第一工科大学研究報告第34号(2022)pp.7-22

Aviate, Navigate, Communicate!:
DX-inspired pilot - ATC exchange training.
Dr. David A. Kellaway Ed. D. (Nottingham)
Lecturer, School of Aeronautical Engineering, Dai-Ichi Institute of Technology
Abstract
The purpose of this research is to gauge the effectiveness of recently developed online applications, utilising DX
approaches to pilot training. The Aircraft Radio Simulator (ARSim) application makes use of disruptive
technologies such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Natural Language Processing (NLP) to train student pilots insimulated Air Traffic Control conversations and then exercise their knowledge in realistic exchanges with the rangeof simulated ATC services in airports around the world.
ᮏ◊✲ࡢ┠ⓗࡣࠊ᭱㏆㛤Ⓨࡉࢀࡓ࢜ࣥࣛ࢖ࣥ࢔ࣉࣜࢣ࣮ࢩࣙࣥࡢ᭷ຠᛶࢆホ౯ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡛࠶ࡾࠊࣃ࢖ࣟ
ࢵࢺࢺ࣮ࣞࢽࣥࢢ࡟ DX ࢔ࣉ࣮ࣟࢳࢆ฼⏝ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡛࠶ࡿࠋ⯟✵ᶵ↓⥺ࢩ࣑࣮ࣗࣞࢱ㸦ARSim㸧࢔ࣉࣜࢣ࣮ࢩࣙࣥࡣࠊேᕤ▱⬟㸦AI㸧ࡸ⮬↛ゝㄒฎ⌮㸦NLP㸧࡞࡝ࡢ◚ቯⓗᢏ⾡ࢆ฼⏝ࡋ࡚ࠊ⯟✵⟶ไࡢᶍᨃ఍ヰ࡛Ꮫ⏕ࣃ࢖ࣟࢵࢺࢆカ⦎ࡋࠊୡ⏺୰ࡢ✵ ࡛ᶍᨃ⟶ไࢧ࣮ࣅࢫࡢ⠊ᅖ࡜ࡢ⌧ᐇⓗ࡞஺ὶ࡛ࡑࡢ▱㆑ࢆ⾜౑ࡍࡿࠋ
Keywords: Natural Language Processing (NLP), communications, Air Traffic Control (ATC), DX, Artificial
Intelligence (AI)

1. Communicate!
“Digital Transformation (DX) is about adopting

two verbs of this paper’s title: to aviate and tonavigate.

disruptive technologies to increase productivity,

The third verb is also an essential part of pilot

value creation, and social welfare.” (Ebert andeducation: the ability to communicate by radio with

Duarte, 2021, pg 16). It “is driven by a flood of

Air Traffic Control (ATC) before, during and after

software technologies... data analytics, cloudflights. In Japanese domestic aviation, thesestorage and services, convergent interactivity andcommunications are typically in Japanese, but forcognition, augmented reality with visualization andinternational flights passing over Japanese airspace

simulation, pattern recognition, machine learningand,and AI.” (ibid, pg 16).

internationally, communications are in English as

A large proportion of pre-service and in-service
pilot education takes place in flight simulators (aka.
Flight Training Devices, or FTD), which havebecome increasingly complex and realistic withrecent advances in hardware and software. FTDs
give pilots the chance to make mistakes and recoverindeedforJapanese

aircrew

flyinghas been mandated by the International Civil
Aviation

Organisation(ICAO)

since

2011.

Moreover, pilots flying internationally pilots are
obliged to pass proficiency tests in Aviation English
which coverxStandard phraseology, ie. the “jargon”

from them in an augmented reality environment.

governing

The FTD educates and exercises pilots in the first

between pilots and ATC such as requests toroutinecommunications

第一工科大学研究報告 第34号

x（2022）

taxi to and from a specified runway,

instructions from air traffic control are often

requests to change altitude or heading,delivered quickly and not uncommonly with five or

permission to land and so on.

six instructions in the one communication, which

Plain English, ie. communications requiredby non-routine situations, such as technicalor mechanical faults with the aircraft, or athe pilot must remember and read back accurately.
AI powered software can potentially fill an
instructional gap, allowing students to work at theirown pace and in their own time using their mobile

sick passenger.

device to access language production practice,Japan enjoys the expertise of professional andwhilst getting feedback in real time.

experienced pilots, in many cases former airline
captains, who are routinely employed in Japanese
air training institutions.

Less available areexperienced resources for teaching Aviation
English.

