I bring you a weekly bite-sized chunk of the science behind helicopter human factors and CRM in practice, simplifying the complex and distilling a helicopter related study into a summary of less than 500 words.
TITLE:
The role of native English speakers in safe, efficient radiotelephony
WHAT?
This paper examines how Native English Speakers (NES) contribute to — and sometimes compromise — safety in aviation communication. It challenges the commonly held assumption that being a NES automatically ensures clear, standardised, and effective radiotelephony (R/T).
WHERE?
Developed by the Aircrew Training Policy Group (ATPG – Skytalk Group), with contributions from ICAO, IFATCA, ICAEA, and safety professionals across Europe and beyond.
WHEN?
Published in 2024, reflecting current industry concerns around ICAO Language Proficiency Requirements (LPRs).
WHY?
Although ICAO established English as the global aviation language, communication breakdowns remain a leading human factors risk in aviation accidents and incidents. Non-native English speakers (NNEs) often find NES harder to understand because they speak too quickly, use slang or idioms, and deviate from standard phraseology. Addressing this gap is vital for operational safety, especially in multinational and high-stress operations.
HOW?
The paper:
- Reviewed communication incidents where language was a factor (using ASRS and EASA reports).
- Collected first-hand accounts from international pilots and controllers.
- Analysed weaknesses in ICAO LPR policy (e.g., lifetime “Level 6” awards for NES without reassessment).
- Proposed training interventions for NES, covering speech rate, pronunciation, phraseology, empathy, and management of breakdowns.
- Suggested future initiatives such as Simplified Spoken English (SSE), enhanced CRM communication training, and integrated phraseology testing.
FINDINGS:
- NES often compromise safety by speaking too fast, using colloquial language, or assuming universal comprehension.
- Effective communication requires NES to adapt their speech (slower rate, softened accent, standard phraseology) and show empathy toward NNE challenges.
- The ICAO Level 6 lifetime award for NES is misleading: language ability degrades over time, and communicative skill involves more than vocabulary and grammar.
- NES should be trained and periodically reassessed in standard usage and phraseology, just like NNEs.
- Shared responsibility is key: both NES and NNEs must commit to clarity, but NES — often in positions of authority — must model best practice.
SO WHAT?
For helicopter operations, the stakes are particularly high:
SAR, HEMS, and offshore crews regularly interact with multiple agencies outside of the ‘traditional and trained’ aviation sphere. e.g. other emergency services, ground staff, and vessels, making radiotelephony clarity critical.
In emergencies, when plain English replaces routine phraseology, linguistic discipline by NES becomes even more decisive for safety.
Miscommunication can escalate quickly in low-level, high-workload helicopter contexts where time margins are slim.
Regulators and operators should treat language as a safety risk factor equal to fatigue or workload, and no longer assume automatic proficiency of NES communication.
NES should pay greater attention to how they communicate including choice of words, speech rate, accent, and empathy.
REFERENCE:
Aircrew Training Policy Group – Skytalk Group. (2024). The role of native English speakers in safe, efficient radiotelephony. Retrieved from https://www.aviation-english.com/atpg-skytalk/
competentaviators.com 