Flying into French Language Only (FR-only) airfields (and French ATC ELP)

I agree with you totally that you are not going to understand all the blind calls in a circuit.I think that is the same in all parts of the world.But surely even hearing that someone is around and may be in or near the circuit is safer than non radio. In this area as I have explained there are many airfields, all on the same club frequency 123.5. Two of these are airparks where the majority of residents/home owners are not French. 123.5 is reserved for speaking French only. The idea of prefixing your radio message with the airfield is so that everyone on that frequency immediately recognises whether or not you are to look out for. If a German, French, British, Swiss, Dutch or whatever calls up Atlantique, or Vendee airpark and announce vertical dans trois minutes most of the French and others, what ever the accent will have a good idea where you are and if we are anywhere in the vicinity we’ll keep a good look out. After all Vendee airpark sounds pretty much the same, however heavily accented.
I note that your two problems, both arose because of Air Traffic Controllers.Neither should have happened. The training of air traffic controllers in France is of a high level and the English language test they must take and pass at a level which the average English person would struggle with. The difficulty perhaps is that they may be tempted to speak too quickly, as they do in French (even sometimes too fast for the French) and that many control towers are noisy places and the French accent, to a foreigner, often gets lost in the crowd. Its a difference in the syllables which are stressed in each language. The point being that in your particular cases, it sounds as if the Air Traffic Controllers in question need to be retrained. But this should not stop you from flying into the smaller fields of France, after all there are no controllers here to put you in a dangerous position.

gallois wrote:

all on the same club frequency 123.5

Where does it say that 123,5 is a “club frequency”?

gallois wrote:

123.5 is reserved for speaking French only.

Reference please?

gallois wrote:

The training of air traffic controllers in France is of a high level

gallois wrote:

English language test they must take and pass at a level which the average English person would struggle with.

Although that is true, it is not for the reasons you might think, because I am not sure that you have taken that test. It is just that a heavy Indian accent with heavy statics in the background and generally poor audio quality, is really hard to understand regardless of English Proficiency, or regardless of what language is spoken.

[ offensive portions removed ]

Aviathor, 123, 5 is used at most small unmanned airfields in France and it has been for many years, just look at the VAC’s. As such it has become known as the “club frequency”. The use of 123, 5 throughout France does have and arrete in DGAC literature, I will look it out if you tell me how it would help this thread.
I have taken the FCL 055D language exam at the dgac exam centre at Orly, and I do know how difficult it is. Sitting the test on the same day was a German and a Dutchman, both of whom I would have said spoke fluent English. One got a level 4, the other a level 5.
As for the Air Traffic Controller’s theoretical and language proficiency tests, no I have not taken the exam but I have seen the papers and talked to Air Traffic Controllers whom I studied alongside for the IR exams at Mermoz.
There was also an article written for Info Pilote, the FFA magazine, by a well known air traffic controller who writes an article, every month for the magazine, called speak English please. An effort, along with her website to encourage French pilots to learn and speak English.

gallois wrote:

The use of 123, 5 throughout France does have and arrete in DGAC literature, I will look it out if you tell me how it would help this thread.

It would help avoiding spreading erroneous information.

AIP GEN_VAC (p.69), GEN_VAC_HEL (p.69)

b) Non controlled aerodromes:
Radio frequencies:
When an aerodrome is provided with a control tower or an AFIS organism and these are out of service, pilots shall use the frequency assigned to the tower or organism.
When neither of these services is available, pilots shall use the self information frequency assigned to the aerodrome ; failing this, they shall operate on 123,5 MHz.

Thanks Capitaine it saves me trawling through the AIP I hope it answers Aviathor’s question. I do point out the I wrote it has become known as the club frequency, I don’t know whether this is just a tradition or whether it is written somewhere.

Capitaine wrote:

AIP GEN_VAC (p.69), GEN_VAC_HEL (p.69)

I am not disputing the fact that 123,5 is the A/A frequency in France, and probably in many other European countries, including Norway IIRC. gallois has made several claims as for example

123.5 is reserved for speaking French only.

that are in my opinion false, without substantiating them. For this particular example there are VACs with 123,5 for A/A and stating explicitly “FR only”. Other VACs also using 123,5 for A/A with no mention of “FR-only”.

The training of air traffic controllers in France is of a high level and the English language test they must take and pass at a level which the average English person would struggle with.

It is a well-know fact that France has the best everything in the world. Norway too (Widerøe’s pilots are the best in the world). The whole world looks to us for guidance.

I think it is called “chauvinism”.

I personally love flying in France. I do find their controllers to be fluent in English and have never had a problem communicating with them. Yes, you might hear that they are French people, but their conversations on the radio have always been professional and easy to understand (in English). In general, French people talk a lot on the radio (in French) where in Germany the tendency is to keep the conversations short, but that is another matter.

I fly quite frequently into Airports and small airfields in France where you are expected to talk French. For example, if I land at night after AFIS hours at Lyon Bron, I can use the pilot controlled lights, but they are expecting me to speak French on the radio at that time. As I don’t speak French, I just use the few phrases that I memorised when established on their ILS and when I have vacated the runway. One advantage I have is that my wife studied French, so in case someone else would respond on the radio, she could interpret it for me. However, when arriving at night at say 12.30 or 1 o’clock at night, there is surely nobody in the circuit or flying in the area and the Lyon Approach controllers will stay with you until established on the ILS speaking English. I just don’t see the problem.

Non-towered airfields: yes, that could be a problem as there might be other French pilots flying there with no knowledge of the French language. It just won’t stop me from flying there. If I want to land at Courchevel on a Monday (when there is nobody in the tower), I just follow the procedure and land and theoretically would be expected to speak French, but in the end never got a complaint from anyone else flying there in the mountains. Some for flying in the Alps on the mountain frequency. It is only French, but if they hear me speak English, then they just respond in English to me when needed.

gallois wrote:

French people have to pass an exam in English to fly outside of the hexagon.

Obviously. All of us do btw, everyone all over Europe has to pass as well an RT and a LP exam in English. And for good reason: In order to take part in ATC you need to have an adequate use of both terminology and language. The RT exam is terminology, the use of language is the Language Proficiency.

gallois wrote:

It is a very difficult exam.

Language proficiency is internationally regulated. It may be “very difficult” for someone who does not speak a language at all, but LP 4 should be passable by anyone who has a reasonably good use of any language. Level 4 is the level of the Cambridge First exam, Level 5 of the Advanced and Level 6 of the Proficiency in English, or B2 for Level 4, C1 for level 5 and C2 for level 6. Any language has exams in this classifications. If a level 4 exam is deemed very difficult, then there is something wrong with the applicants language skills. And while the Cambridge exams have a load of examination subjects, only conversation and listening&comprehension is in the LP exam.

What I would have looked at as logical would have been e.g a recognition of the corresponding level if a equal exam can be proven to the CAA, e.g. someone who holds a Proficiency Exam (C2) in English would get the LP6 automatically, someone with a C1 within the last 10 years gets LP5 to the renewal date and so on. But in any case, passing the exam for someone who has done any of those exams is a non-issue.

gallois wrote:

I know one Brit here who has a degree in English from Oxford University who was given a level 5 in his FCL055D exam at the DGAC.

The very idea that a non-native speaker should be examiner on any of these exams is a travesty. But being a Brit alone does not mean he speaks understandable B2 English, nor does a degree from Oxford guarantee that unless it is a degree in English language. But anyway, knowing ONE Brit who has not been given a Level 6 is similar evidence as that famous 105 year old chain smoker…. it happens but it should be rare. If not or if a CAA methodically refuses level 6 issues then this should be brought to EASA’s attention.

I did my level 6 in Switzerland, with two examiners one of whose main job is to be a Cambridge examiner. While I would not call it a piece of cake, I did it in the first attempt with my normal everyday English. I would say, anyone who can speak a language fluently and can manage every day life in such a language should be able to pass level 4 without too much problem. Seeing how you write English, it should really be a walk in the park for you even to get 5 or 6 if you speak it as fluently.

In practice, all over Europe there was a big bitching about this when it started out, in the mean time it’s become routine almost everywhere, so why France is the BIG exception is beyond me. There are always people everywhere who moan about “having to know” certain things if you want to make use of a privilege, but apart from some fairly obvious rubbish in some exams, most of what you “must know” in aviation is there for a good reason.

gallois wrote:

The DGAC answer would be that one needs to be FLP level 4.

That is the big rub: The DGAC has to my knowledge never actually said anything, not for the lack of trying by many organisations to finally make them comit to a clear word of law. IMHO, they either can’t be bothered, don’t want to play their hand or wonder what will happen if they actually do mandate it. Even the most dim witted bureaucrat would reckon that in such a case, other countries would start to implement similar measures.

And there is one other thing: LP is intended for communications with ATC, that is controllers. However, on AFIS airports there are no controllers. So this is one way out for this. The other would be for France to drop this FR Only requirement and to do like most others do: Locals speak French if they must and foreigners English RT. While it is not ideal, it is common practice everywhere else.

Aviathor wrote:

The bottom line is, simply put, that you are not required to have a French Language Proficiency in your license to speak French, but if you do not speak French, you do need ELP to fly in France. Read FCL.055 until you are convinced.

FCL.055 Language proficiency (a) General. Aeroplane, helicopter, powered-lift and airship pilots required to use the radio telephone shall not exercise the privileges of their licences and ratings unless they have a language proficiency endorsement on their licence in either English OR the language used for radio communications involved in the flight. The endorsement shall indicate the language, the proficiency level and the validity date.

Aviathor: The bottom line is that the DGAC should long have clarified what they expect as FCL.055 is NOT as clear as you say it is or they should abolish FR only which would make the whole matter go away.

FCL.055 sais:

pilots required to use the radio telephone shall not exercise the privileges of their licences and ratings unless they have a language proficiency endorsement on their licence in either English OR the language used for radio communications involved in the flight.

So what that means is you need to have ELP if you want to use the radio in English. Quite logically. But:

OR the language used for radio communications involved in the flight.

tells me that if you want to use an ICAO language other than English for radio coms, you need the corresponding LP. That is the only thing that IS logical actually. Otherwise, why force the whole world to learn English if, if there is the obligation to speak another language on RT, it is not required for that language?

As I understand FCL.055, ELP gives me the right to speak English in any aviation related radio communication within any ICAO country. But there is nothing in FCL.055 which implies that an ELP gives me the right to speak anything else. Why should it? Mind, Spanish, Russian, Chinese and Arabic are also ICAO languages! Yet none of those countries would get the idea to mandate their local language for their aerospace infrastructure!

But in the end, the whole LP bureaucracy only became necessary because some countries sent people into international airports with absymal language skills making the whole thing dangerous. If people were reasonable enough to not exercise privileges for which they have no skill, all this would not have been necessary. But unfortunately, people often are not as rational as that.

Mooney_Driver wrote:

so why France is the BIG exception is beyond me.

Probably the combination of general poor english (when I was in high school, ~20 years ago, to be in the classes with the better students, you generally had to pick German as 1st foreign language, and then english as 2nd foreign language. 2nd foreign language means less years and less hours / year learning).

Mooney_Driver wrote:

ICAO language other than English for radio coms, you need the corresponding LP. That is the only thing that IS logical actually

The use of local language is confined to more “niche” (sorry for use of french!) situations: small airfields, with mainly local traffic, thus much less need to be regulated. Common sense can prevail, no need to make rules – I haven’t yet come across an accident where inability to communicate in in the local language was a causal factor.
I’ve actually tried with the UK CAA to get a french level 6, but they do not issue LP for other languages that 6.

Anecdotally, when I did my CRI, there was a swiss guy doing the course with me who was awarded a 5 only. He spoke great english, could make humor with subtle language nuances, but the FOCA examiner didn’t give him a 6 because apparently his accent wasn’t good enough (it was – our examiner was also really surprised)

I feel we’re debating again a non problem:
- There’s an infrastructure made for international flights, with ATC. You are guaranteed you can go there safely talking in english.
- There are some smaller airfields where clubs operate, with lots of users that don’t have a good level of english. In order to allow them to fly (they are the ones paying infrastructure with their taxes), when there is no ATC, the airfield reverts to local only (I bet even without the restriction, 90+ percent of the traffic at most of these places would be local only). Putting a english ELP in these situations would likely decrease the incidents / potential accidents, but not because people would all talk better, but because there would likely just be much less traffic.