Air Flight Communication

Definition: The practice of exchanging safety and operating information between aircraft in flight and ground stations.

Significance: Communication enables aviation to serve society more completely by expanding its operations' conditions and geographical areas.

Because they were few in number, underpowered, and only slightly engaged in commerce, airplanes before 1914 required no communication between themselves or ground-based stations. As World War I progressed, airships and specially equipped airplanes carried Morse code radio equipment for military purposes. However, it was not until the 1930s that civil aviation communications radio became useful. Fledgling airlines in the United States began to install radios aboard their airplanes and at their dispatch hubs to monitor each airliner's progress. This practice brought about the earliest, most rudimentary form of what has become the air traffic control (ATC) system. Early pilots considered radios an unwelcome intrusion in the cockpit, and some refused to use them. Despite these protests, aviation communications provided undeniable benefits to safe and efficient operation, so the system expanded. Following World War II, aviation radios had become widespread in all but most miniature airplanes as airspace around major cities became congested. By the 1960s, radios were familiar even in small airplanes. By the 1970s, air travel had become sufficiently pervasive that medium-sized and smaller cities attracted enough air traffic to make communications important to safety. The number of control towers rose accordingly, and radio communication frequencies soon became congested. Few pilots could realistically consider their airplanes operating apart from the air traffic system, but standardization of communications procedures and phraseology lagged behind hardware technology.

International Standardization

Standard phraseology is essential for several reasons. Flying is increasingly an international venture, for even those pilots who never venture far from their home airports encounter fliers from other lands. At the end of World War II, industry leaders of various nations recognized aviation's international tendency and formed the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). The ICAO established English as the standard aviation language; international aviation communication will be conducted in English. Pilots from non-English-speaking countries must be able to read, write, and speak English sufficiently to use the aviation system. However, at the beginning of the twenty-first century, reliably judging that ability in every corner of the industry was still uncertain. The twentieth century's worst aircraft accident in the Tenerife, Canary Islands collision of two loaded Boeing 747s, hinged solely on unclear communications. In response to these deficiencies, the ICAO's Proficiency Requirements In Common English Study Group (PRICESG/2) completed its second meeting and final report in May 2001. The ICAO aims to implement an English language proficiency standard for aviation in the twenty-first century. That standard addresses pronunciation, stress and intonation, grammar and syntax, vocabulary, fluency, comprehension, and interaction. The group suggested a list of items to be included in ICAO guidance material. These included the full ICAO scale with a glossary of terminology, elaboration of each level, and examples; an English language competencies chart specifying language performance objectives appropriate to the air traffic controller and pilot work domainan introduction to English language acquisition and learning theories and methodologies, a manual describing the characteristics and attributes of sound English language training programs, a discussion of the importance of "extended" English, relevant to a controller and pilot's ability to handle unusual aviation circumstances and emergencies, and approaches to testing English language speaking and listening proficiency.

Aviator's Alphabet

At the beginning of the twenty-first century, aviation largely depended on radio communications for safety and efficiency. Air traffic control has developed from a trial-and-error experiment in the 1930s to an essential aviation industry segment. It works best when all participants understand the system and use it properly. Understanding is the most critical commodity in pilot-controller communications. In the early 1970s, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) of the United States established a pilot/controller glossary to establish a solid basis for understanding. In that glossary, words, and phrases to be used in flight have specific meanings.

Aviation communication relies on these standardized meanings. The FAA calls this "phraseology" and sets forth these words, phrases, and definitions in the Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM). The AIM divides its treatment of communications into a user-friendly general discussion, placing the pilot/controller glossary handily at the end of the book. The FAA also had to deal with the issue of letters and numbers spoken over aviation radios. Each nation registers its airplanes using letters and numbers or letters alone; these tail numbers establish an airplane's identity in radio communication.

To facilitate verbal communication in aviation operations, AIM employs a phonetic alphabet. This is an alpha-numeric system in which individual letters and several numbers are pronounced as specific and distinctive words. The phonetic alphabet is not confined to aviation. Other international communities, such as military forces and foreign language educators, employ it.

The AIM also utilizes the phonetic alphabet with numbers. In verbal communications, easily confused numbers are replaced with distinct sounds. For example, in conversational use, the numbers "five" and "nine" can be impossible to distinguish in noisy environments or when accents blur them. In addition, "nine" can be confused with the German word "nein," which means "no." Aviation pronounces "five" as "fife" and "nine" as "niner." Number sets such as "fifteen" and "fifty" are easily misheard even in the quiet of casual office conversation. Aviation addresses this by instructing pilots to, in most cases, speak each number separately—"Fifteen" becomes "wun fife," and a correctly speaking pilot or controller says "fifty" as "fife zero."

The AIM instructs pilots and controllers to speak airliner call signs and airways in a more conversational format. Airway V12 would be spoken "vik-tah twelve." Airliner 523the assigned flight number, not the tail numberwould be "Airliner fife-twenty-tree."

Aviators accepted the phonetic alphabet as they did the radioome loved it, some ridiculed it. As aviation brought regions, states, and nations into ever-closer contact, the existing assortment of dialects and accents justified the FAA's wisdom in detailing even phonetic pronunciation. This practice bolsters understanding between pilots and controllers, making the aviation system far safer than before standardization became a goal.

The phonetic alphabet is a concise method to achieve verbal precision and communication in a dynamic fight management environment. In aviation communication, designated words are spoken in place of individual letters to ensure clear communication. For example, the word "left" would be spelled out as "Lima, Echo, Foxtrot, Tango."

