• ZJBlank@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      Interesting, we the same sort of language as the US up here in Canada too, but I always assumed it was the same thing the world over. Is there a website or handbook containing ICAO standard language available somewhere? I’m curious what other differences there are

        • ZJBlank@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 years ago

          That makes a lot of sense, because like I said in another comment, I’d be more likely to interpret that as “taxi into [takeoff] position and hold”, not “taxi to threshold.” Hopefully the change that comes of this is US/Canadian aviation starts using the ICAO standard phraseology.

          • poopkins@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 years ago

            While I do think this is a good idea, I don’t think it can be attributed as a factor in the accident. The captain of the Japanese Coast Guard had nearly 5 years under his belt and was likely much more familiar with ICAO phraseology than what is used in North America.

            • ZJBlank@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 years ago

              You’re probably right, I’m being too quick to jump to conclusions.

              As an aside, I find it a little ironic that most of the world follows ICAO phraseology, yet Canada, home to ICAO’s headquarters, does not.

    • poopkins@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Thank you for pointing this out.

      I had also looked into it in more detail, and came to the same conclusion. In the ICAO quick reference guide they provide an almost identical example:

      Taxi to holding point C, runway 27, Big Jet 345

      I’ve clarified this in my analysis.