Does VFR Operation Require A High Level Of Language Proficiency?

Does VFR Operation Require A High Level Of Language Proficiency? It
looks like some in Europe would think it might:

IAOPA WINS LANGUAGE REPRIEVE
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#196325)
The International Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association has
successfully lobbied the International Civil Aviation Organization
(ICAO) to delay by three years implementation of onerous language
proficiency rules it says would severely limit VFR flight in much
of Europe. Under the ICAO proposal, all pilots would require to
demonstrate a high level of proficiency in either English or the
language of the country in which they are flying. In an interview
with AVweb at AOPA Expo in Hartford, IAOPA General Secretary John
Sheehan said the rule makes sense for IFR operations but not for
recreational flyers. "For VFR people it doesn't make any sense,"
Sheehan said. "I don't think [VFR] requires a high level of
[language] proficiency."

Given the US's provision for NORDO VFR operations, that has probably
been in the regulations since their inception, one can only conclude
that VFR operation doesn't even require any communication at all.

On Oct 9, 1:41 pm, Larry Dighera wrote:
Does VFR Operation Require A High Level Of Language Proficiency? It
looks like some in Europe would think it might:

IAOPA WINS LANGUAGE REPRIEVE
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#196325)
The International Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association has
successfully lobbied the International Civil Aviation Organization
(ICAO) to delay by three years implementation of onerous language
proficiency rules it says would severely limit VFR flight in much
of Europe. Under the ICAO proposal, all pilots would require to
demonstrate a high level of proficiency in either English or the
language of the country in which they are flying. In an interview
with AVweb at AOPA Expo in Hartford, IAOPA General Secretary John
Sheehan said the rule makes sense for IFR operations but not for
recreational flyers. "For VFR people it doesn't make any sense,"
Sheehan said. "I don't think [VFR] requires a high level of
[language] proficiency."

Given the US's provision for NORDO VFR operations, that has probably
been in the regulations since their inception, one can only conclude
that VFR operation doesn't even require any communication at all.

The usual answer, it depends.
Flying from farm strips, staying out of busy airspace and the like not
a problem without (good)communication.
Operating from a busy field with ground, twr, approach freq. and in
controled airspace I think having good communication is rather
important, even for VFR.

My two cents.

-Kees

Larry Dighera wrote in
:

Does VFR Operation Require A High Level Of Language Proficiency? It
looks like some in Europe would think it might:

IAOPA WINS LANGUAGE REPRIEVE
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#196325)
The International Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association has
successfully lobbied the International Civil Aviation Organization
(ICAO) to delay by three years implementation of onerous language
proficiency rules it says would severely limit VFR flight in much
of Europe. Under the ICAO proposal, all pilots would require to
demonstrate a high level of proficiency in either English or the
language of the country in which they are flying. In an interview
with AVweb at AOPA Expo in Hartford, IAOPA General Secretary John
Sheehan said the rule makes sense for IFR operations but not for
recreational flyers. "For VFR people it doesn't make any sense,"
Sheehan said. "I don't think [VFR] requires a high level of
[language] proficiency."

Given the US's provision for NORDO VFR operations, that has probably
been in the regulations since their inception, one can only conclude
that VFR operation doesn't even require any communication at all.



oes this mean that MXS wil have to display proficiency in gibberish since
he lives in cloud cuckoo land?

If so, mission accomplished.



Bertie

On Oct 9, 2:29 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Larry Dighera wrote :





Does VFR Operation Require A High Level Of Language Proficiency? It
looks like some in Europe would think it might:

IAOPA WINS LANGUAGE REPRIEVE
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#196325)
The International Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association has
successfully lobbied the International Civil Aviation Organization
(ICAO) to delay by three years implementation of onerous language
proficiency rules it says would severely limit VFR flight in much
of Europe. Under the ICAO proposal, all pilots would require to
demonstrate a high level of proficiency in either English or the
language of the country in which they are flying. In an interview
with AVweb at AOPA Expo in Hartford, IAOPA General Secretary John
Sheehan said the rule makes sense for IFR operations but not for
recreational flyers. "For VFR people it doesn't make any sense,"
Sheehan said. "I don't think [VFR] requires a high level of
[language] proficiency."

Given the US's provision for NORDO VFR operations, that has probably
been in the regulations since their inception, one can only conclude
that VFR operation doesn't even require any communication at all.

oes this mean that MXS wil have to display proficiency in gibberish since
he lives in cloud cuckoo land?

If so, mission accomplished.

Bertie- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

He lives in France not Switzerland, and besides MX is using south
gibberish and in cuckoo land they use main stream gibberish. Everybody
knows that.

wrote in
ps.com:

On Oct 9, 2:29 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Larry Dighera wrote
:





Does VFR Operation Require A High Level Of Language Proficiency?
It looks like some in Europe would think it might:

IAOPA WINS LANGUAGE REPRIEVE
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...974-full.html#
196325
)
The International Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association has
successfully lobbied the International Civil Aviation
Organization
(ICAO) to delay by three years implementation of onerous language
proficiency rules it says would severely limit VFR flight in
much of Europe. Under the ICAO proposal, all pilots would
require to demonstrate a high level of proficiency in either
English or the language of the country in which they are
flying. In an interview with AVweb at AOPA Expo in Hartford,
IAOPA General Secretary John Sheehan said the rule makes sense
for IFR operations but not for recreational flyers. "For VFR
people it doesn't make any sense," Sheehan said. "I don't think
[VFR] requires a high level of [language] proficiency."

