Narrative:

The controller's english was very difficult to understand. It was necessary to ask him to repeat over and over. At the beginning he either cleared us for a VOR approach to runway 19 or said plan a VOR approach to runway 19. Since there are 2 VOR approachs to runway 19, I asked him which one he meant and I think he asked me which one I wanted. I requested the VOR DME 19. He said cleared to 17 mi DME arc. The arc for runway 19 is described by a 17 mi arc from aur 306 degree radial clockwise to aur 065 degree radial. I continued inbound toward aur intending to turn outbound aur 065 degree radial to 17 mi arc. After I was inside of 17 mi, still inbound on 126 degree radial, the controller began to remind me that he had cleared me to the 17 mi arc. This led the copilot and myself to believe that the controller had expected us to join the 17 mi arc southeast of aur and follow it all the way around the airport (not how the approach is written -- none of the arc is on the southeast side). The controller mentioned it yet again and seemed concerned about us not being on the arc, so I punched in aur 065 degree radial 17 mi fix into the FMC and engaged LNAV to go direct to that point from present position which was then only 7 or 8 mi from the aur VOR. I told the controller what we were doing and he said nothing else except 'fly the approach according to the procedure.' we completed the approach and landing without further problems. We stayed at 11000 ft and above until we were established on the published 17 mi arc for obstacle clearance. I am not sure what the controller expected us to do and I can't be absolutely sure of what he said. Communication due to language difficulty is sometimes marginal in central america. Also, procedures used by ATC in central america only approximately those used by ATC in the us

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR LGT CREW COMPLAINS ABOUT THE QUALITY OF THE ENGLISH SPOKEN IN CENTRAL AMERICA, ESPECIALLY GUATEMALA CITY.

Narrative: THE CTLR'S ENGLISH WAS VERY DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND. IT WAS NECESSARY TO ASK HIM TO REPEAT OVER AND OVER. AT THE BEGINNING HE EITHER CLRED US FOR A VOR APCH TO RWY 19 OR SAID PLAN A VOR APCH TO RWY 19. SINCE THERE ARE 2 VOR APCHS TO RWY 19, I ASKED HIM WHICH ONE HE MEANT AND I THINK HE ASKED ME WHICH ONE I WANTED. I REQUESTED THE VOR DME 19. HE SAID CLRED TO 17 MI DME ARC. THE ARC FOR RWY 19 IS DESCRIBED BY A 17 MI ARC FROM AUR 306 DEG RADIAL CLOCKWISE TO AUR 065 DEG RADIAL. I CONTINUED INBOUND TOWARD AUR INTENDING TO TURN OUTBOUND AUR 065 DEG RADIAL TO 17 MI ARC. AFTER I WAS INSIDE OF 17 MI, STILL INBOUND ON 126 DEG RADIAL, THE CTLR BEGAN TO REMIND ME THAT HE HAD CLRED ME TO THE 17 MI ARC. THIS LED THE COPLT AND MYSELF TO BELIEVE THAT THE CTLR HAD EXPECTED US TO JOIN THE 17 MI ARC SE OF AUR AND FOLLOW IT ALL THE WAY AROUND THE ARPT (NOT HOW THE APCH IS WRITTEN -- NONE OF THE ARC IS ON THE SE SIDE). THE CTLR MENTIONED IT YET AGAIN AND SEEMED CONCERNED ABOUT US NOT BEING ON THE ARC, SO I PUNCHED IN AUR 065 DEG RADIAL 17 MI FIX INTO THE FMC AND ENGAGED LNAV TO GO DIRECT TO THAT POINT FROM PRESENT POS WHICH WAS THEN ONLY 7 OR 8 MI FROM THE AUR VOR. I TOLD THE CTLR WHAT WE WERE DOING AND HE SAID NOTHING ELSE EXCEPT 'FLY THE APCH ACCORDING TO THE PROC.' WE COMPLETED THE APCH AND LNDG WITHOUT FURTHER PROBS. WE STAYED AT 11000 FT AND ABOVE UNTIL WE WERE ESTABLISHED ON THE PUBLISHED 17 MI ARC FOR OBSTACLE CLRNC. I AM NOT SURE WHAT THE CTLR EXPECTED US TO DO AND I CAN'T BE ABSOLUTELY SURE OF WHAT HE SAID. COM DUE TO LANGUAGE DIFFICULTY IS SOMETIMES MARGINAL IN CENTRAL AMERICA. ALSO, PROCS USED BY ATC IN CENTRAL AMERICA ONLY APPROX THOSE USED BY ATC IN THE U.S.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.