In 1966 ‘’NALL Report’’ indicated that 70-80 % of aircraft accidents are caused by human

factors, 8% by mechanical or electrical failure factors and remaining are ‘’others’’. 15 years
record of Aircraft incidents shows that there was great role of radio communication system.
Sometimes it was major and sometimes it was incidental. And, typically associated with so
many of the NTSB National Transportation Safety Board accident studies are comments such
as these:

 "Air/ground communications not attained."

 "Communications/information delayed."
 "Air/ground communications not used."
 "Improper interpretation of instructions."
 "Communication inattention."
 "Communications not understood."
 "Improper use of radio equipment."
 "Radio communications not maintained."
 "Failure to communicate on the Common Traffic Advisory Frequency (CTAF)."
 "Communications inadequate."

In the technological world of modern air travel, there’s a certain irony in the fact that the
majority of aviation disasters are caused by human error. And one of the most common forms
of error is miscommunication. Even if just one person makes a mistake, the repercussions can
be catastrophic. Air travel is arguably one of the safest forms of transportation, but when
airplane crashes do happen, because of their nature, they can take a devastating toll on human
life.

1. Avianca Flight 52 (1990)

On January 25, 1990, Avianca Flight 52 was carrying 149 passengers from Bogotá, Colombia
to New York. However, because of bad weather conditions and air traffic congestion, the
Boeing 707 was forced into a holding pattern off the coast near New York. And after circling
for nearly an hour and a half, the aircraft was running low on fuel.

When Flight 52 arrived at Kennedy Airport, due to the fog and wind, only one runway was
open for the 33 planes that were attempting to land every hour. What’s more, the flight was
delayed again as the aircraft ahead of them failed to touch down. Flight 52’s fuel situation
soon became desperate.
Two crucial pieces of miscommunication led to the disaster that was to follow. When the
aircraft was passed from regional to local air traffic controllers, the local controllers were not
informed that the aircraft had too little fuel to reach its alternative airport. Compounding the
problem, crucially the aircraft’s crew did not explicitly declare that there was “fuel
emergency” to the local controllers, which would have indicated that the plane was actually
in danger of crashing.

As a result, after missing its first attempt to land, the airplane was given a landing pattern that
it had too little fuel to execute. While the crew attempted to maneuver the plane, its engines
flamed out in quick succession. The Boeing 707 slammed into the village of Cove Neck,
Long Island, killing 65 of its 149 passengers and eight out of nine of its crew..

2. Air Florida Flight 90 (1982)

On January 13, 1982, Air Florida Flight 90 was due to travel from Washington National
Airport in Virginia to Hollywood International Airport in Fort Lauderdale, FL, with a layover
in Tampa.
Conditions were snowy, and the aircraft had been de-iced improperly. Neither did it have its
engine anti-icing system activated. This caused instruments to freeze and fail to register the
correct readings. So, while the cabin crew thought that they had throttled up sufficiently for
takeoff, in actual fact they didn’t have enough power.

The Boeing 737’s run-up took almost half a mile (800m) longer than it should have done.
Even as they set off down the runway, the first officer noticed that something was wrong with
the plane’s instruments and that it wasn’t capable of getting airborne. However, his attempts
to communicate this were brushed off by the captain, who ordered the takeoff to continue.

The plane crashed into the 14th Street Bridge, killing 78 people, including four motorists.
Later, reports showed that there was sufficient space for the aircraft’s takeoff to have been
aborted – if only the flight crew had been communicating better.

3. Singapore Airlines Flight 006 (2000)

It’s not often that an aircraft collides with a bulldozer yet, tragically, that’s exactly what
happened in this next accident, involving an airplane schedule to fly from Singapore to Los
Angeles via Taipei. On October 31, 2000, Singapore Airlines Flight 006 was taxiing to its
takeoff point in stormy weather. Conditions were bad. There was low visibility thanks to the
heavy rain. And crewmembers accidentally steered the Boeing 747 into runway 05R, which
was closed for repairs.

The runway was cluttered with excavators, concrete barriers and a small bulldozer, but the
pilot was unable to see them because of the inclement weather. The pilots had also apparently
failed to read a report issued two months earlier that stated that the runway would be closed.
As a result, they began takeoff procedures on the wrong runway.

While attempting to take off, the aircraft collided with the heavy equipment and broke apart.
Many passengers seated in the middle of the plane were killed when fuel in the wings
exploded and sent fireballs through that section. The final death toll amounted to 83 of the
179 on board, including four crewmembers.

