and aviation don't mix. Even if only one crew member is lost or unsure of the aircraft's location, the airplane needs to be stopped until everyone on the flight deck is positive of the aircraft's location. DO NOT stop on a runway. If possible, taxi off the runway and then initiate communication with ATC to regain orientation. (Preventing runway..., 2007, ¶ 11)

7. Sterile Cockpit. Maintain a sterile cockpit until reaching cruising altitude. Explain to your passengers that talking should be kept to a minimum. Sterile cockpit means only matters pertinent to the operation of the aircraft are discussed. (Preventing runway..., 2007, ¶ 12)

8. Understand Signs and Markings. Keep current with airport signs, lights, and markings. Know what they mean and what action to take. Many airports around the world have inadequate signs and markings, and some signs and markings are improperly placed and used inappropriately. As always, if in doubt, query the controller. (Preventing runway..., 2007, ¶ 13)

9. Never Assume. Don't take clearances for granted. Look both ways before entering or crossing taxiways and runways. Controllers are human and they make mistakes. Apply common sense to all clearances and again, if in doubt, ask! (Preventing runway..., 2007, ¶ 14)

10. Follow Procedures. Establish safe procedures for airport operations, then follow them. Although procedures are developed at the MAJCOM level, if you see a procedure that is unsafe, talk to your flight safety officer and have your concern addressed at the appropriate level. Standard operating procedures (SOPs) should minimize flight crew workload while the aircraft is in motion. Ensure aviators you fly with adhere to established procedures. (Preventing runway..., 2007, ¶ 15)

IV. Consequences of non-use - (~4 pages)

A. Accident case #1

Among the various ways IFR pilots have to ingratiate themselves with the powers prevailing in our National Airspace System, there's one back door procedure known as the "pop-up." No, this isn't a discussion about breakfast confections, or those insidious and distracting little windows that burst in front of whatever you're doing on the Internet. (Back door IFR... 2006, ¶ 1)

Instead, think of the pop-up as an on-the-spot IFR clearance from ATC, possibly without either an IFR briefing or having filed a flight plan. A pop-up may be quick and dirty, but it sure beats scud running. And for those pilots who like entering the system as soon as possible after takeoff from a non-radar airport, the back door becomes the front door. (Back door IFR... 2006, ¶ 2)

Actually there are two basic kinds of pop-ups. They're given that name though, because you don't have to start off with Flight Service to get an IFR clearance, and even if you have a flight plan on file, ATC can "let you in" before they can see you on radar.

Requests for pop-ups can be made for VFR or IFR. You can ask ATC for pop-up clearances for practice, under either VFR or IFR flight. Heck, before the days of the ADIZ, when we were VFR and would occasionally call up Potomac with a request to transition their Class B, that was kind of a pop-up, too. The IFR popups, of course, are given the same separation as all other IFR flights once they're in the system. Anything VFR has to be approved on a non-interference basis; separation usually won't be provided unless in Class B airspace. But here's a quick look at what matters most. (Back door IFR... 2006, ¶ 3)

The first kind of "pop-up" is for pilots proceeding VFR inbound to an airport but where worsening weather justifies (or dictates) contact with ATC. The pilot either gets radar guidance or a full instrument approach (assuming the pilot and airplane are up to the task). (Back door IFR... 2006, ¶ 4) This situation, where a pilot flying under VFR contacts ATC for an IFR clearance when the weather starts going downhill, without having previously filed an IFR flight plan, puts a little more work on the controller's back, but can literally be a lifesaver for the pilot. (Back door IFR... 2006, ¶ 5)

Why? Scud-running kills even Instrument-rated pilots; it's never been a problem restricted to VFR-only pilots. When the briefer said you'd have VMC but the view out the window says differently, or the white carpet gets rolled out in front of you and you find yourself above a solid undercast, this kind of pop-up can be one of the few arrows left in your quiver keeping you from getting sucked into a VFR-into-IMC scenario. (Back door IFR... 2006, ¶ 6) in either case, you could say it's a "pop-down." (of course, it should go without saying that a VFR-only pilot's wisest action in this case is to get back on the ground while he can still see it-from a normal altitude, that is). (Back door IFR... 2006, ¶ 7)

