She missed, ‘Who is the president of Russia?’
aart wrote:
Pronunciations please
‘Hein’ pronounced closest to ‘un’ in French. We do actually have a Dutch neighbour in France called Hein, pronounced ‘Hang’
Skydriller’s video had me 
Big discussion today in my flight school … Asking for a friend ;-)
If I were to fly from Belgium as a Belgium licensed FI (native Dutch language but very proficient in French) with a Belgian student (native Dutch language) to a French “FR only” uncontrolled airfield, while speaking perfectly French on tha radio, but without French Language Proficient on its license:
a) where is it written that this is illegal? (any reference to official verbage is appreciated)
b) where is it written that this is legal? (any reference to official verbage is appreciated)
Thanks so much ……..
You need ELP to legally speak French in FR-only airfields on foreign ICAO aircraft & foreign ICAO licence (one interpretation of FCL055)
If you don’t have ELP, you need to speak to DGAC to get an FLP
I talk French everyday on N-reg using “English Proficient” using an FAA PPL, no issues so far, happy to say to everyone that I am doing it
I don’t understand the above at all.
Niner_Mike wrote:
Big discussion today in my flight school … Asking for a friend ;-)
Why is this question important, or even interesting?
Everyone, on almost every flight, likely does something that could be qualified as “illegal”. If your friend is concerned about this, then his or her priorities are definitely in the wrong place. Anyone speaking “perfect” French shouldn’t lose even one second of sleep over this question. Just fly. The chances of anyone with the necessary authority trying to enforce a legal proceeding are certainly less than 0.001%, for someone speaking less than perfect but still understandable French perhaps 0.01%.
Related to the overall discussion on the thread subject, IMHO there is far too much concern and discussion about the legality. In Germany there might be more risk, but I would be interested to know if there has been even one fine or prosecution (not a rumour) related to the “illegal” use of French within the past 10+ years.
Related to the overall discussion on the thread subject, IMHO there is far too much concern and discussion about the legality. In Germany there might be more risk, but I would be interested to know if there has been even one fine or prosecution (not a rumour) related to the “illegal” use of French within the past 10+ years.
You are probably right that the risk of a check after having landed and a prosecution is minimal and should therefore not be of any concern. The thing is, what happens if something goes wrong as in damage or personal injury as a result of pilots not perfectly having understood each other. I have not heard of any case, but it is still something to consider. Insurance invalid to start with?
@chflyer I agree with your analysis however … the Chief FlightvInstructor might forbid said Flight Instructeur to go train in France on the basis of lacking the FLP on his license and hence jeopordise convenient training.
Hence the question for documents proving / disproving this point…
The answer must be further back in this thread.
But let’s say you needed a “license endorsement”. France could do this only on a DGAC license. So this is self evidently not true.
However, to me, FWIW, it is clear that you need to speak French if you want to fly to FR-only airports. This is evident from things like this where “French speaking” was clearly enforced, in a manner designed to trap somebody who could not do so.
aart wrote:
Insurance invalid to start with?
It would need to be a poor insurance company indeed that would try to deny coverage on that basis. The companies that I’ve dealt with are more interested in settling a claim as quickly as possible to the satisfaction of all concerned than wasting time trying to find a way to avoid payment. They would need to prove that the pilot intentionally acted without the necessary licence or approvals. Given the extensive effort spent even only on this forum trying to prove or disprove the legality would suggest that the insurance company would be quite challenged to prove pilot intent to ignore regulations.
That said, simple common sense would indicate that a person should be able to understand and speak basic French to use an airfield in France designated FR-only. My comment was about the question related to legal or not legal. In GA, we seem to sometimes (often) get hung up on the legality of something for hypothetical insurance concerns rather than concerning ourselves with the common sense of what we want to do or what the regulations are meant to address.
