Flying in Germany with BZF E

MikeWhiskey wrote:

If the airfield operator (we are talking about aeroclub-airfields and the likes) finds a “flugleiter” who is capable to do English RT, that does not necessarily mean to “disregard regulations” as German RT is still provided.

Once again: No! If the frequency is “German only” even if the Flugleiter (or whatever) is capable of speaking English it is still legally not allowed to fly there with English only RT. The Language designator on the AIP is not indicating which languages are offered but rather which languages are allowed to be used.

MikeWhiskey wrote:

I would prefer to keep the topic to a real-life environment where a pilot without German RT licence wants to (or considers to) use a German-only airfield;

The real life answer is: Just talk German independent of which LP you might have and the problem is solved. It is extremely unlikely that someone checks your papers after landing for language certification (and if someone does, it doesn’t matter if you called the Flugleiter in advance).
In real life Info Frequencies on uncontrolled airfields are for air to air communication – it is a real life safety issue if you approach an airport that is one language only and you do not understand the language and others don’t understand you. I would never ever dare to fly to a “Spanish only” air flied in Spain because I had no clue on what is happening.
Eher even have been documented accidents (wasn’t there one with a YAK in southern Germany ?!?).

MedEwok wrote:

The chances of getting into legal trouble without a formal German language R/T certificate/LP are sub 0.1%. I’ve experienced several pilots doing the initial call in English, and it was no problem, never.

Same thoughts here. The only ‘risk’ in our area would be, if the blue Volkswagen Caddy from the Luftaufsicht (local CAA) appears on the airfield, then some CAA guys might show up to do some random ramp checks, but I never heard that a foreigner was prosecuted by the CAA for not speaking German on the radio. They will just ask politely to speak German next time, especially towards Dutch pilots, as most people from the Netherlands should have some basic German language skills.

My view is opening hours and starts or landings without “proper” Flugleiter are a thing of the airfield operator. He who runs the place will have regulations from the CAA resp. the regional bureau to his liking. It happens you return from an airshow a bit too late for 19 o´clock landing before the place is closed. So you contact the Flugleiter before start to announce your possibly late return – or even in flight when you know you will not quite make it till 19:00 . So this was done often enough no problem but you may have to pay extra for that late hour. This is arranged on the airfield only, don´t believe they contact any administration for these cases. Our parajumpers often have longer hours in summer for business, not sure if the couty-paid Flugleiter stays that long. Special arrangement here, my guess. Vic

I think there is a confusion between the maximum operating hours in the airfield approval and the actual operating hours offered by the operator, i.e. the duty times of the Flugleiter.
My home airfield is a good example. The approval says “day VFR”, so from a regulatory side you can fly from BMCT to EECT, without any prescribed break. But since unfortunately a Flugleiter or some other person has to be present, we cannot offer the full possible range as standard, since that would mean that in the summertime someone would have to come to the field at half past four in the morning. If you find someone who does that for you however, you are free to use the field at these times.
So we have a quite large delta between the published opening hours and the maximum possible hours, which means that our Flugleiter is able to extend their duty hours if they are asked and have the spare time without any problems regarding the airfield approval.

As this is dependent on the individual situation of the airfield, you cannot make any assumptions based on the AIP data alone regarding possible extensions. The airfields should put “O/T PPR” in their AIP entry to indicate that their published hours are not hard limits, but not all of them do.

I hope I could clear some things…

ophirmm wrote:

But that’s the point – I do speak German (not a native speaker, though) but have only a BZF E. So I have no problem communicating in German with the Flugleiter and with the other pilots but apparently this is illegal.

Absolutely! The main point about the last 5 pages, however, is, that there is no easy way to legalize it – as whatever the airport operator, Flugleiter, etc. would say to you would not change something at the fact that it is technically illegal.
The only ways to legalize would either be to apply for a single case exemption with the local oversight authority for the airfield (which btw. is done sometimes e.g. for airshows but is not really practical for an individual flight) or to get the right papers like a BZF I/II or German LP.

In the absence of non illegal options, the next best thing to do (if not doing the flight is no good option) is to at least pick the safest illegal action and that is to speak German.

So to summarize the options:
- Get the papers and talk German: Legal and safe
- Talk German without getting the papers: Illegal and safe
- Talk English (even if Flugleiter or the innkeeper at the airfield agreed): illegal and unsafe.

Malibuflyer wrote:

In the absence of non illegal options, the next best thing to do (if not doing the flight is no good option) is to at least pick the safest illegal action and that is to speak German.

There’s several things here I don’t understand.

Is R/T compulsory at all “Ge only” airfields? As they don’t have ATS, by what legislation? RMZ?

Why do some countries (notably Germany and France) find it necessary to restrict R/T at some airports to the local language while other countries don’t feel this is necessary.

What happens in Germany at an airfield without ATS which is not “Ge only”? Does the Flugleiter translate all messages between German and English and retransmit? If not, why is the “danger” of having two languages less at these airfields?

From my point of view I would suggest that the Dutch, Belgians, Swedes, Danes find learning English easier than the French. Most Dutch people I have spoken to seems to speak 3 or 4 languages fluently. Very impressive.
French people in the East tend to be better at German, those in the South East better at Italian and those in the South West better at Spanish.
North and Northwest France are usually more competent at English.
If you go to Brittany you will find people who can converse with Welsh speakers as they are similar.

Airborne_Again wrote:

There’s several things here I don’t understand.

I try to answer some of them – and I never pretended that the regulations make sense…

Airborne_Again wrote:

Is R/T compulsory at all “Ge only” airfields? As they don’t have ATS, by what legislation?

Practically yes. The German AIP says (I thing it is somewhere at 3.2.4.?…) that you shall contact the destination airfield 5 minutes prior to landing. The question is much more complex as there are many exemptions, etc. but for all practical reasons it is hard to do a cross country flight legally without radio.

Airborne_Again wrote:

Why do some countries (notably Germany and France) find it necessary to restrict R/T at some airports to the local language while other countries don’t feel this is necessary.

Ask the countries ;-) Part of it might surely be that e.g. in France English language in general is spoken less often than in other countries (at least at the point in time where the regulations come from). In Germany part of the answer might be that glider flying is very common so that you have literally 14 year old kids in the pattern that might not be as familiar with English.

Airborne_Again wrote:

What happens in Germany at an airfield without ATS which is not “Ge only”? Does the Flugleiter translate all messages between German and English and retransmit?

At least he could! Plus the other pilots that fly to this airfield know that they might be confronted with English.

Airborne_Again wrote:

If not, why is the “danger” of having two languages less at these airfields?

There is a danger – and accidents due to lack of communication in mixed language operations show that this is a real danger. Therefore it is not completely out of the world when the regulator says that at least at airfields with little to now international traffic and high share of inexperienced pilots the language is limited to one