How is it done? If you don't have a chart or an Airport/Facility Directory to look up a frequency for the nearest Tracon or ARTCC, there's always Flight Service. If your back is really up against the wall, call on 121.5. Don't worry about paperwork -- there usually isn't any -- and don't get scared by the seemingly non-secular inference when they ask for the number of souls on board. There are no undertakers involved, and unless the predicament is entirely of your own making, the FAA won't be, either. (Back door IFR... 2006, ¶ 8) the controller will usually request aircraft identification, type and equipment and you'll probably get a discrete squawk code. Speaking of paperwork, if you don't have IFR charts and plates, admit it, and they'll give you all the required information. (Back door IFR... 2006, ¶ 9)

As an unannounced arrival, you may get directed to a navaid or fix before getting a clearance (or a vector). Just make your best guess which way to turn, start twiddling in the right frequencies and OBS settings, and off you go. (Back door IFR... 2006, ¶ 10)

If you're below a minimum IFR altitude, you'll probably be asked if you can climb while remaining VFR, keeping your own distance from terrain and obstructions. If you can't, you just became the controller's top priority, if you get my drift. Once you get the clearance (route, altitude, etc.) if the controller can identify you on radar, he'll probably skip the spooky "souls aboard" stuff. (Back door IFR... 2006, ¶ 11)

The biggest way to screw up a popup clearance is to request one because you were too busy to file an IFR flight plan before you took off. That's a great way to have the controller judge you as being unprofessional, just lazy, or both. And that judgment would be correct. (Back door IFR... 2006, ¶ 12) if you get easily tongue-tied or distraction-overload displaces your usually facile command of phraseology (or whatever decorum and mental bandwidth you had left), you're going to make things that much harder. If you work with the controller and can converse professionally, clearances are usually more forthcoming. Of course, this is true anywhere, whether it's for VFR flight following or hard IFR. (Back door IFR... 2006, ¶ 13)

B. Accident case #2

The National Transportation Safety Board said that a regional jet overran the end of a runway in Michigan last year because the pilots elected to land on a contaminated (snowy) runway without performing the required landing distance calculations. (Pilot's poor..., 2008, ¶1)

The Board adopted its final report on the April 12, 2007 accident in which, a Bombardier/Canadair Regional Jet (CRJ) CL600-2B19, operated as Pinnacle Airline 4712, ran off the departure end of runway 28 after landing at Cherry Capital Airport, (TVC) Traverse City, Michigan. There were no injuries among the 49 passengers and 3 crewmembers and the aircraft was substantially damaged. The weather at the time of the accident was reported as snowing. Instrument meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident, which was operated on an instrument flight rules flight plan. (Pilot's poor..., 2008, ¶2)

Our recommendations are designed to reduce injuries and deaths and prevent accidents like this from occurring," said NTSB Chairman Mark Rosenker."Piloting an aircraft should not be guess work. There are rules and guidelines that need to be followed at all times and it is imperative that the Federal Aviation Administration enforce these recommendations." (Pilot's poor..., 2008, ¶3)

The probable cause cites the pilots' decision to land without performing a landing distance assessment, which was required by company policy because of runway contamination initially reported by TVC ground operations personnel and continuing reports of deteriorating weather and runway conditions throughout the approach. This poor decision-making likely reflected the effects of fatigue produced by a long, demanding duty day, and, for the captain, the duties associated with check airman functions. (Pilot's poor..., 2008, ¶4) Also contributing to the accident were the Federal Aviation Administration pilot flight and duty time regulations that permitted the pilots' long, demanding duty day; and the TVC operations supervisor's use of ambiguous and unspecific radio phraseology in providing runway braking information. (Pilot's poor..., 2008, ¶5)

During its investigation, the Safety Board evaluated the pilots' actions and decisions during the flight, including their decision to land at TVC, their awareness of/attention to the weather and runway conditions at TVC, and their actions during the landing roll. The Safety Board concluded that the pilots failed to perform the landing distance assessment that was required by Pinnacle's Operations Specifications. Had the pilots done so, using current weather information, the results would have shown that the runway length was inadequate for the contaminated runway conditions described. (Pilot's poor..., 2008, ¶6)

The investigation also examined pilot fatigue. The accident occurred after midnight at the end of a demanding day during which the pilots had flown over 8 hours, made five landings, been on duty more than 14 hours, and been awake more than 16 hours. The Safety Board further notes that the pilots had also flown in challenging weather conditions throughout the day. (Pilot's poor..., 2008, ¶7)

Therefore, the Safety Board concluded that the poor decision-making shown by the accident pilots, including their failure to account for the changing weather and runway conditions during the approach; their failure to perform a landing distance calculation; and their failure to reassess or discontinue the approach accordingly, likely reflected the effects of fatigue. (Pilot's poor..., 2008, ¶8)

