@Frans, I can‘t speak for all CH airfields, but my home airfield is a grass strip with a variety of conditions affecting use, mostly but not exclusively weather-related.
As just one example, in winter it may be open in the morning when the ground is frozen and then restricted or closed in the afternoon when it has thawed and significant use would leave deep ruts and ruin the surface for an extended period. Or if it has rained heavily, there may be a restriction on the number of takeoffs and landings or type of aircraft (tailwheel only). NOTAMS in these cases are unfit for purpose. Current info is always on the web site and the answering machine refers there as mentioned above. There are 3 nearby town cemeteries and burial ceremonies are also announced on the web site, when alternate approach routes are active. These are usually of short duration, 30 minutes or so.
Your reasons do make sense, but raise the question why this PPR mechanism seems only necessary in Switzerland and not elsewhere (*). I fly to plenty of grass strips in France which would suffer from the same seasonal and weather issues, but there’s very few places which require PPR. It’s all up to the self-responsible pilot. (On the other hand, there’s a number of aerodromes “for based pilots only”, which is annoying as well.)
For me obtaining PPR is not an issue for longer and planned trips. But for spontaneous (potentially weather-dependent) weekend fun flying, it feels like a hassle, because it’s too late to get PPR once in the air.
( * ) Perhaps for a similar reason why in Switzerland manufacturer recommendations on equipment are considered mandatory (like an AD) by OFAC, whereas in the rest of EASA they are … well … merely recommendations. :)
Zorg wrote:
why this PPR mechanism seems only necessary in Switzerland and not elsewhere
The UK and Belgium just love PPR also…
It‘s a cultural thing. Everything is regulated and the Swiss are fanatics for detail. That has its cost. The difference is obvious when coming from elsewhere. Everything is clean, tidy, and works. Strikes are extremely rare. For some people that‘s not utopia.
Dreaming of the freedom of North America is an exercise in frustration, unless one moves there to make the dream reality. But nowhere on earth is perfect.
LeSving wrote:
I read somewhere that PPR is misunderstood. PPR stands, in it’s original form, for “Prior Permission Requirements”, not “Prior Permission Required”. Fact or not I don’t know, but it makes sense.
When I started flying in 1983, PPR meant “Prior permission required”. ICAO doc. 8400 (Abbreviations and Codes) also says “Prior permission required”.
Airborne_Again wrote:
When I started flying in 1983, PPR meant “Prior permission required”
You remember that from 1983? That’s really amazing 
Is ICAO applicable at all for small, non public, national airports?
ICAO recommendations are not applicable as law at any airport, they are just an international body with no direct authority. For example, FAA does not list PPR as an airport acronym or abbreviation
LeSving wrote:
Is ICAO applicable at all for small, non public, national airports?
I don’t know what you mean by “is ICAO applicable”? ICAO is a UN agency. All flight rules and procedures are based on ICAO standards and recommendations.
Silvaire wrote:
FAA does not list PPR as an airport acronym or abbreviation
But it does list PPR in the AIM, sections 5-1-3 and 5-4-5. Also in AIP-USA GEN 2.2.
The FAA AIM is not law, just information. ICAO is not something US pilots need concern themselves with.
US charts show Public airports, Private Public Use airports (which do not get any special notation on the chart) and Private airports (which are charted but noted as private). The meanings are obvious: Private in isolation means you can’t land there unless invited. Others don’t require permission.
It’s fun to do a touch and go someplace along your route without preplanning. I have a couple of spots where I do it on the way home, including one that is too short for me to do a full stop. I could land but the subsequent takeoff would be marginal… I wonder if this would under the Swiss proposal cost an extra CHF/USD 500
What nonsense.
