Hacker News Reader

Comment by geocrasher | Hacker News Reader

Juan Brown has an excellent explanation of what is known so far, along with an analysis of the alarms heard in the background.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cslSQB5mgyc

Juan (an airline 777 pilot) also goes into why it is just fine that they were all speaking French in France.

View on HN

> why it is just fine that they were all speaking French in France

I've heard before that pilots are allowed to speak their native language with ATC in their own countries, but I'm still confused about the risk to foreign pilots in the same airspace, who will then potentially not understand some of the other conversations going on. I realize ATC would still give commands, answers, and clearances to foreign pilots in English, but wouldn't it occasionally be important for the foreign pilots to be able to understand the context of conversations that aren't directed to them?

Is the benefit of that just rare enough that it's not considered worth it?

When you are in controlled airspace, you should be able to safely only listen to the commands given to you and ignore everything else. Your situational awareness is potentially better if you can process those other communications but strictly speaking, controlled airspace is just that… controlled by ATC. Also, if you are busy in the flight deck, you might completely disregard communication that is not to you no matter what language it is.

That’s only true in a class B airport in the US, ie the absolute busiest airports. Everywhere else, even with a control tower, ultimate responsibility lies on the pilot during vfr conditions. I imagine it’s similar in other countries ?

It's essentially the same everywhere, but these large planes are flying IFR not VFR and so they rely on the separation service provided by ground control. Ground control isn't allowed to provide separation service to VFR flights (although you can ask them for an advisory, and they will tell you about traffic that is relevant to you).

They already know english for the job, so its not like its an extra requirement

Imagine for a second the international language of planes was German. As an American who's an international pilot you of course speak German, although not as well as you speak English.

Now imagine you're a bush pilot flying around Alaska in a Cesna flying near Anchorage. Imagine being forced to speak German to your fellow American ATCs.

These aren't bush pilots. They're professional airline transport pilots. Their job requires a proficient level of aviation English.

I've never heard of the English rule being ignored anywhere else except perhaps at tiny airports without proper radio discipline. Though I was only a private pilot.

It's not that it has to be in English because it's meant to be a better language. It's because the international community chose it. English is a requirement because lives were lost because of this (think Avianca 52). Foreign pilots have to do a language test to get their license. Even for a PPL. At least here in Europe.

Also the phraseology of radio communication is pretty specific and even a native English speaker wouldn't make heads or tails of it if they have no knowledge of aviation. It isn't really English as such.

It's no coincidence that the French invented the word Chauvinism :) I the multinational company I work for I've never seen a people so angered at having to speak another language than the French.

Sounds like a scene from The Man In The High Castle.

Your question backfires: Americans are used to being humiliated by their employers and see nothing wrong with the hypothetical.

> They already know english for the job (...)

You're somehow presuming that there is no functional difference between being a native speaker and knowing a language as second or third language.

The job? What about private pilots?

Still mandatory to be proficient in English. EASA makes everyone pass an English exam, including private pilots.

English hegemony is wrong and dangerous to the cultures of the world.

… just not in this particular situation.

Interesting, I did not know until watching this video that lawnmowers posed such a high risk to aviation.

(16m00s into the video, discussing how ground activity near the localizer antenna can cause the signal to wiggle on approach.)

Helps me understand why the FAA was so against 5g.

Longtime fan of his channel. Nice to see it pop up here.

A true journalist

Reply on news.ycombinator.com