As pilots flying real aircraft in controlled airspace,students are required to communicate with various
sections of ATC such as Tower, Ground andApproach, for routine events such as requesting
permission and directions to taxi to a designated

The cost of flight training in the United States, New
Zealand and Australia being far less than theequivalent training in Japan, many Japanese
universities, Dai-Ichi included, send their students
overseas usually for a period of six months to gain

runway. ATC responses are often terse and rapidly
delivered: “Hold short of runway 34. Taxi via
Charlie 1, Charlie 2, Charlie 3” which the pilot is
obliged to understand completely and repeat
accurately in a process called “read back”.

their initial flying license, known as the Private
Pilot’s License (PPL). The focus of English
language instruction hitherto has been to prepare
students for their lives overseas, to make them
functional in the language of the host country andable to perform tasks such as ordering food in a
restaurant, purchasing goods in a supermarket andenjoying everyday conversations with people
around them.
The approach at Dai-Ichi has been a little different;
the emphasis is equally on preparing students fortheir ATC communications, such as they are
required to use when they pilot actual aircraft.
Classes are typically small; on average 7 to 8
students per lesson but even so, offering students

Trainee pilots appear to have the most difficulty
mastering ATC communications; cockpits are noisy
places and the radio airwaves are often filled withthe conversations of other pilots in the area. Pilots
who are first learning to fly have to remember andcope with a large number of simultaneous prompts
and actions; it is not uncommon for the cognitive
load to become very heavy indeed.
Moreover, there is anecdotal evidence that nonnative English speaker pilots can be reluctant tocommunicate over the radio knowing that native
speaker pilots share the same airwaves and havebeen heard to make insulting comments about theirEnglish.

sufficient production practice is a challenge.

Nevertheless, the ability to think in, and beStudents need the opportunity to make mistakes andunderstood in English is required, especially inrecover from them, learn how to deal withemergency situations such as in the case of auncertainty and develop good memories, as thetechnical malfunction in the aircraft, where pilots

.HOODZD\$YLDWH1DYLJDWH&RPPXQLFDWH';ဩLQVSLUHG3LORWဩ$7&H[FKDQJHWUDLQLQJ

on the flight deck may literally be being bombarded

Aviation Organization (ICAO) as the internationalwith a variety of diagnostic messages.

lingua franca of aviation. This has come about not

Preparing for an all-English living and training
environment within 12 months is a large
undertaking, but it is one our students approach

least because of multiple and avoidable airline
disasters whose cause was at least partiallyattributed to faulty communication between pilots
and ATC. According to Cookson (2009), causes ofwith dedication and commitment.

the mid-air collision above Zagreb in 1976 and the
The genesis of this project was a Morning
Conversation involving three pilot students. The
topic for the week was “online resources you use to

runway collision at Tenerife in 1977, significantly
though not exclusively were attributable tolinguistic factors.

supplement your pilot training.” Students sharedmultiple YouTube channels hosted by popular
Japanese pilots, FlightRadar24.com, on which it ispossible to view the movements, altitudes anddesignations of aircraft worldwide in real time,
various ATIS (Automatic Terminal Information
Service) broadcast websites. Like most English
learning websites, they simply reported information
and required little or no interaction from the user.
However, one student volunteered ARSim, andThe stakes are high. Similar errors could happen in
Japan. Esteval and Molesworth (2009) have studied
the potential impact on aviation safety of language
proficiency of pilots whose first language is not
English and their ability to effectively communicate
with ATC and found reason for concern, especiallyin the face of increasingly busy airports,
increasingly busy and stressed aircrew and support
staff.

quickly added that because it was all in English he

It is therefore appropriate to review the status of

had found it difficult to use. I noted all suggestions,

English in Japan, before exploring culturaland downloaded a free version of the software a

influences on learning.

short time later.

3.1 English as a Lingua Franca

This paper outlines a research project with students
from the 21TA and 22TA (third year and secondyear

aviation

students,

respectively)

English is now the world’s dominant second
language.

whovolunteered their time to test the software andagreed to report and discuss their findings with meover a period of 3 months.

British linguist David Graddol (2000, pg 7) assertsthat English generally and American English inparticular ‘is dominant as an international language
because of its global economic power’. However,

2. Research Questions

he contends that in the post-colonial age, the

1. How easy is ARSim to use for Japanese L2

ownership of English is changing. There are now

English pilot trainees? Is it suitable for self-

more speakers using English as an additional or

directed learning (SDL)?

second language, than those using it as their native

2. How does the software benefit the students?

language. Not only are non-native speakers greaterin number but English is also used increasingly in

3. Backgroundmultilingual contexts both inside and outside theEnglish is mandated by the International Civil

traditional English-speaking countries (eg. United

第一工科大学研究報告 第34号

Kingdom, United States, Canada, Australia).
According to Graddol (2000, pg 58) native speakers
lost their majority in the 1970s, and he projects thatby the year 2050 native speakers of English would（2022）

its English competency?
The most influential and oft-quoted paradigm forunderstanding World Englishes remains Kachru’s(1992) Onion-ring model.

number 433 million compared to those who havenativised the language at 668 million. Linguists

Figure 1: Kachru’s Onion Ring modelfromcultural

The three onion rings consist of the Inner, Outer andbackgrounds (Canagarajah, 2012; Gao, 2007;

