fees are one thing a fine is another.
That may certainly be true in court, Tumbleweed, but I am afraid that in the field it makes little difference. You pay, you fly. You don’t, you don’t. Simple as that.
And the French Gendarmerie have a strong tradition of impounding vehicles. Couple of years ago there were some ill-implemented changes to the French driver’s license regulations, and there were a good many Belgians (from near their south-western border) who could either pay a hefty amount or leave their car at a supermarket parking in the Lille area. Nobody cared whether or how they would get home, not to mention the deepfrozen foods they had just bought.
The true difference is that fees normally conform to a published tariff (though sometimes one has to find it) whereas fines are at the discretion of the agents within quite wide margins.
It is exactly the large degree of liberty that French Gendarmerie have, and the ruthlessness they apply it with, that makes me hesitate to ever fly to a French field again, until I know the truth of it all.
Then we should get AOPA (Germany, UK) involved to get in touch with AOPA France in order to stop the France authorities from issuing fines to pilots without any legal basis.
AOPA Germany is well aware of the issue, and working with EASA to clarify and resolve. But it needs hard evidence that fines have actually been levied.
AOPA Germany is well aware of the issue, and working with EASA to clarify and resolve. But it needs hard evidence that fines have actually been levied.
Bookworm, do you know if AOPA Germany got anywhere in terms of clarifying this with the French Authorities?
I was reading through this thread and thought it strange no one had mentioned the entry in the French AIP at GEN75 Section 3, it is clearly stated thus:-
3. LANGUAGES TO BE USED
Air traffic services messages can be transmitted in French
or in English unless “Fr only” appears on the aerodrome
charts; when it does only the French must be used. However
French pilots must use the French language except for training
requirements.
Many charts, EVEN Le Touquet, are FR/soulement outside the tower ops hours!
As has been pointed out to me many times by an old wise man, "just because you did IT last wednesday and all was well, doesn’t mean “IT” is legal"
So, to me that means the requirement to be able to speak French or you are not invited would seem to be proven?
Best Regards to all
Max
The argument is not about when or where to speak French, but rather on the requirement to show proof of one’s ability.
It has been remarkably silent in this corner; perhaps someone in Paris reads this forum even though it is in English 
If the DGAC required foreign pilots to have a French LP endorsement to fly in a “French only” environment, they would not issue letters such as this:
Monsieur,
Veuillez trouver, ci-joint, votre attestation valant pour qualification montagne roues a
joindre a votre licence britannique de pilote prive avion.
Je vous prie de croire, Monsieur, a I’assurance de ma consideration distinguee.
Bureau des licences
That said, there are French language courses advertised here from time to time, which would seem to be worthwhile if in doubt as to one’s ability to make and understand French radio calls.
Jan_Olieslagers wrote:
It has been remarkably silent in this corner; perhaps someone in Paris reads this forum even though it is in English
The reason why it is silent from Paris is that this horse is dead. Everything that could be said has been said, and unless there is irrevocable new evidence one way or another, I have nothing to add. Silence is gold. 
The only new thing that was recently added to this thread is:
maxallup wrote:
the French AIP at GEN75 Section 3, it is clearly stated thus:-
3. LANGUAGES TO BE USED
However French pilots must use the French language except for training requirements.
I have previously advocated that pilots using their native tongue in R/T enhances safety in an environment where 90% of radio traffic is made in the native language, as is the case at all secondary airports and airfields in France.
I certainly use French when flying at French airfields in a French registered aircraft, if only to lighten the controller’s workload and improve the situational awareness of the mostly French-speaking pilots in the circuit.
Indeed, on the few occasions when I have tried to use English, the controller has forgotten they were supposed to speak to me in English and reverted to French later on.
With regard to the old question of “FR Only” and qualifications…. there is no mention in any regulations of needing ICAO Level 4 French to land at an airfield with “FR Only” on the charts. The decision on whether or not to include this requirement is made by airfield owners and not the aviation authorities.
Sorry if this have been already mentioned, I’ve made just a quick reading of the 8 pages, but I think the main point here is that all of these ‘FR only’ airfields are in uncontrolled G airspace. In that case, it must be possible not only to land without French ICAO level 4 but even without using the radio at all.
Or am I missing something?
Coolhand wrote:
Or am I missing something?
Yes, 95 % of the plates include a note stating that the use of R/T is mandatory. On the other few, yes, you could land NORDO, but it would be bloody bad airmanship to have a radio on board and not use it.
I can only agree with Aviathor: When you discover you’re riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount.
