Leaderboard

Brevity terms are not difficult to hear, not similar to words with different meanings, and they make sense to what they are referring to. I would stick to language differences in the aviation community.

Bingo. --break break-- Additionally, for the guy with 17.5 in, no way in hell a unit is gonna willy nilly gonna let you walk in and go on a set of 6 month orders (RPA/MPA) and reach sanctuary on their watch; they're gonna watch you like a hawk. Alternatively, they might make you sign a conditional agreement where you agree to waive sanctuary, as a condition of employment with the unit. For a guy with 17.5 years? Yeah right, he'll rather stay AD. There's no way life can get that much tougher for a guy in the last two years of service staring at a primo retirement check for life. If you got less than 3 years to go, man just tough it out. Yeah they'll probably deploy you, just think of the prize. Now, if your thinking process is that you're just addicted to the gig and want to continue to do it 'til they kick you out the door, and that's worth more to you than an AD retirement check, by all means go Reserves, sign that waiver of sanctuary away, and keep hacking the mish for king and country. I warn you though, grass in the AFRC/ANG is starting to burn up. Google TFI (total force integration) and talk to people who have otherwise been lifers in the ARC and get their perspective on the abortion they're committing on the Reserves. This ain't your grandaddy's guard/reserve gig anymore. It's part time regAF brother. Old timers are jumping ship and more and more just-off-AD guys are taking their place, "just happy I don't have to deploy anymore", and accepting the AD way of doing things and the chit deals and disco belt shenanigans. Just be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

I think examples of this you could focus on within the military side of flying is brevity terms. I.E. words like tally, contact, splash, etc. and what purposes they serve. These structures I think are what make rapid comms possible such as getting instrument clearances, missed approach instructions, etc. International controllers may be bad, but I think international pilots are just as big a threat as well. For example this video is a perfect example. This is a great funny example of communication issues. That said I think you might have a hard time finding a focused scope given the wide range of points you put forward, and I would think mixing the radio communications syntax with accents/language barriers is a bad idea. This is because you are trying to do a scientific examination so having more than one variable at play makes it hard to form a cohesive argument. So I would focus on either the syntax OR the language barrier, but avoid the combination of the two. This is just my opinion, but I think it will make it easier to build a solid argument.

I was about 15 miles from a large airport at 7000' doing 250 knots. Approach. N##### turn right 30 degrees. Traffic at your six o'clock, Airline 737 at 9000' with a 50 knot overtake. Us. If he is at 9 and I am at 7 doing 250 knots how is he passing me? Approach. Airline 123 reduce speed to 200 indicated.