Expanding Circles where the Inner Circle refers to

Kumaravadivelu, 2003) argue that in future,

traditional cultural and linguistic bases of English

English will be predominantly used in multilingualsuch as Britain, the United States, Canada andcontexts

Australia, countries where English is spoken as a

non-nativeasaEnglishsecondspeaking

language

andforcommunication between non-native speakers.
David Crystal (1997) adds that the English
language has some form of official status in 17
countries while the results of a British Council
survey administered to 1,398 respondents in 1995
(in Bamgboe, 2001) showed that 96.3% of
respondents agreed that English would remain theworld's dominant language (pg 357); in short thereisoverwhelming

acceptance

of

the

globaldominance of English. Additionally, Crystal (1997,
pg 106) reports that in the academic, scientific andtechnological sectors ‘over 80% of all informationis stored in electronic retrieval systems in English’.
This is an especially pertinent point for Japanesepilots flying international routes. leaving Japanese
airspace and heading west towards Europe, pilots
will overfly countries such as Vietnam, Korea, India,
Pakistan, Myanmar, Thailand and China before
they even get out of Asia. Flying South to Australia
or New Zealand, they may need to overfly Taiwan,
the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia; The common
factor in all of these being that Air Traffic Control
in each of these countries will be staffed bycontrollers for whom English is a second, and nottheir native language.
So where does Japan sit internationally in terms of

Native Language (ENL). The Outer Circle
represents the institutionalised non-native varieties(English as a Second Language - ESL) in countries
which have experienced extended periods ofcolonisation by either Britain or the United Statessuch as India, Malaysia and the Philippines. The
Expanding

Circleincludesregions

where

performance varieties of the language are usedessentially in English as a Foreign Language (EFL)
contexts. Countries such as China, Japan and Korea
are part of the expanding circle (Kachru, 1985 pp
366-7).
Pennycook (2017, pg 518) contends that while theonion ring model is informative, it entrenches thecentral role of Native Speaker (NS) English, in theprocess de-legitimising Non-Native Speaker (NNS)

.HOODZD\$YLDWH1DYLJDWH&RPPXQLFDWH';ဩLQVSLUHG3LORWဩ$7&H[FKDQJHWUDLQLQJ

models in portraying the norm-providing Inner
Circle, the norm-developing Outer Circle and theand geographically neutral’.
3.2 Cultural influences on learningnorm-dependent Expanding Circle.
Benson and Voller (1997) question whether or not
According to Matsuda (2003, pg 723) ‘learners may
internalise a colonialistic view of the world anddevalue

their

own

statusininternational

communication. They may also feel that that their
peripheral position in international communication
in English is irreversible.’concepts of autonomous and self-directed learning
are culturally bound, and if there are any ethnic orsocialgroupswhose

culturalbackground

predisposes them either for or against suchapproaches. According to Pierson (1996, cited in
Quoc, 2005, pg 52) the popular trope is that non-

Torikai (2011) and Yano (2001) seem to agree thatwestern learners are ‘conditioned by a pattern ofno such nativised version of English will develop in

cultural forces that are not harmonious to learner

Japan, where it will remain a foreign language

autonomy, independence or self-direction’.

functioning ‘only as a means of communication
with the non-Japanese in international settings’.
Within the broader Japanese community, English is
not expected to form part of a speaker’s identity
repertoire. ‘There will not be a distinctly local
model of English, established and recognisable asJapanese English, reflecting the Japanese culture
and language’. Yano (2001) suggests as inevitable
thatJapaneselinguisticandsocioculturalcharacteristics seep into the English of Japanese
speakers, wryly adding that for example as theJapanese phonetic system does not distinguishbetween /l/ and /r/ sounds, it would uniquely bepossible to consult Wrongman’s Dictionary (pg127). Contrasting Japan with the countries ofEurope, where Crystal (1997, pg 80) calculates that
99% of organisations use English as an official
language, Yano suggests the ‘Japanese will not use
English intensively and extensively enough toestablish what might be called Japanese English in
the same way as Indian English or Singapore
English’. He suggests it will be a kind of formal andnormative form of English, showing little regionalvariation and meant for only occasional public andformal communication. He concludes that theJapanese form of English would be ‘socioculturally

Hall (1976) identified Asian learners as operating
within what he termed high context culture, inwhich societal groups are closely-knit and can berelied upon to support each other. High context
cultures ‘tend to have a long shared history. Usually
they are relationship-oriented societies where
networks of connections are passed on fromgeneration to generation’ (Meyer, 2016, pg 40).
Japan is an island nation with a largely homogenous
population (ibid, pg 40) and while China has
extensive land borders and has been subject toinvasion throughout its history, the most recent four
hundred years has seen significant periods whenboth nations were closed to the rest of the world.
Meyer argues that this has brought about a sharedconsciousness, especially in Japan, where theunsaid but implied part of communication can be asimportant as, or more important than the words
physically spoken. Contrasted with this are thesources of English language, young and immigrantnations such as America in particular, with its“melting-pot” diversity of ethnicities, is thearchetypal

low-context

culture

where

oral

communications have a strong tendency to be taken
at face value.