As a result of the investigation of this accident, the Safety Board made recommendations to the Federal Aviation Administration in the following areas: the pilots' actions and decision-making during the approach, landing, and landing roll; landing distance assessment training; pilot fatigue; weather and field condition information and ground operations personnel communications; criteria for runway closures in snow and ice conditions; and alcohol testing. (Pilot's poor..., 2008, ¶9)

C. Accident case #3

Montreal - the International Air Transport Association (IATA) released its annual Safety Report today, showing that 2006 was the safest year on record. "The safety results for 2006 are impressive. Air transport remains the safest form of travel. But we must do even better. With demand for air travel increasing at 5-6 per year, the accident rate must decrease just to keep the actual number of accidents in check. The goal will always be zero accidents. And the interim target is to reduce the industry rate to 0.49 accidents per million flights in 2008-a 25 improvement," said Giovanni Bisignani, IATA's Director General and CEO. (Making a safe..., 2007 ¶1)

The 2006 industry hull loss rate was 0.65 accidents per million flights for Western-built jets, which is equivalent to one accident for every 1.5 million flights -- a 14 improvement on 2005. IATA's member airlines performed significantly better than the global average with a hull-loss rate of 0.48 accidents per million flights, or one accident for every two million flights. (Making a safe..., 2007 ¶2) There were 77 accidents in 2006, compared to 111 in 2005. Of these 77 accidents, 46 involved jet aircraft and 31 involved turbo-props. (Making a safe..., 2007 ¶3)

Regional Results: The Safety Report shows that not all regions of the world saw the same level of safety. For example, Russia and other members of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) had the highest accident rate of all the regions in 2006, with 8.6 Western-built hull losses per million flights-13 times the global average. IATA is actively working with the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), States and operators to improve the situation. (Making a safe..., 2007 ¶4)

In Africa, improvements have been made to enhance safety. However, the accident rate remains the second highest in the world at 4.31 accidents per million flights. IATA is working with relevant organisations to further reduce it with a focus on upgrading onboard systems and navigation databases. (Making a safe..., 2007 ¶5)

IOSA:"Aviation must be safer-everywhere-including Russia and Africa. Regional safety begins with global standards that are maintained by all. That is why the IATA Operational Safety Audit (IOSA) is a condition of IATA membership," said Bisignani. IOSA is the airline industry's first globally accepted audit programme using internationally harmonised standards.All IATA airlines must complete an audit by the end of 2007 and close all findings by the end of 2008 to maintain membership. Currently 144 airlines are on the IOSA registry, including 121 IATA members. (Making a safe..., 2007 ¶6)

Integrated Airline Management Systems:an integrated approach to safety is also critical. "The commitment to safety starts with the CEO. But it must be integrated systematically throughout the airline to be effective," said Bisignani. Following on the ICAO requirements for Safety Management Systems, IATA has incorporated Integrated Airline Management Systems (Integrated AMS) into IOSA. Based on IOSA standards, Integrated AMS provides guidance and best practices on safety, security, quality and risk management as well as supplier management systems. IATA today launched an interactive tool to help airlines implement Integrated AMS. (Making a safe..., 2007 ¶7)

Adverse Weather:43 of accidents occurred during operations in adverse weather. Training is a key issue, particularly with respect to the decision to abort landing in bad weather conditions. IATA is working to improve flight crew standards with enhanced training. This focuses on the process leading to the decision to "go-around" (abort landing) as well as the proper execution of the "go-around" once the decision has been taken. (Making a safe..., 2007 ¶8)

Communication:38 of accidents involved flight crew communication issues, either between pilots or between pilots and air traffic controllers. IATA is implementing programmes, such as the English Language Solution, to help pilots and air traffic controllers enhance their language skills and adopt standard phraseology to prevent communication breakdowns. (Making a safe..., 2007 ¶9)

Flight Crew Training:33 of accidents involved flight crew training issues. Spreading best practice in training is the key to mitigating this issue and IOSA includes detailed training standards for operational personnel. (Making a safe..., 2007 ¶10)

V. Uses - (~2pages)

A. Domestic

Kyrgyz Air Navigation controllers who help keep a watchful eye on the sky over Manas finally had a chance to get the "ground's eye "view of Manas Air Base in July. (Kyrgyz air..., 2007 ¶ 1) the controller crews toured the base as part of their ongoing English education program with members of the 376th Expeditionary Operations Support Squadron. (Kyrgyz air..., 2007 ¶ 2) the group of approximately 40 is focused on helping the Kyrgyz controllers improve their English so they can earn their international certification. They have been meeting for about four weeks. (Kyrgyz air..., 2007 ¶ 3)