4. Linate Airport Disaster (2001)

On October 8, 2001, miscommunication played a role in a major collision at Linate Airport in
Milan, Italy. The runway was obscured by thick fog, effectively reducing visibility to around
656 feet (200 meters), which may also have contributed to the tragedy, together with factors
such as high traffic volume.
A Cessna Citation CJ2 business jet was given clearance to taxi to its takeoff point on a route
that would avoid the main runway. However, due partly to poor use of radio communications
and lack of proper markings and signs, the Cessna misinterpreted the message and turned in
the wrong direction, crossing the main runway. Its route led it into the path of Scandinavian
Airlines Flight 686, a McDonnell Douglas MD-87 airliner.

The two planes collided, with Flight 686 traveling at about 170 mph (270 kph). The Cessna
went up in flames, while the right engine of the MD-87 was destroyed. The pilot of Flight
686, Joakim Gustafsson, managed to get the plane airborne for a brief period. And in an
attempt to regain control, he hit the thrust reverser and brakes – noted as a particularly skilful
maneuver. Even so, Gustafsson lost control of the plane, and it smashed into a luggage
hangar at the end of the runway. In total, 118 people were killed in the disaster.

5. Dan Air Flight 1008 (1980)

This disaster was caused by a single misheard word. Dan Air Flight 1008 departed from
Manchester, England, on the morning of April 25, 1980, en route to Tenerife, one of Spain’s
Canary Islands. At 1:21 pm, the plane ploughed into the side of the island’s mount La
Esperanza, killing all 146 people on board.
 A Dan-Air 727 similar to the accident aircraft
The cause of the disaster was a misinterpretation made by the Boeing 727’s flight crew. The
plane was instructed by the control tower to take an unpublished, not officially approved, and
potentially dangerous holding pattern above Los Rodeos Airport. But the pilot also seems to
have mistaken the word “inbound” for “outbound” in the instructions he received, flying in
the opposite direction to which he was supposed to.

This turn in the wrong direction took the plane through an area of exceptionally high ground.
And due to the airport’s lack of ground radar, the air traffic controllers were unable to tell the
flight crew that the plane was off course.

Heavy clouds obscured the crew’s vision, likely preventing them from seeing the looming
threat of the mountain. The first sign they had of any impending danger was when the plane’s
ground proximity warning device was triggered. The crew attempted a steep climb, but the
aircraft slammed into the mountainside, killing everyone on board instantly.

6. PSA Flight 182 (1978)

On September 25, 1978, Pacific Southwest Airlines Flight 182 was making a routine trip
from Sacramento to San Diego. In the vicinity, an instructor was giving one of his students
flying lessons in a private Cessna aircraft.

At some point, the Cessna made an unauthorized change of course, which put it on the same
flight path as the much larger Boeing 727. At first, both pilots managed to steer clear of each
other. But communication between the crew and airport control sounded nervous prior to the
crash.

In the transmissions between air traffic control and Flight 182, the crucial word “passed”
appears to have been misheard as “passing,” causing the controllers to believe that the flight
crew knew the location of the Cessna. In fact, they had lost sight of the plane.

Less than two minutes after the transmission, the Cessna slammed into the bottom of Flight
182’s right wing. The Cessna broke to pieces, and the Boeing 727’s right wing was shattered.
Both aircraft plummeted into a San Diego neighborhood, killing all 135 onboard on Flight
182, seven people on the ground, and both the Cessna pilots.

Witnesses at the crash site reported utter carnage, with blood and pieces of people’s bodies
strewn across the entire area. In the end, if the crew of Flight 182 had managed to clearly
communicate to air traffic control that they had lost sight of the smaller plane, California’s
deadliest ever aircraft disaster might have been averted.

7. American Airlines Flight 965 (1995)

On December 20, 1995, American Airlines Flight 965 was flying from Miami to Cali,
Colombia, carrying 163 passengers and crew. On approach to the airport of Cali, the crew
accidentally erased the waypoints that would have allowed them to navigate to the airport.
It was at this point that two miscommunications occurred. First, the captain entered the first
“R” on the list of waypoints available, inadvertently sending the plane directly towards
Bogotá, through a valley that put it on a collision course with mountainous terrain. Next, the
air traffic controller at Cali, Nelson Ramírez, sensed that something was wrong, but he did
not know enough English to correct the errant plane.