第一工科大学研究報告 第34号

Littlewood

threepersonal relationships, caring and solidarity.

perspectives: Collectivism and Individualism,

Hofstede found learners in Asian countries showed

Attitudes to Authority and Motivational Orientationa greater respect and favour for masculine values

as the basis for his cross-cultural study of Eastover feminine ones.

Asian(2001,

andpp

European4-6)outlined（2022）

students’ attitudes

toclassroom English learning, but even now the mostquoted and authoritative taxonomy of cultural
influences comes from Geert Hofstede (1991) who,
using data from management surveys of 116,000
IBM employees in sixty six countries (McCoy,

The fourth index, Uncertainty avoidance, specifies
the degree to which people prefer structured andpredictable situations over unstructured andunpredictable ones. Hofstede found that learners in
Asian countries are not highly tolerant of risk andstrongly tend to avoid uncertainty.

2003, pg 1004) proposed four dimensions of culture
which he claimed could be used to explain why
people from different countries do things differently.
These

indiceshetitledPower

Distance,

Individualism – Collectivism, Masculinity Femininity and Uncertainty Avoidance.

Uncertainty avoidance is a pertinent point foruniversity students, and especially freshmen who
have in the main graduated from high schools
where they were not encouraged to experiment or
to question the teacher and where the fear of making
a mistake - drummed into them for many years -The first index, Power distance refers to the ‘theextent to which the less powerful members ofinhibited the kind of risk taking attitude required forlearning a foreign language for fear of losing face.

organisations accept and expect that power isdistributed unequally’ (Meyer, 2016, pg 121).
Hofstede also extended the concept to families andother social structures, such as communities ortribes. Learners in Asian countries are generally
considered to tolerate unequal power distance, andHo and Crookall (1995, pg 237) state that theconcept of face applies to communication, in that‘one must protect the other’s self-image andfeelings, [in order that] he or she is not confronted
directly’.

to accept that the teacher is more likely to be an

Kumaravadivelu (2003, pg 710) finds the reference

authority figure than a facilitator or partner into Asian cultures altogether too broad. ‘It islearning.

apparent that there exists a harmful homogenisationThe

second;Individualism–

Collectivism,

indicates the degree to which people are willing tosubsume their own needs and wants for the good of
the group.

Asian learners, who show a strong

proclivity to group orientation, tend to score highlyon this index.

of nearly three billion people belonging to cultures
as contrasting and conflicting as Chinese, Indian,Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, and many others –all thrown into a single cultural basket labelled
Asian.’ He further contends that Asians do not havepassivity all to themselves: ‘the classroom
behavioural profile attributed to Asian students is

Thirdly, the Masculinity - Femininity index refers
to the degree to which masculine values such as

not confined to them alone; it can be seen among
mainstream North American students as well’.

performance, success and assertiveness dominate
over feminine values like quality of life, warm

Perhaps it is best to view cultural influences onlearning as tendencies rather than certainties, as

.HOODZD\$YLDWH1DYLJDWH&RPPXQLFDWH';ဩLQVSLUHG3LORWဩ$7&H[FKDQJHWUDLQLQJ

helpful rather than indicative. The truth for specificsoftware demonstrations, I believe it was reassuring

learners in specific communities is likely to be more

for the students to see that I wasn’t always 100%

nuanced and less deterministic; influenced bycorrect.

physical (climatic, geographic, genetic) factors asmuch as cultural ones.

Four groups of students (total eight, later expanded
to nine) were selected by convenience sampling.

Even so, Hofstede’s analysis probably carries some

The first group consisted of two male second year

weight in that his surveys were conducted with IBM

students (21TA) from the first cohort imminently

employees throughout the world. Pilots and IBM

leaving for studies in the US.

systems

analysts

share

some

importantcharacteristics, including that they are typically:x

Tertiary educated,x

Practical and problem oriented,x

Accustomed to working under pressure,x

Accustomed to responsibility.

The second group consisted of two male second
year students (21TA) from the second cohort
leaving for the US in the autumn semester, 2022.
This was later expanded to three when anotherstudent asked to join the program.
The third group consisted of two male third year

4. Method of research
4.1 Participants
Selection of participants was based on convenienceor opportunity sampling which as Dörnyeɿ (2007,
pp 98-99) explains is ‘the most common sample
type in L2 research’. The most important criterion
is the convenience of the researcher; participants
are chosen ‘if they meet certain practical criteria,

students (20TA) who had recently returned from the
US and were about to commence Commercial Pilot
Licence (CPL) training at Saga airport in Japan.
The fourth group comprised two female third year
students (20TA) who also had recently returned
from the US and were about to commence CPL
training in Kagoshima airport in Japan.
4.2 Materials
4.2.1

Softwaresuch as geographical proximity, availability at a
certain time, easy accessibility or the willingness tovolunteer’.

