sammypilot
I don't doubt that a previous occupation must have provided you with "fairly extensive experience of those who have imbibed freely" but I don't see where that experience assists on the topic being discussed: Accidents in commercial aviation caused, or contributed to, by a pilot having consumed alcohol.
Nor do I see how the other experience you mention assists.
Either there's evidence to support your assertion, or there isn't. If there is, what is it?
I don't doubt that the Senior RAF Pathologist was very experienced, but pathologists aren't experts in the effects of alcohol. That's a toxicologist's sphere of expertise.
That aside, did he suggest the RAF had a problem with their pilots crashing because of the effects of alcohol?
I agree, without any medical expertise, that the old '8 hour' maxim is both unreliable and risky. It depends upon so many factors, not least the quantity consumed before that period. It may well have been a reasonable guideline for most people under the old UK law, but it isn't under the new offence introduced in the UK last year.
This is all very interesting, and has been discussed at length in previous 'alcohol' threads here, but how does it help support your assertion? Where's the evidence of accidents in commercial aviation being caused, or contributed to, by professional pilots having consumed alcohol?
So far, we've come up with just one example - 28+ years ago.
Will you join me in reassuring any members of the public or journos who read this thread that. despite the headline hitting high profile prosecutions, the statistics show they have no reason to be frightened that their airliner might crash because the pilot(s) is/are under the influence of alcohol?