English is the international standard for aviation, and the Kyrgyz air traffic controllers have just until March to prepare. To help his controllers get ready, KAN Director General Shakir Djangaziev enlisted support from the 376th Expeditionary Operations Group, and Maj. Michael Smith was a natural fit for the task. (Kyrgyz air..., 2007 ¶ 4) the commander of the 376th EOSS, responsible for airfield operations and management for the base, is no stranger to the air traffic control members. (Kyrgyz air..., 2007 ¶ 5)

Backed by a band of volunteers from the operations group, medical group and wing safety, he set up a daily meeting with the Kyrgyz controllers. A group meets each weekday to practice aviation phraseology as well as conversational English. (Kyrgyz air..., 2007 ¶ 6) the classes help put study into practice. In addition to learning new vocabulary, the group gets a chance to perfect grammar and pronunciation. it's also a chance for the controllers to strengthen relationships with their counterparts. (Kyrgyz air..., 2007 ¶ 7) "This forum provides a wonderful opportunity for the coalition instructors to demystify operational and cultural differences,"Major Smith said. (Kyrgyz air..., 2007 ¶ 8)

Practical exercises enhance the exchanges, with controllers taking turns in an air traffic controller simulator with coalition pilots. The pilots "fly" varying approaches and make the necessary radio calls, giving the KAN controller an opportunity to listen and react to different situations using English. (Kyrgyz air..., 2007 ¶ 9) "Running various simulator scenarios test the controller and pilot's ability to effectively and efficiently communicate,"Major Smith said. (Kyrgyz air..., 2007 ¶ 10)

At the end of every English class session, the controllers present the pilots with past situations and recorded exchanges where some perceived or real violation of procedures occurred. Misunderstandings are often resolved through explanation, while legitimate mistakes and errors are brought back to the various flying units for corrective action. (Kyrgyz air..., 2007 ¶ 11)

Volunteer pilots also occasionally visit the approach tower controllers during the busy time of day to listen to the real-time pilot-controller exchanges. During these visits, confusion or misunderstanding of coalition flying procedures and radio calls are explained on the spot. (Kyrgyz air..., 2007 ¶ 12) Aibek Akmatov, a senior KAN controller, has found those exchanges particularly helpful. "Talking with the pilot was informative. The ability to speak to the coalition pilots directly is very useful,"Mr. Akmatov said. (Kyrgyz air..., 2007 ¶ 13)

Lt. Col. Randall Reed, the 376th EOG commander, knows the value of the program extends beyond simply communicating. "Not only do we have a vested interest in helping improve the capability of those controllers who will communicate to our pilots, but we have an opportunity to help improve air operations overall,"he said. (Kyrgyz air..., 2007 ¶ 14)

In addition to increasing the level of safety of air travel in Kyrgyzstan, Colonel Reed said earning and maintaining international certification will strengthen the aviation industry and promote increased air traffic, which would generate revenues for additional improvements. (Kyrgyz air..., 2007 ¶ 15)

On a more personal note, an added bonus of the English education has been increased understanding between the two cultures. This was reinforced this week as the controllers visited areas on base and interacted with Airmen outside the operations group. "These exchanges make us realized that all of us are more alike than different, and share many of the same hopes, dreams and passions,"Major Smith said. (Kyrgyz air..., 2007 ¶ 16)

B. Foreign

Standing 200 feet above Baghdad International Airport in a weathered control tower, Air Force air traffic controllers are busy directing aircraft while their Iraqi counterparts get certified through intensive formal training and hands-on experience. (Airmen Iraqi..., 2007 ¶ 1) it's a job that is extremely challenging, yet extremely rewarding, said Capt. Pedro Rampolla, who is serving his second deployment here. (Airmen Iraqi..., 2007 ¶ 2)

It's neat to see how things have improved,"said the 447th Expeditionary Operations Support Squadron airfield operations flight commander. "The Iraqis are great guys, very friendly and they really want to learn."(Airmen Iraqi..., 2007 ¶ 3) the language barrier is the most immediate challenge facing the Airmen and Iraqis. While the Iraqi controllers speak English (which is the universal language for air traffic control), they could not understand the rapid-fire "phraseology" over the airwaves. (Airmen Iraqi..., 2007 ¶ 4)