Flight 965 slammed into the 9,800-foot (3,000-meter) mountain, despite the flight crew’s
last-minute efforts to pull out of the collision. In total, 159 people were killed in the crash,
leaving only four survivors (initially five), who were all sitting within two rows of each other.
A dog was also rescued from the wreckage.

8. Garuda Indonesia Flight 152 (1997)

On September 26, 1997, Garuda Indonesia Airlines Flight 152 was traveling from Jakarta to
Medan. While making its final approach, the pilot called Medan airport for help, complaining
of poor visibility due to forest fires burning below.

At the time, the fires had caused delays, and three planes were waiting to land at Medan.
Confusion arose because two of the aircraft had the same flight number. And in the chaos, air
traffic control allegedly pulled the doomed Garuda Flight 152 off its regular course.

However, it seems that the crucial element of the disaster was a massive failure of
communication between the pilot and the airport. Just before the plane – an Airbus A300 –
was due to land, air traffic control ordered the pilot to turn right instead of left. A mix-up
resulted, and the flight crashed in mountainous terrain, killing all 234 individuals on board.
Chillingly, one minute after the plane turned in the wrong direction, the pilots were heard
screaming.

9. Charkhi Dadri Mid-Air Collision (1996)

The Charkhi Dadri mid-air collision the occurred on November 12, 1996 is the worst mid-air
crash in the history of aviation. Kazakhstan Airlines Flight 1907 collided with Saudi Arabian
Airlines Flight 763 at an altitude of almost 14,000 feet (4,300 meters), killing all 349 people
on board both planes.

The cause of the disaster can be traced back to communications difficulties in the
Kazakhstani plane. None of the Kazakhstani flight crew, except the radio operator,
understood English, so they were completely reliant on him to communicate with air traffic
control. The radio operator also lacked his own set of instruments and had to look over the
shoulders of the pilots in order to find out information, such as the aircraft’s height.

The result of this was that Flight 1907 descended more than 1,000 feet (300 m) below its
assigned altitude of 15,000 feet (4,600 meters), while struggling with turbulence inside a
bank of cloud. The radio operator noticed the descent and told the crew to bring the aircraft
back up, unfortunately placing them square in the path of the Saudi Arabian Boeing 747.
The resulting collision destroyed the left wing and stabilizer of Saudi Arabian aircraft,
sending it spiraling towards Earth, disintegrating as it fell. Flight 1907, meanwhile, crashed
into a field. Four survivors were recovered from the wreckage of the Kazakhstani plane, but
all of them died soon afterwards.

10. Tenerife Airport Disaster (1977)

The worst air disaster of all time occurred at Tenerife’s Los Rodeos Airport (now known as
Tenerife North Airport) in the Canary Islands. Two Boeing 747s, Pan Am Flight 1736 and
KLM Royal Dutch Airline Flight 4805, collided in fog, killing 583 people and leaving only
61 survivors. Unfortunately, the causes of the disaster boil down to possible impatience and a
very basic error of communication.

On March 27, 1977, Los Rodeos Airport was covered in heavy fog and was overcrowded due
to traffic being diverted from Gran Caneria Airport, where a bomb had exploded. This may
also have meant that direction from air traffic control was more muddled than usual.

KLM pilot Jacob van Zanten was eager to leave. Van Zanten and his crew had almost
reached the legal limit of their on-duty time and would have to stay in Tenerife overnight
unless they got going soon. This may have contributed to the pilot’s fatal mistake when he
received the communication “you are clear” from the air traffic control tower.

A second clearance was required before van Zaten could take off, but instead he began to
accelerate down the runway. In the meantime, the Pan Am flight, which was attempting to
find its assigned taxiway in the heavy fog, was directly in the KLM airplane’s path. The
resulting collision obliterated the Dutch plane, sending it some 100 feet into the air before it
came crashing down and exploded in a ball of fire. The Pan Am flight was sliced into pieces
and also went up in flames.

The Top 12 Reasons for Miscommunication between Pilots and Controllers

And how to avoid them
In aviation, clear and timely communication is crucial for safety. Any misunderstanding or
miscommunication between pilot and ground could potentially be disastrous.
Simply being aware of these top 12 reasons is the first important step to avoiding them.

1. Callsign Confusion
Aircraft callsign confusion is an annoyance throughout the world and has been
implicated in many incidents when pilots have accepted clearances meant for others.
There have been calls in the UK and North America for a central system for controlling
the allocation of callsigns (Canadian Aviation Safety Board, 1990). It is not unheard of
for there to be several aircraft with similar callsigns on the same frequency. In Asia,
number 8 is considered to be a very lucky number, so you can imagine the likelihood of
incidents arising from callsign confusion in this region.

