… but the French accept the LP French on a separate piece of paper. I think it must be the same with a LP German.
There is no approved individual or organization that can issue LP German, neither by LBA nor NATS. The only way to get an LP German is by self declaration of level 6 which has additional requirements not connected to the language (being born/raised in Germany). LBA does not issue level 6 on a separate document and there is currently no approved curriculum for less than level 6.
DGAC have French LP assessments and you can carry the test result with you.
Best would be the scrap the whole LP system, it’s complete nonsense and only enforced by the countries where the problem never existed in the first place. The LP guidelines by ICAO state that a 3rd country shall only verify the presence of the LP endorsement by the license issuing state. It is entirely up to the member state to implement the assessments and grade system. So all the Italian pilots that got English level 6 no matter what are fine.
achimha, I don’t know where you got the information regarding all Italian pilots getting English level 6: it is not correct.
When LP became mandatory 6-7 years ago all Italian pilots were considered English level 4. They had 3 years to take the exam and get their actual LP level written on their licence. Most pilots have to take exams every 3 or 5 years because they only manage Level 4 or 5. Not many have acquired Level 6. Quite a few private pilots don’t manage level 4 and have stopped flying abroad, or do so with with someone licenced.
I don’t know where you got the information regarding all Italian pilots getting English level 6: it is not correct.
It was something people were writing about and of course it sounds so good that it must be true. 
I believe all Italian ATPL holders were supposed to get the level 6 right away but it’s just hearsay of course.
My point was a different one though: the LP regulations say that a third country has to accept a license with an LP endorsement no matter what the actual language level is. So if whatever country just issues LP6 based on let’s say paying a fee then this is valid world wide even though it accomplishes exactly nothing. It is a fact that there are countries in Europe where a percentage of ATC (for whom the LP requirements are much stricter) speak a terrible level of English, way below what is required for them to do their job and to ensure safety. I never made any bad experiences in Italy but in other surrounding countries.
When LP became mandatory 6-7 years ago all Italian pilots were considered English level 4. They had 3 years to take the exam and get their actual LP level written on their licence. Most pilots have to take exams every 3 or 5 years because they only manage Level 4 or 5. Not many have acquired Level 6. Quite a few private pilots don’t manage level 4 and have stopped flying abroad, or do so with with someone licenced.
Flying with someone licenced is also a fallacy. A friend didn’t have a Level in his licence and wanted to fly with me to Holland, unfortunately he couldn’t get an appointment before the date of our flight so he rang the Bezirksregierung and asked about the legality of him flying and me handling the radio – which is something I usually do in any case (when I fly with another pilot, one of us does the actual flying (PIC), the other handles radio and checks the navigation). He was advised that as (e.g.) a PA28, DA40, SR20 or a C172 are single crew aircraft, the PIC must have the level entry otherwise he is flying illegally; he cannot say “well, the guy sitting front right was handling the radio as he has the correct paperwork, I was just flying the crate”.
The guy sitting front left HAS to have all documentation or he falls foul of this rule…… whether the tasks are split between those sitting at the front is irrelevant, as long as the PIC has all his accreditation (including LP)….
Flying with someone licenced is also a fallacy.
Not in the UK. The radio must be operated by a person holding a FRTOL; that person does not have to be the pilot. The FRTOL is a flight crew licence in its own right and whilst an aircraft may be certified for a minimum crew of one, it is the operator who decides on the number of crew members.The slightly tricky part is that the UK FRTOL does not contain an ELP entry, so unless the holder also holds a pilot licence with ELP then that would preclude such opearation.
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.
Therefore, if a pilot is not required to use the radio by virtue of having a second person who can legally use the radio, then there is nothing in law to prevent it!
Too late to tell you, but people should be aware this “English Language Proficiency” comes from EASA, and thus one can take it in any EASA country.
I am a Norwegian license holder and took the English Proficiency Test at the French CAA. The Norwegian CAA refused to recognize the test and required extensive documentation about how the test was conducted. So much for pan-European cooperation.
I can’t help thinking an average German would be wise to take this test in France, where his level of English is likely to make quite an impression.
If you attended one of tests conducted by the French CAA I think you would revisit your statement. The test was impressive and the examiners mastery of English was close to native English speakers
Well, it already seemed I quite misunderstood the whole story – thanks for enlightening me.