Given the US's provision for NORDO VFR operations, that has
probably been in the regulations since their inception, one can
only conclude that VFR operation doesn't even require any
communication at all.

oes this mean that MXS wil have to display proficiency in gibberish
since he lives in cloud cuckoo land?

If so, mission accomplished.

Bertie- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

He lives in France not Switzerland, and besides MX is using south
gibberish and in cuckoo land they use main stream gibberish. Everybody
knows that.



Oops, my bad.


Bertie

On Oct 9, 4:41 am, Larry Dighera wrote:
Does VFR Operation Require A High Level Of Language Proficiency? It
looks like some in Europe would think it might:

IAOPA WINS LANGUAGE REPRIEVE
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#196325)
The International Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association has
successfully lobbied the International Civil Aviation Organization
(ICAO) to delay by three years implementation of onerous language
proficiency rules it says would severely limit VFR flight in much
of Europe. Under the ICAO proposal, all pilots would require to
demonstrate a high level of proficiency in either English or the
language of the country in which they are flying. In an interview
with AVweb at AOPA Expo in Hartford, IAOPA General Secretary John
Sheehan said the rule makes sense for IFR operations but not for
recreational flyers. "For VFR people it doesn't make any sense,"
Sheehan said. "I don't think [VFR] requires a high level of
[language] proficiency."

Given the US's provision for NORDO VFR operations, that has probably
been in the regulations since their inception, one can only conclude
that VFR operation doesn't even require any communication at all.

Most pilots would consider NORDO to be an emergency operation. All
public use airports need communication. Flying into an airport (even a
very small one) without talking could certainly be considered careless
or reckless.

-Robert

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in
oups.com:

On Oct 9, 4:41 am, Larry Dighera wrote:
Does VFR Operation Require A High Level Of Language Proficiency? It
looks like some in Europe would think it might:

IAOPA WINS LANGUAGE REPRIEVE
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#196325)
The International Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association has
successfully lobbied the International Civil Aviation
Organization
(ICAO) to delay by three years implementation of onerous language
proficiency rules it says would severely limit VFR flight in much
of Europe. Under the ICAO proposal, all pilots would require to
demonstrate a high level of proficiency in either English or the
language of the country in which they are flying. In an interview
with AVweb at AOPA Expo in Hartford, IAOPA General Secretary John
Sheehan said the rule makes sense for IFR operations but not for
recreational flyers. "For VFR people it doesn't make any sense,"
Sheehan said. "I don't think [VFR] requires a high level of
[language] proficiency."

Given the US's provision for NORDO VFR operations, that has probably
been in the regulations since their inception, one can only conclude
that VFR operation doesn't even require any communication at all.

Most pilots would consider NORDO to be an emergency operation. All
public use airports need communication. Flying into an airport (even a
very small one) without talking could certainly be considered careless
or reckless.

By some maybe, not by me.


I have flown thousands of hours of no radio ops. The place I did this
most at has had one midair over the years. Someon (with a radio) bucked
traffic because he'd made a unicom broadcast and collided with one of
our tow planes.

K've flown the length and breadth of the US and canada in airplanes with
no radios whatsoever in them.

Flew right over the top of JFK in one, as a matter of fact

Bertie


Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Flew right over the top of JFK in one, as a matter of fact

That must not have been very hard; what was he, 6 foot something?

:P *awaits the brick*

TheSmokingGnu

TheSmokingGnu wrote in
news:GVPOi.5804$j14.1276@trnddc06:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Flew right over the top of JFK in one, as a matter of fact

That must not have been very hard; what was he, 6 foot something?

:P *awaits the brick*


Grooooan!

Bertie

On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 18:10:09 -0000, "Robert M. Gary"
wrote in
.com:

On Oct 9, 4:41 am, Larry Dighera wrote:
Does VFR Operation Require A High Level Of Language Proficiency? It
looks like some in Europe would think it might:

IAOPA WINS LANGUAGE REPRIEVE
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#196325)
The International Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association has
successfully lobbied the International Civil Aviation Organization
(ICAO) to delay by three years implementation of onerous language
proficiency rules it says would severely limit VFR flight in much
of Europe. Under the ICAO proposal, all pilots would require to
demonstrate a high level of proficiency in either English or the
language of the country in which they are flying. In an interview
with AVweb at AOPA Expo in Hartford, IAOPA General Secretary John
Sheehan said the rule makes sense for IFR operations but not for
recreational flyers. "For VFR people it doesn't make any sense,"
Sheehan said. "I don't think [VFR] requires a high level of
[language] proficiency."

Given the US's provision for NORDO VFR operations, that has probably
been in the regulations since their inception, one can only conclude
that VFR operation doesn't even require any communication at all.

Most pilots would consider NORDO to be an emergency operation.

ATC controller, Mr. McNicoll does it all the time, as does Mr. Ford. I
doubt they would concur.

All public use airports need communication.

At controlled fields, light signals are quite effective for
communications, and they require no language ability.

Flying into an airport (even a very small one) without talking could
certainly be considered careless or reckless.

For some folks, flight of any kind might qualify as careless and
reckless, but the fact is, that the CFRs permit aircraft without
electrical systems (and hence radios) to operate at public use
airports, and it routinely occurs.

I haven't the time right now to research the NTSB database, but it
would be enlightening to know how the percentage of NORADO flights
that result in being the cause of or contribute to incidents and
accidents.

Don't get me wrong. If I were flying an aircraft certified without an
electrical system, you can bet I'd have a handheld radio. But that's
just me. I'm a cautious sort; I'd have a backup handheld too.