Fully functioning copies of ARSim were provided
to the school by the software publisher andtechnical support provided by Mr. Muharram Mane,With software so freshly developed, there arealways going to be “teething problems”, and I
deduced that participants needed to be risk-takers
who would not be put off or discouraged byoccasional vagaries or faults in the software. I
explained that it was AI-based, lacking human
discernment. As such its voice recognition could
not be expected to be 100% accurate, and there
were times when even I couldn’t get it to recognisea particular word and I'm a native speaker! In the

who also suppported me with online training and第一工科大学研究報告 第34号

（2022）

guidance in how to use the Dashboard.
For the purpose of localising the training, thesoftware publisher added a number of Kyushu
airports to the database with which our pilot
students are familiar, in that they often fly to themeither in real aircraft or, more frequently, on a Flight
Training Device (FTD).
x

Kagoshima (RJFK)xNagasaki (RJFU)

Fig 2: Trainer mode main screenx

Fukuoka (RJFF)

TRAINER in turn is divided into twenty levels withx

Miyazaki (RJFM)

four stage checks, which rehearses the student inx

Saga (RJFS)

x

Kumamoto (RJFT)

identification and production of a wide range ofstandard phraseology and usage. Levels 1 and 2 are
relatively simple: instructing the student in numeric

ARSim is designed to be a resource to help trainee

information; altitudes, distances, headings, runway

pilots learn to use Aviation English (also known asorientation.

“standardinThere are four lessons at each level. Level 1 tests

communications with ATC for purposes such as

the student’s ability to identify and pronounce

getting clearance to taxi, take-off, enter and leavenumerical information, from two digits (distances)

airspaces, approach and landing, an area of

to five digit (frequencies).

phraseology”),

especiallydifficulty for trainee pilots, regardless of whether
they are English NS (Native Speakers) or ESL(English as a Second Language) speakers.
4.2.2

Interactivity

A brief overview of how the software interacts withthe user is appropriate.
The software is structured into modules forx

TRAINER,x

BASICS,Fig 3: Say the number

x

VFR,

Selecting Level 1 Distances, the first lessonx

IFR andrequires the student to identify the number using

x

FLY.

aviation terminology, in this case “one zero” (andnot “ten”).

.HOODZD\$YLDWH1DYLJDWH&RPPXQLFDWH';ဩLQVSLUHG3LORWဩ$7&H[FKDQJHWUDLQLQJ

4.2.3

Feedback

The student uses the microphone to record their
response, which is analysed by the NLP system, andfeedback presented on a continuum from 0 to 100.

In that ARSim is an AI system based on a learning
heuristic, it is constantly constructing a model of thestudent’s voice and its accuracy improves over time.
Students may Mark As Correct a word or words,
which helps the software learn their voice. In the

Where the student identifies the correct prompt andpronounces it within accepted boundaries, thesoftware responds with 100% feedback.

training, I suggested this as a last resort – to be used
if a specific numeral or piece of vocabulary had
been marked correctly previously, but now perhaps
due to subtle changes in the student’s voice (eg. due
to sore throat), or the learning environment(incipient noise etc.) was now being flagged as
inaccurate.

Fig 4: Partial successIn this instance, the student pronounced “one”
correctly, but failed to produce a recognizable“zero”, as is revealed in feedback on the following
screen.
Fig 6: Students may Mark As Correct

The lessons in Level 3 are significantly more
complex, and this level is the first opportunity forthe student to produce rateable well-formed
requests to ATC, for permission to taxi out andpermission to take off at origin, for permission toland (enter) and permission to taxi in at destination.

Fig 5: Keyword feedback

ARSim identifies the correct and incorrect digits
and prompts the student to tap a (red) word for the
option to hear it spoken by the software (speakericon).

第一工科大学研究報告 第34号

（2022）

Fig 7: Student’s aircraft “at ramp” at Isla Grande airport.

Fig 9: Structured feedback on ATC communications

The student is given a scenario: they are “at ramp”

Given the difficulty for students in making well-and are required to produce a clearance request toformed ATC communications, the Keywords

ATC for VFR flight. All required information, such

Feedback screen is very helpful to the student inas the aircraft identification, ATC location and ATIS

differentiating and identifying the items of

update version are displayed on screen. The student

information they need to produce, and the order inis required to use the information to make a valid

which they need to produce them.

request to ATC.

The structured Keywords Feedback prompts the

The student’s response is assessed for appropriacy

students to formulate responses to:against a correct response.

x

Who you are talking to (which branch of
ATC and in which location)x

Who you are (your aircraft identification)x

Where you are (if airborne, what is youraltitude, heading, direction and distancefrom ATC), andxWhat you want (the nature of your request).

