BA crew test positive for alcohol (Sentences)

[bizflyer]

Reported BBC Online today 11th of November

BA staff 'breached alcohol rules'

Three British Airways crew are being investigated for allegedly being under the influence of alcohol while on duty.
The two flight crew and one cabin crew member were prevented from flying from Oslo to Heathrow on Tuesday morning after being reported by colleagues.

The 55 passengers had not yet boarded the 0745 flight, and were transferred to alternative flights to London.

The three crew are still being questioned in Oslo after being removed from the plane.

My Questions

If this is true (that's IF), can anyone tell me why these guys don't just call in sick? they must know if they are over limit, although I know it's rare, why does this still happen, why risk your job, career, everything? I just don't get it.

[viking737]

http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/iriks/article.jhtml?articleID=667448

In the Norwegian paper it says that it was an anonymous phone call.........

[M609]

All over the news over here. One TV station allso ran the BA drunk flying scandal from a couple of years back. (From the undercover documentary pice) Kinda "here we go again" :uhoh:

[Sonic Cruiser]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3261861.stm

[troubleatthemill]

According to VG Nett (http://www.vg.no/) a BA captain, first officer and purser failed an alcohol test this morning after an anonymous tip saw them pulled off the BA 0761 scheduled departure 07:45 from Gardermoen to LHR. According to VG Nett they were subsequently interviewed at a police station. The ba.com arrivals/departure service shows that BA 0761 arrived at LHR 18:07 today.

[BRL]

If this is true (that's IF), can anyone tell me why these guys don't just call in sick? they must know if they are over limit, although I know it's rare, why does this still happen, why risk your job, career, everything? I just don't get it.
It could be that they had a few drinks and thought nothing of it. It doesn't take much to go over the limit, especially the morning after so you could think I will only have 3 pints then that is it and wake up the following morning over the limit.
Our limit here is 30mls and I think the limit for drivng a car is 80? I could be ok to drive a car but not for work and that may have happened in this instance. They may not have realised exactly how much they were over that morning.
At the moment though, they are just being questioned so they may not have been over the limit in the first place.

[Jerricho]

The whole point is they are being questioned, but one has to ask the merrits of having a drink or 3 on a school night!?

[A4]

Drinking before an 0545Z report......... 12 hours B to T........ ?

If (NOTE IF) it's true I do not have one iota of sympathy for them. There's a time an place for "socialising". Before an early report isn't it. The fact that the limit is much more stringent in Scandiland also makes their alleged actions non sensical.

No doubt the truth will out.

A4 :rolleyes:

[40KTSOFFOG]

I understand that there is a ZERO TOLERANCE level in Norway. Don't even think about it, especially around "Summerfest". Many people don't understand that certain states have different limitations to either Company limits or originating states. In this case "Zero". Careful what you gargle with.

Be warned!

[purpleone]

So does anybody know who the three culprits are?? I'm curious.

[M609]

Norwegian TV2 reports:

Captain 59 years
FO 26 years
Female purser 48 years

They are faceing fines and confinement if convicted.

[purpleone]

Did they release any names yet?? I expect it will be in tomorrow's papers here. Is it possible for the FO to only be 26?

[middlepath]

is this happening only to uk pilots or other nationalities as well ?

[Hårek den Hardbalne]

This is the intro to a news flash in the Norwegian Aftenposten, English edition:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
British Airways crew held at Oslo airport
The captain, the first officer and the purser of a British Airways flight ready to take off for London Tuesday morning were stopped by airport police. All three failed to pass an alcohol breathalyzer test.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Failing a breathalyzer test would be followed up by a free ride to the nearest hospital for a blood test (?)

[WeLieInTheShadows]

Hmmm....

Purpleone - lookin at your profile methinks you is a hack looking for the gen on the story before anyone else.

Nice try though - but believe me with a 2 post history (only on this topic) not very original.

[Calle Belle]

The captain cannot be 59, as all BA pilots have to retire at 55, as far as I am aware.:rolleyes:

[Basic T]

Captain was reported to be 50 in the articles I have read.