Solution: Controllers need to ensure that instructions are received by the correct
aircraft. In addition, pilots also need to ensure that they readback the instruction that is
intended for them.

*Tip: Practicing listening to numbers spoken in different accents and also practicing the
pronunciation of numbers is a MUST for any pilot flying internationally.

2. Absent-mindedness (or “slips”, as it is commonly referred to)

Absent-mindedness is a form of miscommunication which controllers and pilots will
make occasionally. For instance, a controller may routinely assign the same level for
descent to arriving aircraft. But on the one occasion that conflicting traffic at that level
has been noted, the controller may still absent-mindedly assign that level to an inbound
aircraft instead of providing level separation. Such slips are usually linked to worry about
a personal problem or an external distraction at the time. They are not signs of
incompetence but of misapplied competence. They are a problem of experts, not of
beginners. The chance of making an absent-minded slip increases as we become more
experienced and skilled at an activity and perform tasks automatically.
Solution: Additional training may not be the answer here; instead, experienced
controllers and pilots should learn to expect the unexpected, look for inconsistences and
not react as if the mind is on autopilot.
3. Ambiguity
Ambiguity (vagueness) can happen due to many features of verbal communications. It
has been a factor in many aviation accidents such as the 1992 Air Inter Flight 148 crash
on Mont Sainte-Odile in France which killed 87 people where, because of the use of
“less-than-optimum phraseology by both the flight crew and the controller, their
respective intentions and expectations were ambiguous”. This led to a sudden increase
in workload for the crew just before the crash (Pariès, 1996).
Workload and the stress of abnormal situations may increase imprecision and
inaccuracies. Colloquial speech (plain English) may confuse pilots or controllers and
restrict the flow of information between them. This in turn reduces situational
awareness (Morrow and Rodvold, 1998).
A lack of definition can also be included here when controllers and pilots have differing
understandings of words and procedures.
Solution: To practice standard phraseology and use it at all times.
*Tip: It is also advisable to improve your comprehension of aviation English vocabulary
for abnormal situations, in case you are involved in an emergency and plain English is
used as a form of communication. Here is a great resource for that.
4. Emergencies
You all know that in emergency situations a pilot must aviate, navigate and
communicate. This means that tasks become the priority for pilots and controllers and
they may be distracted and communicate less effectively due to the workload.
Solution: To concentrate on delivering slow, clear speech using standard phraseology
whenever possible. Controllers have the additional task of ensuring that the distraction
with an emergency does not cause slips with communications with other aircraft.
5. Different Voices
Voices become familiar, and it can confuse the pilot if a different controller from the
one expected replies; and similarly it can confuse the controller if parts of a single
dialogue with the crew of an aircraft are with different crew members.
A controller may be unsure that the correct aircraft has received the instructions,
especially since pilots sometimes mix up their callsigns if they have flown several
different aircraft recently.
Solution: Ensure that you listen closely to the callsign and instruction and readback
correctly. Communication is two-way, as is the responsibility to avoid miscommunication.
6. Speaking different languages
When flying internationally you will encounter controllers who communicate with
aircraft from their country in their native language, and pilots will also reply in their
native language. There are also numerous occasions when you will hear speakers of the
same language communicating with different dialects or using colloquial expressions.
This can lead to serious problems and often cases of poor situational awareness due to
lack of understanding. A well-known example of this was the Tenerife disaster in 1977.
Solution: To use ONLY English, the language of aviation and to broaden your knowledge
of plain English for abnormal situations to increase your chances of being able to
comprehend colloquial communication if faced with it.
*Tip: You should be proactive in checking your own English level according to ICAO
standards, regardless of your ICAO English exam score because not all exams give the
same results. Here is a resource for accurately checking your own level.
7. Pronunciation
Poor pronunciation by controllers or pilots leads to lack of understanding. The receiver
is confused about what has been heard. Many controllers are not aware that they have
inadequate pronunciation and that it is the reason for unacknowledged instructions or
requests for message repeats. Some people find certain words very difficult to
pronounce, especially when they are busy, so, for example, ‘Juliet Juliet Tango’ becomes
‘Jew Jew Tango’ and a ‘Bulls 2 arrival’ becomes ‘Buws 2 arrival’.
Solution: You must listen to good clear pronunciation of RT Phraseology and repeat what
you hear.