These four separate items of information make up
Fig 8: ARSim can suggest an appropriate response

the bulk of routine ATC communications andlearning their structure and order gives the trainee

By pressing the RES button, the student can viewpilot real assistance in developing fluency in ATC

an appropriate answer, which they can then read

communications.

verbatim. I suggested to students to use thisfunction sparingly and to make every effort toproduce well-formed ATC requests.

For the purposes of the research project, theparticipants were asked to invest time in the
TRAINER mode. The software itself also includes
BASICS and VFR (Visual Flight Rule) sections,which reinforce and add complexity to what is
introduced

in

the

TRAINERsection.

IFR

.HOODZD\$YLDWH1DYLJDWH&RPPXQLFDWH';ဩLQVSLUHG3LORWဩ$7&H[FKDQJHWUDLQLQJ(Instrument Flight Rules) is beyond the scope of theiPads where, due to a recent iOS upgrade, thetrainees and not used at this level, though thenavigation menu failed to scroll and was concealing

opportunity certainly exists to test it with senior

the TRAINER, BASICS, VFR, IFR and FLY

students who have completed their Commercial

buttons at the bottom of screen, rendering the

Pilots Licence (CPL). FLY mode offers the student

software almost unusable. However, the publisher

to choose an origin and destination airport, and toquickly rolled out an update which appeared toperform the entire range of ATC communications

resolve the issue.

from taxiing out at origin, takeoff, cruising,approach, landing and taxiing at destination.
4.2.3

We also checked Settings and saw how to set
English Proficiency to Limited (instead ofIntermediate or Advanced), and to set the

Hardware

Pilot trainees at Dai-Ichi Institute of Technology

phraseology standard to ICAO instead of FAA.

use iPads or laptops for their studies and most of the

The participants’ task initially was to work throughcommon flight manuals and instruction books are

TRAINER, before progressing to BASICS andin PDF or e-book format. All research participants

VFR; to note any difficulties (and successes) and to

used an iPad, though the software also runs on

keep me informed of their progress.

Android and a web version is available forMicrosoft Windows.

6. Results
I gathered results through three methods,

5. Procedure
Having sought and accepted volunteers for the
project, I invited them in groups of two and three toxObservation,x

Face to face and online (SNS) discussions,andmy office for initial demonstrations which lasted
between 45 minutes to one hour. I asked students tobring their iPads with them and ensured that
installations

andloginswerecompletedsuccessfully and that there were no problems withthe microphones.

x

An online Google Forms survey.

The survey was anonymous and gathered no email
addresses, so that I could not know who had
responded or what they had stated. This is an
important consideration for ensuring students feelI demonstrated the TRAINING section, testing thefree to be honest, and not constrained by concerns

voice recognition on their equipment and showing

about their teacher’s “saving face” or the threat of

how its sensitivity could be adjusted to suit a non-reprisals. I received responses from eight of nine

native voice.

participants.

If the student still appeared interested in thesoftware at this point, I allocated an Institutional
licence which gave them access to the complete
ARSim software suite. All students chose tocontinue.
Initially there were teething problems on some

The

first

question

asked

the

participants to rate ARSim with respect tovocabulary learning, from 1 (not helpful) to 5 (veryhelpful).

第一工科大学研究報告 第34号

（2022）

helpful in developing their ability to communicate
with ATC. However, two (25%) were disappointed
at their progress.
The following question asked participants to rate
ARSim with respect to its recognition of their voice,on a scale from 1 (never) to 5 (all the time).
Fig 10: Learning and using aviation vocabulary

Seven of eight respondents rated ARSim at least
moderately

helpful.

The

softwareassessespronunciation but not definitions or understandingof the terminology, though of course many of the
terms

will

form

part

of

subsequent ATC

Fig 13: Voice recognized accurately?

communications.
Five of eight respondents (62.5%) rated ARSim
below average in its voice recognition, and this was
supported by many of the written comments. Thisis a concern, which highlights more work possibly
needing to be done in the NLP.
The following question asked respondents tospecify the areas in which ARSim was beneficial to

Fig 11: Practicing ATC communications

their learning. It was possible to choose more thanAgain seven of eight respondents (87.5%) rated

one answer, and twelve options were recorded by

ARSim at least moderately helpful in practicing

the eight respondents.

ATC communications, and two (25%) rated it very
highly.

ItsabilitytoassistwithATCcommunications is an important part of thesoftware’s “raison d’etre” and forms the bulk of its
marketing message.

Fig 14: Advantages of ARSim

Assistance toward more accurate pronunciation
was cited by five of eight (62.5%) respondents,
while assistance in learning how to structure ATC
Fig 12: Your ability to communicate with ATC

Six of eight participants (75%) found ARSim

communications was cited by four (50).
The following question asked what problems the

.HOODZD\$YLDWH1DYLJDWH&RPPXQLFDWH';ဩLQVSLUHG3LORWဩ$7&H[FKDQJHWUDLQLQJ

participants had with the ARSim software. It was

accuracy over the extent of their exposure topossible to choose more than one answer, and

ARSim.

eleven options were recorded by the eight
respondents.