Purpleone:

It is possible for an FO to be 26, in my company we have many that are just 22. Good on them!
I am afraid that that sort of question does indicate that you are not familiar in aviation and I hope you are the first reporter tomorrow to make the headlines! ;)


Middlepath: Why would the rule be any different to other Nationalities?

[overstress]

RTO

BA hasn't done anything. 3 crew are ALLEGED to have done something.

Perhaps you would like someone to make an anonymous (perhaps false) call to an airport just before your next early report?

[Jack The Lad]

According to my information, crew involved have failed to meet the 'zero tolerance level' imposed by the Scandanavians.

Sympathies to all concerned, but rules is rules, like it or not

Anyone that has been in aviation long enough will sympathise, the rules are changing, but we have all broken these in the past. It did not mean that any passenger was ever subjected to any safety risk, but there you go.

Another reason why flying isn't the necessarily the best job in the world any more!

Sad, but true.

[ratarsedagain]

RTO,

Since when was acting Judge, Jury and Executioner your prerogative.

The facts will out eventually, and IF they are guilty, then they will have made there biggest and last mistake, but don't ever pre judge the rest of the professional Flight and Cabin Crew community.

p.s. what is a "Thisty crew"?????

Check your own shortcomings before you start judging others.

[Freeway]

Here we go again!!

[DJ Mixmaster]

Could a norwegian please explain about the zero-tolerance?
This is new to me, and I am a norwegian. I don't know about these 30/80 mls regulations, we call it promille and I thought you could have 0.5 of those. (equals 0.05 percent alcohol in your blood)

[mr Q]

BA crew barred over drinking claims

Andrew Clark, transport correspondent
Wednesday November 12, 2003
The Guardian

When the 55 passengers on board British Airways flight BA761 from Oslo to Heathrow yesterday were told their journey had been cancelled, the reason given was "staff shortages".
That much was true. But an important detail was omitted: the captain, first officer and purser of the flight had been arrested for apparently being drunk shortly before take-off.

BA ground staff in Norway called police when the trio reported for duty for the 6.45am flight.

The incident is a severe embarrassment to the national flag-carrier, which bans crew from drinking for eight hours before flights and insists staff should only consume alcohol "in moderation" for the preceeding 16 hours.

It comes three years after a crackdown at the airline, prompted by a television documentary which showed crew binge drinking before flights.

An insider at the airline said it was obvious to onlookers at Oslo airport that some of the crew were the worse for wear: "This was more than just having a few glasses of wine and going to bed early."

It is understood that the trio were arrested before passengers boarded. Police initially breathalysed them, then took them to a police station for blood tests. Two of the three passed the blood test.

Disgruntled passengers were finally taken home on a BA flight which left Oslo 10 hours later.

A BA spokeswoman said: "We have launched a full investigation. Norwegian police were alerted to the alleged breach by BA staff."

She said drinking before a flight was deemed "gross misconduct" and could result in dismissal.

Pilots are rarely caught in breach of drinking regulations: out of 10,000 commercial pilots in the UK, only 10 or 12 a year lose their licences for drinking.

Earlier this year, BA sacked a pilot who reported for work under the influence of drink at Stockholm's Arlanda airport.

The airline also dismissed two crew in 2000 following a Channel 4 programme in which a former stewardess covertly filmed crew drinking up to eight pints of beer on brief continental stopovers.

The British Airline Pilots' Association declined to comment yesterday.

[Load Toad]

Why the interest in 'the names' purpleone?

This is being 'investigated'. They are not yet 'guilty'. The plane, the passengers were not at risk because the crew who 'might' be over the alcohol limit were stopped from flying.

How would the names benifit anybody at this time unless you were a sad hack looking for sensationalist drivel.

[middlepath]

Basic T- ofcourse rules applies to all.
I was trying to figure out why Ba crew(uk pilots in general) seems to get involved often in this sort of incidents in foreign countries. Is this due to our pub culture or is it the foreigners drinking less, besides who wants overpriced drinks in scandiclands anyway.

