Flying the Dragon Rapide was a dream and my first commercial job! We operated pleasure trips which were normally large circuits of the airfield, occasionally further afield. Designed in 1933-34, she is an elegant twin-engine biplane with beautiful long tapering wings with the engine, fuel tanks and undercarriage all combined in a streamlined nacelle. She was and still is one of the first reliable and commercially viable airliners. A crew of one - me! The cockpit feels like being in a cramped greenhouse and is unnervingly high with the tail on the ground. The basic cabin holds 8 passengers, the largest being discreetly sat at the wing roots. Like most tailwheel aircraft of the period she is more of a handful on the ground than in the air. Taxying requires more skill and concentration than with a modern aircraft. The throttles are high up on the left but the brake lever is low down on the left. Taxying downwind, crosswinds or downhill requires skill and anticipation. You end up leaning down to the left to control the brake whilst holding the yoke hard back with your right arm and right hand stretched forward to control the throttles and your feet dabbing on the rudder to maintain direction.
Once on a pleasure trip over London I was heading west at 2000ft just north of the Thames. I noticed I was having to advance the left throttle to maintain RPM. Oil pressure was good, no vibration, and I was able to re synchronise the props. The throttle stagger was getting worse so I started a turn towards London City airport. The 1,500m runway was reassuringly close and glistening in the sunshine. Our routes were carefully planned via a series of diversion airports. The left throttle was now at max but the RPM was still decaying so I called City and asked to make a precautionary landing as I had an engine problem. The response surprised me “Sorry, we are closed and have no parking space. Suggest you divert to North Weald”. I was under pressure and I thought for a moment. The most likely problem was fouled plugs which might clear themselves, and these engines have a reputation for continuing to produce power despite all sorts of problems. However, flying away from a perfectly usable runway did not seem prudent. I did not want to go all the way to North Weald with one engine losing power. After a short pause feeling under huge pressure, I declared a MAYDAY and I explained I was losing power and might have to shut the engine down. London City was immediately open for me and willing to do whatever they could. I self-positioned for a left-hand visual for runway 27 and asked for the fire services to be standing by. I briefed the passengers immediately behind me and they passed the briefing backwards through the cabin.
The tower gave me clearance to land on 27 and informed me that the PAPIs were set at 5.5°! I had neither the intention nor possibility to go around, I aimed to touch down slightly deep and we made an uneventful landing and were met by the fire brigade.
Looking back now, more than 20 years, the flying part was the easy bit with this partial engine failure. My initial communication with the Air Traffic Control Officer (ATCO) was poor. I did not tell the ATCO how serious I thought my problem could be or what I needed. As a native speaker of English, this experience taught me a valuable lesson. Aviation English proficiency is, I suggest, a combination of standard phraseology and plain aviation English language plus linguistic awareness and accommodation skills. Since then I have tried to be as clear as possible on the RT.
Later in my career I started flying all over Europe and working in a multicultural cockpit which, as a native speaker gave me an added responsibility to make accommodations for my co-pilot, cabin crew and the ATCOs. It was hardly necessary due to the excellent level of English of my company colleagues but I slowed my speech rate, enunciated clearly and used standard phraseology and tried to be very concise. Humour and cultural references can be ambiguous in the cockpit or on the RT so I tried to keep those for the bar. I have often heard native speakers using excessive politeness, even idioms when making requests which has caused confusion and the need for clarification on the frequency. On becoming a Captain, one of the things that struck me the most was the increase in the amount and types of communication I became involved in.
I remember whilst on a flight, hearing the RT interchanges of another flight, different airline, similar type, which was a bit of a communication challenge. The Captain had for some reason noticed that the level of fluid in one hydraulic system was lower than normal, still above limits but lower than normal. He notified ATC and started explaining this, initially the ATCO was confused and tried to clarify the situation. Moments later the Captain asked to reduce speed and advised they needed time to look through the implications. The ATC confirmed the speed reduction and we were asked to slow too. The other crew took some time presumably running the checklist, creating a plan and reviewing it.
Some time later we heard something along these lines, he cut the historical narrative and said :
“So to confirm, at the moment we don’t have a problem, but we expect we will have a hydraulic failure shortly which will mean we will have limited maneuverability and a reduced cross wind limit. We want 27 for landing. After landing we will have limited braking and nosewheel steering we might not be able to vacate the runway. We will need a tug and fire services on standby. We will let you know when we are ready approach.”
The ATCO remained slightly confused by the idea of a future problem. This was a lot of plain aviation English for the ATCO to understand and the Captain gave the information concisely, and cross checked what had been understood.
I was impressed by his handling of the situation, I find myself thinking about what would be the next communication step to brief the cabin crew. A short message, I guess something along these lines:
“We have a technical problem which may affect our ability to steer on the ground. This is not an emergency. We will be making a normal landing but there is a possibility that we might not be able to vacate the runway and might have to be towed to stand. Please re-run the passenger safety brief. The fire service will be standing by the runway as a precaution so they might be seen by the passenger. If you think you can get the cabin secured in time we will be landing in approx 15 minutes? “
I would have asked the cabin number 1 to summarise back to me the problem, implications for the cabin, any special requirements and time remaining until landing.
Then on to the passenger briefing, what would I have said? Brief, clear non-technical language perhaps:
“We have had a technical issue which reduces our steering ability once on the ground, so we may remain on the runway and be towed onto stand. Emergency vehicles will be standing by as a precaution . The cabin crew will re-run the safety briefing which is a standard procedure. For those of you with onward connections, don’t worry. The transfer desks are aware we may be slightly late getting onto stand and will be monitoring connections.”
I think it was while we were on an intercept heading for the ILS that they made a PAN call to ATC. The Captain restated their limited maneuverability, additional aileron load, and the need for the long into-wind runway and he cross checked the understanding of the ATCO again. We changed frequency on intercept and heard no more until after our landing.
Later, I found out that all had gone well. The landing was normal there was no obvious problem except that the gear doors were hanging down so the crew contacted Engineering who gave them a procedure to raise the doors. With a slow taxi in they had been able to get to the apron despite the issue with the nosewheel steering.
Looking back, these were not particularly difficult events but required a succession of careful communications and underlined to me the need to:
Use standard phraseology where possible.
Readback clearances accurately in full.
Explain the implications of your problem in simple slow concise language, paraphrase if necessary.
State clearly what you need, including time.
Take time, if you can, to gather information, plan and review.
Communicate to ATC, cabin crew, engineering and passengers.
At the end of each exchange check what has been understood by concept-checking questions.
Fly the plan and review.
Aviation English proficiency is an amalgam of all these, standard phraseology and language behaviours to help you and the other party share mutual understanding. I truly respect those of you that manage to do this professionally in a second or third language. As a native English speaker I would encourage native English speaking colleagues to be sensitive to the extra burden we may put on our non native speaker counterparts at times.