Fig 15: Problems with ARSim
Fig 17: Average Proficiency of the participants.

Consistent with the concerns over voice recognition,
all eight respondents (100%) stated that thesoftware was at least inconsistent with respect torecognising their voice. Two respondents (25%)
stated that the software at times took too long tostart.

Mean proficiency was actually higher, at 90%,
which translates to Radio Proficiency Level 6 (RPL
6) on a scale of 1 to 6, where RPL 4 (70%) is theperformance threshold required to advance tohigher levels.
Students are given multiple attempts at each level
and the ARSim software records their best effort.

8. Discussion
All but one of the participants reported some levelof satisfaction with the software, though for six of
Fig 16: Is ARSim useful to trainee pilots?

The final question asked respondents if they felt
ARSim was a useful addition to the pilot training
course. Five of eight respondents (62.5%) repliedthat they believed it very useful and deserving of
being included in the curriculum. Two respondents

the nine participants, the amount of time they wereable to invest in it was impacted by therequirements of actual flight training in the US andin Japan. One commented that “I’m worried that I
didn’t work on it much because I was busy with mytraining in the US.”(25%) believed it should be an optional resource.

One of the participants in the 21TA group used the

One (12.5%) was unsupportive of its use in thesoftware frequently and reported great success andcurriculum.

satisfaction with it. He was quoted as saying “I

7. Achievement

think it is perfect for first year students, before they
go to the United States. The information is quite

Despite issues of pronunciation and the voicegeneral though; every airport has its own patterns

recognition difficulties reported by the students, theand procedures.”nine participants nevertheless averaged over 80%

Though the sample was small and the research

第一工科大学研究報告 第34号

（2022）

period for many of the participants was impacted by

The current research was heavily time and resource-

their studies in the US, I believe RQ1 was answered

limited. It primarily took place between January

in the affirmative, notwithstanding concerns about

and April of 2022, (though some participants are

the software’s voice recognition. Participants werestill using the software.) which was probably poor

able to navigate the software and to use it at theirtiming for those in 21TA who needed to turn theirown speed and in their own time, with minimal

attention to PPL training in the United States, anddirection from me. It proved to be an appropriate

those in 20TA CPL training in Saga and Miyagi inresource for Informal and Self-Directed Learning

Japan. The participants who were able to devote(SDL).

most time to it were the 21TA students in the second

Participants noted ARSim’s contribution to theirunderstanding

of

the

“grammar”

ofATCcommunications and, despite difficulties with voicecohort of US trainees, and it is these students who
have recorded the highest training times and thefarthest progress into the software.

recognition, participants frequently mentioned

It will be encouraging if their persistence pays off

improvements in their pronunciation. The voiceand they achieve greater fluency in their ATCrecognition is quite nuanced and particular about /l/communications as they undergo FTD training

and /r/ sounds, an area of genuine difficulty forprior to departure to the United States. If that is theJapanese L2 speakers according to Ueno andcase, then the research will have proved its worth.

Yamane (2020, pg 172). For instance the word
“ramp” was recognised provided the participant
took care to pronounce the /r/, whereas a response

9. Further researchsounding like “lamp” was flagged as incorrect.

More aspects of the software are deserving of

The same was true of English words with consonant
endings, to which Japanese L2 English speakers

research than what was possible in the limited timeframe.

frequently add an extra syllable, such that the two

BASICS, VFR and FLY could be implemented oversyllable word “down`wind” is pronounced in threea year’s course, with sections such as Vocabulary

syllables as “down`win`do”. The latter was not

and Phonetic Alphabet of direct relevance to firstrecognised

year aviation students.

(appropriately)

by

ARSim

and

participants were required to reflect on theirpronunciation.

IFR could be implemented with third and fourthyear students who have passed the PPL and CPL

For these reasons, it can be concluded that

qualifications. IFR rating is a requirement for entry

participants benefited from exposure to ARSim andinto the domestic passenger aviation sector.

RQ2 can also be said to be answered in theaffirmative, though research over a longer period
and with larger cohorts is certainly warranted, as is
more careful reflection on the part of the researcher
as to how to introduce the software and support itover a longer period.

10.Notes
The support of the publishers of Plane English –ARSim and especially Mr. Muharram Mane who
gave generously of his time and expertise, isgratefully acknowledged.

.HOODZD\$YLDWH1DYLJDWH&RPPXQLFDWH';ဩLQVSLUHG3LORWဩ$7&H[FKDQJHWUDLQLQJ

11.References
Bamgboe, A. (2001). World Englishes andglobalization. World Englishes, 20(3), 357-363.

