[UncleT]

Does a Flight Radio-Telephony Operator's Licence issued in 1998 and including a statement that it shall remain in force "for the holder's lifetime" still, on its own, permit the holder legally to use flight radio-telephony equipment today or does the holder now need also to hold an English language proficiency certification?

Edited to note: this refers to its use as a companion licence to a (brown) lifetime UK PPL.

[Andrew Sinclair]

I wrote something here that explains this situation as I understand it.

You need to have your ICAO language proficiency recorded. If you are a native or near native English speaker it is quite straightforward to do.

[UncleT]

@Andrew Sinclair Thank you, that's very helpful.

[Irv Lee]

The language reason seems to be based on icao compliance, yet the radio licence might be in a pilot licence that isn't icao compliant. And the next pilot to call final might not even have a radio licence at all, (plenty of nppl holders without), yet the caa seem completely unconcerned about them, concentrating on making things harder for the ones who do have radio licences - and the way the caa have changed the application process for a radio licence means (imo) numbers of pilots without radio licences will slowly grow as the new process encourages it for non fcl licences

[TopCat]

I had to get a language proficiency form signed (by the then CFI, who was also an examiner) when I got my EASA licence. Pretty sure it doesn't expire though.

[Andrew Sinclair]

I had to get a language proficiency form signed (by the then CFI, who was also an examiner) when I got my EASA licence. Pretty sure it doesn't expire though.

Level 4 has a validity of 3 years as far as ICAO are concerned, EASA has a difference file which provides for 4 years validity. Level 5 is 6 years and Level 6 doesn't expire.

That's from memory, I haven't looked it up recently though.

[TopCat]

I had to get a language proficiency form signed (by the then CFI, who was also an examiner) when I got my EASA licence. Pretty sure it doesn't expire though.

Level 4 has a validity of 3 years as far as ICAO are concerned, EASA has a difference file which provides for 4 years validity. Level 5 is 6 years and Level 6 doesn't expire.

That's from memory, I haven't looked it up recently though.

Ah ok. Level 6 is presumably what I have, as a native speaker. I have a copy of the form somewhere.

[Irv Lee]

I seem to remember 10 year frtol came in long before English proficiency (2008) though.

[Andrew Sinclair]

I seem to remember 10 year frtol came in long before English proficiency (2008) though.

Yes, I think you are correct. IIRC it was somehow mixed up with the JAR licence issue which introduced the daft idea of a licence having an expiry date. Later on in 2008 when the ICAO language proficiency appeared on the scene the UK CAA, not having any knowledge of their licence holders' language proficiency in English 'gifted' everyone Level 4 which has a 4-year validity. This led to the situation where many people have non-expiring Part-FCL licences with Level 4 language proficiency that expires.

I have had quite a few pilots approach me to renew their FRTOL having being told that they need to do another Communications theory + RTF Practical test when all they need is an informal language proficiency assessment and send the form, or latterly apply online.

I have even heard of examiners subjecting pilots to the Communications theory + RTF practical test, charging the applicant and then sending the forms to UK CAA!

As you, or somebody, mentioned earlier the change in the application process for issue and renewal has caused some confusion and I suspect you're right that there will be many people out there just using the radio anyway.

[Andrew Sinclair]

...as a native speaker...

Aren't you from 'ooop norf' though

[TopCat]

...as a native speaker...

Aren't you from 'ooop norf' though

If you think that, you need a new PC sound system

[Irv Lee]

UK CAA, not having any knowledge of their licence holders' language proficiency in English 'gifted' everyone Level 4 which has a 4-year validity. This led to the situation where many people have non-expiring Part-FCL licences with Level 4 language proficiency that expires.

It was a great idea, except they didn't tell anyone, and I suspect the people deciding this might have been high-licensed enough to think everyone does a test every one/two years when in fact GA tends to be reval by experience. If eveveryone did a flight test, which think they believed, it would all be sorted long before "4" expiry without the pilot even knowing. So I think good intentions were screwed up by bad expertise and not saying publicly what their goal was and people not involved much with hobby flying making assumptions. This really bit GA pilots when encouraged 4.5 years later (0.5 years after this unknown-to-the-pilot level 4 had expired!) to dash for easa licences like Lapl. They all received letters saying their application was refused due to expired ELP (? What's that?) and in the attitude of the time they were given 30 days to sort it or their application fee would be forfeited.

I have had quite a few pilots approach me to renew their FRTOL having being told that they need to do another Communications theory + RTF Practical test when all they need is an informal language proficiency assessment and send the form, or latterly apply online.

I have even heard of examiners subjecting pilots to the Communications theory + RTF practical test, charging the applicant and then sending the forms to UK CAA!

Yes, there are so many things I get called about where there are at least 2 ways to legally get somewhere, one easy cheap and fairly quick, one very expensive in money and time, and people who should know better have only told them the worst route for the pilot.

As you, or somebody, mentioned earlier the change in the application process for issue and renewal has caused some confusion and I suspect you're right that there will be many people out there just using the radio anyway.

It is now designed for fcl licences, it doesn't really fit the non fcl process- clearly the designers or spec-ers only had fcl pilots in mind.

[Andrew Sinclair]

...as a native speaker...

Aren't you from 'ooop norf' though

If you think that, you need a new PC sound system

[Andrew Sinclair]

...people who should know better have only told them the worst route for the pilot.

Quite so.

[Bathman]

The other problem was the CAA’s miss administration.

Section 3 on the old SRG1157 used to have a section where the examiner could confirm that the candidate had English level 6. But for whatever reason the CAA never seem to have any record of this despite copies being emailed or posted to them many times and over many years.