Pilot/Controller Glossary

Even pilots native to English-speaking countries may have widely diverging accents, and syntax differs from region to region in many countries. In the United States, after 1972, the FAA established a pilot/controller glossary in the AIM that put forth words and phrases largely compatible with the ICAO. These words had been developed by trial and error since the 1930s, and the FAA found them both efficient and effective. Common words include "Affirmative" to answer a question "yes," while "Negative" answers a question where "no" is the answer. Flight students soon learn that on the radio, monosyllabic words such as "yes" or "no" might not transmit over the radio. A commonly misused aviation word, "Roger," means that the hearer has received all of the last transmission. It does not indicate compliance with an instruction or understanding of information. When pilots or controllers do not understand a transmission, they should ask the sender to "Say again." Because radio communications frequencies are usually very busy, the ATC system has words that encapsulate entire sentences into a single word, easily understood by anyone without regard to their first language, accent, or any impediment, as in the example "Wilco," which the AIM defines as meaning, "I have received all of your last transmission, I understand it, and I will comply with it."

Spoken altitudes, radio frequencies, and headings have traits that mesh with the basic rule of pronouncing numbers. Pilots in the United States speak altitudes as thousands and hundreds of feet. In aviation English, the phrase "Two thousand, five hundred" spoken alone only refers to altitude; any other subject would follow the numbers, such as "two thousand, five hundred RPM" if discussing engine or propeller speed, or "two thousand, five hundred miles" when talking about range. The AIM also mandates U.S. pilots to address radio frequencies by speaking the numbers individually and using the term "point" to define tenths and hundreds of a frequency allocation. Internationally, non-U.S. pilots use the three-syllable word "decimal" instead of the single-syllable "point," which the Americans find clearer and more succinct. A common ground control frequency is spoken as "wun too wun point seven" (121.7). Controllers and pilots use good procedures when discussing aircraft headingsthe direction the aircraft travels in a straight lineby enunciating each number separately. To head east, therefore, is spoken as "zero niner zero" (90). This system, properly used, allows the person familiar with it to understand a message because the more it uses specific, meaning-rich words or phrases, the less aviation is encumbered by ambiguous, nonstandard ones. The result is increased safetysaving lives and propertyand efficiencysaving money and resources. For pilots and controllers, the pride of professionalism is considered a third benefit.

Benefits of Standardized Communication

Not all pilots agree with the principle of standard phraseology. To teach standard phraseology takes time, and its benefits are not readily apparent with each use. Articles in aviation magazines occasionally have derided established phraseology, some authors belittling aviators who used it or instructors who taught it. Many of these too quickly embraced the AIM's allowance that, should a pilot's understanding of phraseology fail, they might speak conversational English. Others retorted that every pilot's public duty is to learn the system and be a fully contributing memberhis includes adherence to established communications standards.

Effective communication must continue to be refined within the aviation community. While other industries tend to have codes or jargon for internal use, the decades have forged aviation's communications system into an English-based specialty language. As such, aviation-speak is inefficient for face-to-face conversation but succinct for time-critical communications in a fluid environment. That fact and its implications are only beginning to make inroads into the flight training environment. Flight schools still concentrate on teaching aerodynamics, airplane systems, maneuvers, regulations, weather, or myriad other subjects that at the time seem far more immediate than communications. The aviation industry continues to awaken to communications as a serious public safety issue.

In the 2020s, the widespread adoption of digital applications, including internet-based communications, enhanced air flight communications between aircrews and air traffic control. Airlines moved toward paperless environments where necessities such as flight plans and weather information were exchanged in near real-time. These types of developments foreshadow a period when aircraft piloting may be a fully automated process. This environment will negate many of the requirements and obstacles current flight communication procedures are designed to ensure.

Bibliography

Federal Aviation Administration. Aeronautical Information Manual. Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 2001.

Federal Aviation Administration. ATC Communications Phraseology Guide. Oklahoma City, FAA Academy Air Traffic Division, 1995.

International Civil Aviation Organization. Proficiency Requirements in Common English Study Group Final Report. Montreal, 2001.

Cushing, Steven. Fatal Words, Communication Clashes, and Aircraft Crashes. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1994.

Gardner, Bob. Say Again, Please, Guide to Radio Communications. Newcastle, Aviation Supplies and Academics, 1996.

Kern, Tony. Darker Shades of Blue: The Rogue Pilot. New York, McGraw-Hill, 1999.

:Radio Communications Phraseology and Techniques." Federal Aviation Administration. www.faa.gov/air‗traffic/publications/atpubs/aim‗html/chap4‗section‗2.html. Accessed 1 Aug. 2024.

Page, Charlie. "Can You Hear Me Now: How Pilots Communicate with ATC While 35,000 Feet in the Air." The Points Guy, 30 May 2020, thepointsguy.com/guide/how-pilots-communicate-with-atc-in-air. Accessed 1 Aug. 2024.

Sparkles, Matthew. "Will We Ever See Commercial Plane Flights without Human Pilots?" New Scientist, 17 Jan. 2023, www.newscientist.com/article/2354840-will-we-ever-see-commercial-plane-flights-without-human-pilots. Accessed 1 Aug. 2024.

"The Digital Aircraft: How Technology Is Reshaping Air Travel." BBC, 2024, Awww.bbc.com/storyworks/future/imagining-the-future-of-air-travel/the-digital-aircraft-how-technology-is-reshaping-air-travel. Accessed 1 Aug. 2024.