Gao, X. (2007). A tale of Blue Rain Café: A study
on the online narrative construction about acommunity of English learners on the Chinese
mainland. System $V 35(2), 259-270.

Benson, P., and Voller, P. A. (1997). Independencein Language Learning: London: Longman.

Gardner, R. C. (1988). Attitudes and motivation.
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 9, 135-148.

Canagarajah, S. (2012). Translingual practice:
Global Englishes and cosmopolitan relations:
Routledge.

Gremmo, M.-J., and Riley, P. (1995). Autonomy,
self-direction and self access in language teaching
and learning: The history of an idea. System $V

Cookson, S. (2009). Zagreb and Tenerife Airline

23(2), 151-164.

Accidents involving linguistic factors. Australian
Review of Applied Linguistics, 32(3), 22.1-22.14

Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond Culture. Garden City,
Nueva York: Anchor Press, Doubleday.

Crystal, D. (1997). English as a global language.
UK: Cambridge University Press. Print.

Ho, J., and Crookall, D. (1995). Breaking with
Chinese cultural traditions: Learner autonomy in

Deci, E., and Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic
motivation and self-determination in human

English language teaching. System $V 23(2), 235243.

behavior: Springer Science and Business Media.
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., and Minkov, M.
Dewey, J. (1923). Democracy and education: An
introduction to the philosophy of education:(2005). Cultures and organizations: Software of themind (Vol. 2): Citeseer.

Macmillan.
Holec, H. (1979). Autonomy and foreign language
Dickinson, L. (1995). Autonomy and motivation alearning: ERIC.

literature review. System $V 23(2), 165-174.
Kachru, B. B. (1992). The other tongue: English
Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The L2 motivational selfacross cultures: University of Illinois Press.

system. Motivation, language identity and the L2
self, 36(3), 9-11.

Katz, I., and Assor, A. (2007). When Choice
Motivates and When It Does Not. Educational

Dörnyei, Z., and Csizér, K. (2002). Some dynamics

Psychology Review $V 19(4), 429-442.

of language attitudes and motivation: Results of alongitudinal nationwide survey. Applied Linguistics,
23(4), 421-462.

Kumaravadivelu,

B.

(2003).

Problematizing

cultural stereotypes in TESOL. Tesol Quarterly,
37(4), 709-719.

Ebert, C., & Duarte, C. H. C. (2018). Digitaltransformation. IEEE Software, 35(4), 16-21.

Lamb, M. (2004). Integrative motivation in a
globalizing world. System $V 32(1), 3-19.

Esteval, D., and Molesworth, B. (2009). A study ofEL2 pilots radio communication in the General
Aviation environment. Australian Review ofApplied Linguistics, 32(3), 24.1-24.16

Lamb, M. (2012). A self system perspective on
young adolescents’ motivation to learn English inurban and rural settings. Language learning, 62(4),997-1023.

第一工科大学研究報告 第34号

Littlewood, W. (2001). Students' attitudes toclassroom English learning: a cross-cultural study.
Language teaching research, 5(1), 3-28.

（2022）

American psychologist, 55(1), 68.
Taguchi, T., Magid, M., and Papi, M. (2009). The
L2 motivational self system among Japanese,

Markus, H., and Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves.

Chinese and Iranian learners of English: A

American psychologist, 41(9), 954.

comparative study. Motivation, language identity

Matsuda, A. (2003). Incorporating World Englishes

and the L2 self, 36.

in Teaching English as an International Language.

Torikai, K. (2011). Kokusai kyoutsuugo toshite no

Tesol Quarterly $V 37(4), 719-729.

eigo [English as a global language]: Tokyo, Japan:

McCoy, S. (2003). Integrating national culture into

Kodansha.

individual IS adoption research: The need for

Yano, Y. (2001). World Englishes in 2000 andindividual

beyond. World Englishes, 20(2), 119-132.

levelmeasures.

AMCIS

2003

Proceedings, 124.
Meyer, E. (2016). The Culture Map (INTL ED):
Decoding How People Think, Lead, and Get Things
Done Across Cultures: PublicAffairs.
Nikolov, M. (1999). ‘Why do you learn English?’‘Because the teacher is short.’A study of Hungarianchildren’s foreign language learning motivation.
Language teaching research, 3(1), 33-56.
Oxford, R. L. (2003). Language learning styles andstrategies: Concepts and relationships. Iral, 41(4),271-278.
Pennycook, A. (2017). The cultural politics ofEnglish as an international language: Routledge.
Quoc Lap, T. (2005). Stimulating learner autonomy
in English language education: A curriculum
innovation study in a Vietnamese context:
Amsterdam unpublished thesis
Ryan, R. M. (1991). The nature of the self inautonomy

andInterdisciplinary

relatedness
approaches

The
(pp.

self:

208-238):

Springer.
Ryan, R. M., and Deci, E. L. (2000). Selfdetermination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic
motivation, social development, and well-being.