I tend to agree with a previous poster who thought this was as much to do with general RT standards in Ireland, than the capability to speak the Queen’s English, per say. So if you are an aviation authority and you think you have a problem with RT standards, but you have issued RT licences as an integral part of flight licences, and therefore would have to admit to a problem with the whole flight testing regime, then I guess you might look for a way out that would save both face and reputation. And so separate testing for ELP is born!
Power and Attitude often leads to Piss Poor Performance.
No serious aviator would believe the ELP is unnecessary.
The implementation (Costs, Availability,Etc.) however by different States remains questionable.
The idea is actually quite sound and is based on a number of accidents which were directly attributable to misunderstandings by flight crew, both with ATC and between crew members themselves. This proficiency rating is not a measure of ones RT standard, this is what the FRTOL is for, but it is a method of trying to assure that in international aviation a good understanding exists between all those on whom the safe conduct of the flight rests.
I add two quotes I read on a CRM related paper as an example, the first reads like a bad joke but unfortunately is true http://www.airlinesafety.com/editorials ... cation.htm
In 1993, Chinese pilots flying a U.S.-made MD-80 were attempting to land in northwest China. The pilots were baffled by an audio alarm from the plane's ground proximity warning system. A cockpit recorder picked up the pilot's last words: "What does 'pull up' mean?"
The implimentation of the ICAO requirement was very haphazard. No one would argue that in the UK and Ireland most if not all of the pilots were at level 6 standards but as this is an international effort it had to be applied equally to all member states. Aviation authorities appeared to have been somewhat surprised by the whole thing when the level 4's were issued on licences in time for the original date, but in the 3 intervening years no apparent thought seems to have been given to putting in place a workable certification system to renew them. The assumption was most people would be meeting an examiner during those 3 years and the issue would resolve itself. This however excluded a whole range of PPL SEP and microlight rated pilots who renewed ratings by experience and did not want or need a flight test just for the sake of having their conversational english tested, something which one should really be able to do over the counter at any RFTO or with any examiner in an informal basis.In 1995, an American Airlines jet crashed into a mountain in Colombia after the captain instructed the autopilot to steer towards the wrong beacon. A controller later stated that he suspected from the pilot's communications that the jet was in trouble, but that the controller's English was not sufficient for him to understand and articulate the problem.
On the contrary, Sir.Carrier Pigeon wrote:If AOPA had any clue or clout, this ELP baloney wouldn't have seen the light of day.
Not only did IAOPA agree with its introduction, but actually recommend it, on the grounds of Worldwide accident investigations and for the future safety of Human life everywhere.
If your statement refers to its implementation status then that is a matter for each ICAO member states authorities.
Each ICAO state was given the regulation to introduce and enforce from March 2008 under their own state conditions.
In the Eleven Years from 1999 until August 2010, Ireland had no AOPA whatsoever, so AOPA Ireland can not be held accountable.
I am not sure if your issue is with the Cost of the assessment itself, its availability or you’re ability to pass it, as it seems, you appear to complain about it without stating a clear reason.
I guess, I shall presume that you object to the cost, if this is true, then your complaint should be with the IAA and not AOPA.
If it is a matter of availability, then your complaint still lies with the IAA, AOPA Ireland approached the IAA and offered free assessments countrywide.
A feeling of Inability? Still no problem, we are here to assist in every way.
I have been on the receiving end of an RT mis-matched TX from what may as well have been from another planet, and it’s a real awakener!
AOPA is not your enemy, please do not assume such!
http://www.aopa.ie" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- Verified User
- Posts: 466
- Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 7:59 am
- Location: Donegal. VFR Flight Guide IRL Page 131
Better not give the Gestapo ideas !... they will bring out a TV license for GPS (may have to go greyscale and get a Black & White license)...lol
Anyone going flying today? (with or without a wireless)
What struck me is the following note to paragraph 184.108.40.206, in relation to the need to re-evaluate after a period a proficiency level already assigned -
“Note 1 – Formal evaluation is not required for applicants who demonstrate expert language proficiency, e.g. native and very proficient non-native speakers with a dialect or accent intelligible to the international aeronautical community.”
So the basic issue seems to be how do you demonstrate expert language proficiency if you are a native speaker? And the IAA view seems to be that you must do at least one test at Euro 40 (for a PPL holder) to do so.
What nonsense. What a nice little earner also. Say 800 current PPLs x 40 = Euro 32000. Where does this money go? Presumably into the pockets of the IAA and its designated examiners. So effectively a self enriching process has been invented. Which raises the question, who advised on the adoption of this process? Specifically, were any of the designated ground examiners involved in formulating the IAA approach?
Why cannot expert language proficiency be demonstrated simply by answering the questions:
1. Are you a native English speaker?
2. Can you confirm that you do not have any physical or other impediment to speaking English?
If the answer to both is Yes, then by definition you are level 6. Otherwise you need to be individually assessed. While these questions may appear discriminatory, that is after all what this assessment is about.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests