italianjon wrote:
AFAIK technically you’re right, but I’ve heard of a large fine if anything goes wrong and you can’t prove DE proficiency… How true, I don’t know, but I’d rather not be a legal test case, and find out.
Let me tell you a little story.
I hold an EASA PPL with Level 6 English Language Proficiency – which is understandable because I’m British, english is my native tongue. However I did my PPL in German (obviously I speak pretty good German). So when the whole palaver with Language Proficiency came about, I wrote to the LBA and asked about gaining LP for German. They told me that I should write a note stating that I had gone to school for the first 12 years in German or spent the first 12 years of my life in German speaking countries, then I would automatically be granted Level 6.
I pointed out that I am not a native speaker, cannot fulfilled those two criteria but that examiners who carried out ELPs would class me as at least minimum level 5, some Level 6. I was told there was no tests available for setting out the requirements of a German Language Proficiency and as the wording for FCL0.55 was open for interpretation, requiring ‘either’ a Language Proficiency in English OR the language you are communicating in, there would be no problem with me flying to GE only airfields without a German Language proficiency entry as I fulfilled the requirements of my licence.
Indeed, I’ve previously been ramp checked by the Bezirksregierung at my home base (which is DE only) and they didn’t bat an eyelid when they saw my licence only had Level 6 english language in it….
AFAIK technically you’re right, but I’ve heard of a large fine if anything goes wrong and you can’t prove DE proficiency… How true, I don’t know, but I’d rather not be a legal test case, and find out.
Thanks @italianjon . That’s the kind of feedback I’m seeking, and a good tip.
Is there any German regulation that says you need a DELP to use German R/T? EASA regs certainly don’t.
Thanks @italianjon. That’s the kind of feedback I’m seeking, and a good tip.
I don’t yet have DE LP. They are only just bringing it in. So I hope to formalise it this year.
What I’ve done, up to now, is contact the ge only airfield, via email, and explain the situation. They’ve (the ones I’ve wanted to use) have always replied that EN is OK.
BTW, upon his #6 disappearance from here, Achim disabled his forum notifications…
This is an old thread, but I can’t for the moment find anything more recent related to the subject for Germany. There is lots of discussion about France, but little about Germany, although I thought I saw something recently about someone having a problem after flying into a (ge) only airfield when he didn’t speak German or was missing a DE LP in his licence.
The quote from @achimha is from 2015. Anyone know if this is still good advice? For example, what should a French pilot do (assume has EN LP) if he wants to fly in to, say, Rügen EDCG which is (ge) and doesn’t have an RMZ or Heringsdorf EDAH which is (ge) only when the tower (and CTR) is not active (otherwise (en,ge))?
- announce and communicate in English, hoping that it works out ok without legal repercussions??
- go in NORDO, just to avoid a possible violation for speaking English when the field is noted as German-only?
achimha wrote:
In Germany, you need to possess a radio certificate in order to legally participate in ground-air communication. This is the only (!) formal requirement an AFIS needs to meet. If he got a BZF I (German radio certificate for VFR in English), then he can legally speak English on the radio.Therefore you are fine and in case there is no English, check if NORDO is possible. Even when the AIP plate says radio communication is required, they can still give you NORDO permission. I would be very surprised if you had to cancel your plan to fly to an airfield in Germany because of the language.
Apparently, judging from several French documents referenced here, the French position is that non-professional pilots need to document proficiency in French but do not necessarily need the LP entered into their licenses.
Thanks Tom. The way the rule was worded makes it clear that they wanted to give English a prioritary position over other languages. And that’s what they did. The fact that the rule, as it is, makes little logical sense is totally another matter.
EASA has had several years of time now if they had wanted to rephrase it. But they have not.
Both an EASA rulemaking officer and a director of the DGAC have recently confirmed that as long as the pilot holds the English LP, he is legal, even for flying at French RT airfields. Just as the rule says.
It goes without saying that the pilot must be able to speak French on the radio (if the airfield requires the use of the radio), otherwise he might be in breach of other rules, e.g. the general “careless operation/endangerment” clause.
