For inbound traffic, we cannot force an aircraft which is unable to speak French to divert. Destination airport is PIC responsibility. We have to report such occurrence
That’s very interesting – thanks for posting it Guillaume. This kind of thing is really useful to know.
I guess that FR-only tends to correlate with a lack of customs+immigration too (especially for an airport which is permanently FR-only; very few exceptions to that) so the police would be rather interested too in some flights…
Peter wrote:
I think ICAO languages do include French, and we have to live with that.
Those have nothing to do with ATC. They are the languages in which ICAO communicates. AIUI, they have someone who understands that language and can translate as required.
Noe wrote:
It’s not obvious whether this or just banning VFR flight in non native would be more fair.
I think requiring local language is more fair. And speaking the local language should be safer in VFR context. A big portion of those flights are done locally by locals. And for those people, it’s IMHO better to speak their own tongue. Of course, it’d be quite inconvenient for traveling longer distances given how many languages Europe has. IFR is a different matter, it should be ensured that English is always an option (a good option).
Martin wrote:
IFR is a different matter, it should be ensured that English is always an option (a good option).
Why? My concern is that you prevent lots of pilots from obtaining an IR which is detrimental to light GA. There are countries that are big enough for a PPL to fly happily without ever wanting to leave his country. Why deprive them of an IR? I think that is a very selfish approach.
Obtaining the IR may even be an incentive to get the ELP.
This is an extract of an article about the BIR published in FTN – a UK training industry newspaper
So they seem to make the DH to be 500ft minimum. That was the case for the IMCR also for about 100 years… then gradually people realised there was no regulation actually saying that and it was just disinformation by the same guys who say you should not fly SE over water… So the wording of the law will be interesting. The IMCR allows you to fly down to the published minima e.g. 200ft DH for most ILS approaches.
A 500ft DH has a poor utility, especially in a modern aircraft i.e. anything built in the last 30 years and in which most of the stuff actually works. It devalues ILS and LPV. The 1500m min vis is also of poor utility value especially for departures.
The topic of how great/lousy/whatever IMCR pilots are and what they should be allowed to do etc consumed terabytes of bandwidth on UK sites over the years but basically the discussion was always polarised by the pilot’s currency and aircraft type, which is to be expected. We can expect similar discussions to appear on national sites in the future and given that most of the countries concerned have almost no private IR activity it will be interesting 
Last few hours to reply to EASA ref NPA 2016-14 and Easier access for general aviation pilots to instrument flight rules flying
I believe that the Basic instrument rating should be able to be done at a DTO (currently RTO,s) hence my replay to EASA ref this NPA via the EASA CRT was to this fact..
Any idea what the realistic timescale for this will be?
Harry wrote:
Any idea what the realistic timescale for this will be
Harry wrote:
Any idea what the realistic timescale for this will be?
The NPA suggests Q4 2018. That sounds about right if there are no significant hold-ups in EASA Committee.
I’ve also commented about the currently not being able to undertake the training at a DTO. Personally I think its dead in the water if you can’t and 1500 meters is a bit high – thats VFR
If EASA aren’t careful this will be a dead duck. Just like the EIR is.
I suppose it does keep them in business writing and then rewriting relevant regulation. And no doubt AOPA will be championing how well they have done to get Europe to adopt the IMC rating.
I’ve also commented about the currently not being able to undertake the training at a DTO. Personally I think its dead in the water if you can’t
Welcome to the $64M realisation of the main reason why so few people in Europe have an IR
The old FTO industry refused to relax its grip on the money printing machine and this is the result.
The CBIR has not done much to address that either. The IR remains a huge hassle for most people, especially those who are actually in a position to actually use an IR – in terms of time, funding, aircraft ownership situation, etc. For example I would not have to go to Bournemouth (a 2hr drive) and live in a hotel there. I was fortunate to have the opportunities when I had them – the FAA stuff done mostly in the UK, the JAA IR (conversion) done out of Shoreham…
And no doubt AOPA will be championing how well they have done to get Europe to adopt the IMC rating.