They were a little perplexed the first time they heard the dialogue between tower (operator) and pilot,"said Captain Rampolla. "They could speak it, but they couldn't comprehend it as fast as it was coming at them."(Airmen Iraqi..., 2007 ¶ 5) That's changing now. The Iraqi controllers are attending an academy run by the Iraqi Civilian Aviation Authority, or ICAA, which is similar to the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration. They must pass a series of rigorous English tests before graduating. The goal is to get the Iraqi controllers certified with the International Civilian Aviation Organization, which sets the standards for air traffic controllers around the globe. (Airmen Iraqi..., 2007 ¶ 6)

So far, things have been pretty good,"said Staff Sgt. William Ferguson, a Wyoming Air National Guard air traffic controller who is serving his second deployment here. "There are some who need the additional help, but for the most part, they are doing well."(Airmen Iraqi..., 2007 ¶ 7) in conjunction with the academy, the Iraqi controllers work in the tower with the Airmen, learning how to keep up with the increased number of flights. Before the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003, the airport averaged 10 flights a day. Now, there are about 14,000 flights a month. (Airmen Iraqi..., 2007 ¶ 8)

Frankly, they didn't have the experience or the technology to meet the demand,"said Captain Rampolla. "That's why we were requested to come in and assist."(Airmen Iraqi..., 2007 ¶ 9) Over the course of several expeditionary deployment rotations, the Airmen also helped modernized the tower's infrastructure established by the ICAA, helping the Iraqis to handle more flights. They also have formed bonds with each other that transcend nationalities and religious beliefs. (Airmen Iraqi..., 2007 ¶ 10)

The interaction has been great,"said Sergeant Ferguson. "We've shared tea and lunch. These guys were here for my first deployment, and they remembered me. It was like a family reunion when I returned."(Airmen Iraqi..., 2007 ¶ 11)Captain Rampolla pointed out there is a mix of Sunnis and Shiite Muslims working together every day with no problems. (Airmen Iraqi..., 2007 ¶ 12)

It's not an issue with them,"he said. "They'll tell you they're just here to do their jobs."However, doing their job presents great danger for the Iraqis. A few years ago, a controller's father was kidnapped and killed because of the controller's association with Americans. Others simply never showed up again. The controllers still get constant death threats. (Airmen Iraqi..., 2007 ¶ 13) "I think it says a lot about their character,"said Captain Rampolla. "They continue to work despite everything. We're all looking forward to the day we can hand off the operations up here to the Iraqis and say 'okay, you got it from here.'"(Airmen Iraqi..., 2007 ¶ 14)

V. Testimonials

A. ATC testimonial #1

One particular area where controllers assert pilots could improve involves obtaining weather information. On startup, one controller recommends, a pilot needs to listen to the ATIS or AWOS/ASOS (where available) before calling the ground controller for taxi. The controller presenting testimonial #1 also recommends that pilots:

Use the alphabet identifier ('ATIS Charlie'), not a colloquial "I have the weather' or 'I have the numbers. ' Check just before you call ground" (Turner, 2007 ¶10)a pilot may have outdated information if he/she considers a cell phone check when he/she drives to the airport or before his/her preflight the airplane to be sufficient. When a pilot reports that he/she possess an outdated version of ATIS, however will complicate the issue, as the controller will either have to read the update to the pilot on frequency, or he/she will direct the pilot to listen to the updated information and then call the controller back, One controller providing the a testimony regarding pilots, advises pilots that when he/she arrives at an airport with ATIS or AWOS/ASOS, to listen before he/she is handed off to the last controller (approach or center) who will handle them before they talk to tower. One controller reportedly steamed regarding a pilot's failure to confirm to accepted practices "There's way too much asking whether a pilot has the ATIS. Look at the frequency for the controlling authority for approaches at your arrival airport. You should have heard the weather, and report so, when you first make contact with controllers on that frequency" Turner, 2007, ¶12). This controller advises pilots that when he/she flies into a tower-controlled airport and will not contact controllers prior to the Class D airspace, he/she needs to make a point to listen to weather before he/she needs to call the tower. "November 329 Papa Tango, seven east, landing with Charlie" (Turner, 2007 ¶12), this controller advises, portrays a concise and effective way for the pilot to make his/her first contact. The controller also notes that if a pilot is flying an instrument approach into a non-towered airport and more than one approach is authorized for that airport, he/she will be asked which approach he/she requests. As ATC will not assign a specific approach for the pilot in this scenario, the pilot will have to choose (Turner, 2007, ¶13).