*Tip: For best results, you should schedule a private face to face lesson with an English
teacher to check your own pronunciation. The latest voice recognition technology can
also be effective.
8. Number Problems
As with callsign confusion, errors with callsigns, levels, heading, speeds, tracks, winds,
latitudes and longitudes, and so on are also common. It seems to occur most often when
controllers give headings and distances together with altitudes. Numbers are likely to
be moved around and the error may not be picked up in the pilot readback. It is also
possible for the pilot to read it back correctly but enter the number in the wrong
sequence into the aircraft’s flight management system.
Solution: It is vital for pilots and controllers to practice listening to real ATC
communications spoken in different accents, especially those accents that may be
encountered on a regular basis during flight operations. For example, if a pilot regularly
operates routes between France and Argentina, it would be advisable to be exposed to
English being spoken by French, North American, Brazilian and Spanish speakers.
*Tip: You can gain this practice by listening to live ATC streams and also by recording the
communications during a flight and listening to them over and over again. Also, correct
and complete RT transmissions must be adhered to. Here is a great resource.
9. Readback Error
Readback errors have been referred to in number 8 above. Readback of applicable parts
of a controller’s instructions does not guarantee that the readback message has been
accurately received. Too often, confirmation is given of an incorrect readback. The
Aviation Safety Reporting System (USA) has labelled this phenomenon hearback and
cited four major causes (Hawkins, 1993:167):
• similar aircraft callsigns, resulting in confusion in transmission or reception;
• only one pilot on board working and monitoring the frequency;
• numerical errors, such as confusing ‘one zero thousand’ with ‘one one thousand’;
• expectancy—hearing what one expects to hear.
Solution: Those that apply to reasons 2 and 8
11. Expectation
Messages are misunderstood because the listener incorrectly assumes the intended
message. Expectation errors are a dangerous type of miscommunication because
readbacks may indicate that the message has been received correctly when, in fact, it
has not. Here is an example:
Pilot: “speed 315 knots”
Controller: “Maintain 280”
Pilot: 280 knots”
The pilot slowed the aircraft to 280 knots and continued climbing. As it climbed through
FL295, the controller said that the aircraft was cleared only to FL280. In this case, the
controller was communicating about airspeed and failed to indicate, due to his poor
phraseologies (i.e. not saying “maintain flight level 280”), that the subject had changed
to altitude. He also failed to hear the details of the readback and missed the pilot saying
“knots”.
Solution: Again, correct phraseology and paying close attention to detail is the key to
prevent miscommunication here. Always listen out for important information in
readbacks. In abnormal situations this is even more crucial when the workload is even
greater than normal.
12. Language Use
The English language becomes complex for aviation when it is used for a variety of
functions, such as: statement, question, request, and so on. Subtle differences in
intonation and placement of pauses affects the way we interpret words. When involved
in an abnormal or emergency situation we may be distracted or stressed and the subtle
features of English that keep communication free of errors may be missed out or moved,
resulting in miscommunication. You will have all heard the communication between an
Air China pilot and a controller at JFK airport. The Air China pilot had a very low level of
English and was taxiing to the gate. The controller instructing him was a native North
American who was using standard phraseology and plain English.
Controller: “Air China 981, have they cleared you into the ramp?”
Pilot: “Roger, ramp Air China 981”
Controller: “Air China 981, have you been cleared into the ramp?” “Ok, cleared to the ramp.”
Solution: Once again, familiarity of standard phraseology, and the ability to understand
and use the following English language structures will be invaluable – Present Simple,
Present Continuous, Present Perfect, Past Simple and passive.
*Tip: You must also gain practice in listening to different accents of English and practice
clear pronunciation with an English teacher, preferably an aviation English specialist.
12. Speed of Delivery and Pauses
The rapid speed at which controllers deliver instructions is probably the most common
miscommunication complaint received from pilots.
Solution: During peak traffic periods, controllers in some positions may be talking
constantly. Actively listen to all transmissions. Use the information gained from listening to
build
your situational awareness and to assist you to see-and-avoid other aircraft. Be alert to your
own
call sign.

Additional contributing factors to miscommunication

As well as the reasons listed above, miscommunication can also be associated with
human factors such as complacency, fatigue, lack of professionalism, personal problems,
and so on. Problems with microphones, headsets and interference are also issues to be
aware of that are not discussed above.