Peter wrote:
If the issue is collecting money from out of hours arrivals, that has been reported in the UK as being a real problem.But you don’t need a Flugleiter to do that. Any person will do – or a half decent surveillance system which films arrivals and emails the pics somewhere.
In Switzerland a “Flugdienstleiter” doesn’t need to always be present during operational hours. While the “coverage” where I fly is generally very high, that is due to the high level of activity. During poor weather or slow days, there is not always someone present. We have a mailbox with envelope/forms (an envelope with a form on the back) that non-local pilots complete and insert their payment and then slip into the letter box. This is on the honour system and is used only when there is no presence to collect the money. I know other Swiss airfields that operate a similar system. The club also has a secretary who handles the bookwork and opens the facility and can collect the landing fee when a “Flugdienstleiter” is not present. But collecting money doesn’t require having on-site presence during 100% of operating hours.
The only time a “Flugdienstleiter” is mandatory on-site in Switzerland is when there is an in-bound international flight (i.e. has announced customs). I suspect that is to ensure the pilot stays with the plane until the announced arrival time, in the case that arrival is early.
4 years later, what is the latest on this? There have been various posts that an airfield can apply to the govt to not need the Flugleiter but most don’t want to do it because of a perceived liability issue.
Peter wrote:
4 years later, what is the latest on this? There have been various posts that an airfield can apply to the govt to not need the Flugleiter but most don’t want to do it because of a perceived liability issue.
Not changed that much here. For example, one airfield quite close to where I fly installed an automatic VHF system, which recognizes you calling and passes wind and runway in use. It’s a quite remote airfield.
But I am not that sure whether we Germans are really able to fly without Flugleiter. Second-last time I flew there when I turned on final (giving position reports practically on any turn I made, being the only one talking anyhow) I noticed a microlight rolling to the holding point. It was not until he passed the line when he finally said that he’s about to take off – me about 100 meters before touchdown. I could convince him not to do so, and saw him holding short sharply, as if he just didn’t expect anyone else to fly. With Flugleiter this would not have happened. He obviously forgot to switch on VHF earlier and (biggest mistake of course) did not look out.
But besides that, only had good experiences, in particular flying to small airfields during working days.
In France this works perfectly fine. Don’t know why we don’t seem to get used to it. Maybe we need some classes :-)
I was hoping that the Pandemia would have changed this regulations, because a lot of airfields reduced operating hours. But haven’t heard any news. My experience is the smaller the field the more flexible it gets.
As you wrote in France there is no need for a Flugleiter or its French equivalent. The majority of airfields in France are unmanned and PPR is also unnecessary. And some airfields which revert to class G unattended outside of operating hours.
France also has quite a few IAPs to unmanned airfields.
However, there are also some pilots like @UdoR’s microlight pilot. But I am sure that such pilots and such occurrences would exist, even with an official presence on the Airfield.
Looking at the FFA’s REX (return of experience) or BEA reports, I can’t find one where a life would have been saved by having a Flugleiter. On the other hand there may well have been some over the last 50 years where members of a club or other pilots on field at the time have dragged someone out of an upturned taildragger.
But despite this I would prefer the freedom to just go to the airfield on a summer’s evening for a short bimble or return late from a day away without making prior arrangements. I feel there are enough restrictions to leisure flying without PPR or having to arrange someone to be in attendance and possibly having to pay for them.
It would have been nice if it was not mandatory for GA just like RFFS on aerodrome sites? and leave it to the pilots to decide? the same as the freedom to visit non-ATC, unlicensed grass airports, not in AIP, un-towered airfields…
I noticed that cautious pilots tend to fly to airports with full RFFS and full ATC set while reckless pilots tend to fly to remote sites without fire services & controllers 
I doubt Flugleiter is anywhere near the safety & peace of mind I get when flying to places with RFFS Level 7 and ATC (Delivery/Ground/Tower/Approach/Director), not enough and his presence is unnecessary, it’s more bureaucratic PPR process with not much safety benefit, better go without knowing the risks I am taking 
Whoa, there seems to be work in progress!! Things might change in 2022!! Can’t believe it!
Just found this number one result on google, from AOPA Germany.
Google Translate:
So far, the Federal Ministry of Transport (BMVI) has strictly adhered to the ICAO standards for fire extinguishing and rescue services, even if one could simply have deviated from them, as in other countries. In NfL I 72/83 you can read: “The landing site operator must ensure that the personnel required for the deployment of the fire extinguishing and rescue service is available during flight operations.” This personnel is usually the flight controller, or in rare cases one Person trained in the use of life-saving appliances. That is why we decided over 10 years ago to tackle the problem at the root, namely through our international umbrella organization IAOPA at the ICAO, the international civil aviation organization in Canada. The topic was taken up by Frank Hofmann, the IAOPA man at the ICAO in Montreal. The goal: fire extinguishing and rescue services should no longer be the recommended standard for flights without paying passengers, which has been handled without problems by most of the major aviation nations for decades.
Our IAOPA proposal was discussed, criticized, defended, coordinated, revised and finally approved about 10 years later in all the necessary committees of the ICAO: Now it is up to the member states to support these changes and ultimately to implement them nationally. In a conversation with the management of the BMVI in October 2020, AOPA President Elmar Giemulla and Managing Director Michael Erb were fortunately signaled that a so-called “State Letter” from the ICAO is supported by the Federal Government. The Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure has also already agreed with the federal states, so that regulations on flying without a flight controller can be expected in Germany from around 2022, as we know them from our neighboring states France and Denmark. It can be assumed that, on the one hand, the use of less frequented airfields will improve and, on the other hand, the airfields will have less pressure due to high personnel costs. What is important here is the pilots’ willingness to take on personal responsibility. Those who do not want to do without security personnel can continue to land at airports that offer a higher level of protection.
UdoR wrote:
But I am not that sure whether we Germans are really able to fly without Flugleiter.
once they learn that there is nobody to change their nappies, they would have to learn to do it themselves.
We have the majority of airfields in Switzerland running without the presence of a person responsible and it works just fine. It’s just a bad habit to believe that you can’t do things without someone “allowing” it, maybe born out of the conviction that what is not specifically allowed is verboten. The legal philosophy most democratic countries have would imply the opposite, yet such gut feelings most people have in certain countries doesn’t go away fast. But I guess the fact that flying without a watchful person noting down every detail works in other countries where the legal perception is not too different generally, should give the Germans a big thumbs up to do away with this relic from best forgotten times for good.
Mind, there is nothing wrong with having someone present at an airfield as long as it is not a requirement. Someone in attendance during ops hours has other advantages too, but their responsibilities have to stand in relation of their usefulness. All that would be needed is the simple reckognition that it is all right to operate without someone there if everyone knows the associated rules, i.e. blind calls, how to behave on an airfield e.t.c.
And as for reporting of accidents, well, why don’t we have a compulsory “Schupo” on lonly country roads then? If someone crashes their car there, the same problem applies, only nobody in his right mind would mandate a constant presence to detect any accident immediately.Good news !
UdoR wrote:
What is important here is the pilots’ willingness to take on personal responsibility. Those who do not want to do without security personnel can continue to land at airports that offer a higher level of protection
Indeed, it’s spirit of NCO & non-paying pax => at your & (informed) pax risk, if you want to burn it, go ahead, no one really cares, apart from you !
There are other useful stuff in choosing a runway if you are looking to “get out by yourself” (other than someone else help), by far the most important one is “runway length”, I would take +1500m runway with no Flugleiters than -400m runway with 10*Flugleiters (NCO & no-paying pax, your are free to fly to 400m runways even if it’s not balanced or does not take into account engine failures or allow for pilot flying mistakes, it’s legal as long as it fits POH ), maybe we should have Flugleiters mandatory to help with the safety of takeoff/landing in 400m runways? and optional for long runways?