[flapsforty]

The Norwegian rule is 0,2 promille max. Which means 0,2 gr alcohol per liter blood. This is in practice a zero tolerance, and the only reason it doesn't say 0 in the law is to avoid disagreements and legal wrangling about things like mouthwash and chocolates with alcohol in them.
In practice you can not drink (fly) and drive in Norway. Very common are also alcohol tests by police on saturday and sunday morning, to make sure that people do not drive with residual promillage in their bloodstream.
There is in this country a culture of little regular drinking, heavy drinking on occasion and a generally endorsed zero tolerance for driving under the influence of alcohol. Punishment is draconian, and peer pressure to not get behind the wheel when having consumed alcohol is massive.
The Norwegian fondness for booze is countered by their loathing of drink & drive. People will always take a cab when going home from the pub or a party and take this responsibility very seriously. As such, it is not surprising to me that the BA crew members were apparently reported to the police by local ground staff.

The Norwegian public gets the following type of information from the state about alcohol :

A grown man who weighs about 70 kg will have a promille of 0,3 after 1 bottle of beer, 1 glass wine or 1 strong drink of the normal 4 cl size.
But his happens only if you drink the drink in one go and get bloodtested straight away, acc to Jørg Mørland of the State Toxicological Institute.

Alcohol metabolizes quickly however. Most people will burn about 0,15 promille per hour, depending on their weight.

If you go to bed with a promille of 1,2 it will take at least 8 hours before you are promille-free.

According to the Norwegian media, all 3 crew members "blew red" when tested on board the AC. They were taken to Gardermoen police station, where they were asked to take a so called entoxilizer-test. (this is the test often used in drink-drive court cases in Norway).
1 crewmember took the test and was tested as having a promille of 0,95. The police was unable to test the other 2 crewmembers in the same way.
this is possibly the test wrongly referred to in the Guardian article above..................
After that, regular blood tests were taken of all 3 crew members.
Reliable test results will be available in about 2 weeks.

Hope this clears up a few questions and misconceptions.

[LIN]

Until some years back, the alcohol limits in Denmark were 0.8 0/00 for driving and 0.4 0/00 for safety critical jobs in aviation (pilots, ATCO etc).

If my memory serves me right, these limits were changed as a consequence of EU directives to the present 0.5 for driving and 0.2 for aviation. The limit for aviation is published in the AIP
http://www.slv.dk/Dokumenter/dscgi/ds.py/Get/File-1386/gen_1_7.pdf

If - as I remember it - the limits are based on EU directives, then surely they must be the same in the UK?

[maxy101]

Judging by the comments on this thread, is it any wonder pilots still have problems knowing EXACTLY what the limits are in different countries? The only guidance we are given in Big Airways is Flying Crew Orders (JAROPS 1), which was only changed a couple of years ago . It now states "there should be NO residual alcohol in the bloodstream when reporting for duty. Nothing about 0.2 or 0.002 or even 0.00000000000002. It says NO. This is something some of us have been unhappy about for a while now. Why not give more guidance? Why not a list of state requirements for each destination we fly to ?
What I suspect is that if breath tests were taken of every person in a safety critical job tomorrow, that a sizeable percentage would fail the ZERO alcohol level in the bloodtream test, whether through mouthwashes, diet ,naturally occuring ketones/alcohol levels or a glass of wine drunk more than 8 hours before work. I also suspect that if all of these people were checked regularly, there would rapidly be a shortage of people wanting to do these jobs. After all, we go to work to earn money to live? Not the other way around....

[whizzjet]

As someone else said here we go again!

Unfortunately the scandanavians for all their tolerance in other areas have a very anally retentive attitude to alcohol (probably due to their high suicide rate).

All the information given to crews does give the state limits in promile per something or other, but no real information, (eg this can be achieved by sniffing a bar maids apron) and I have asked for clarification before someone jumps down my throat.

If you are doing european short haul then you are going to have a drink in the evening, we are socially programed for this and it does help you relax and unwind from the stress of the day. Its about time that the various authorities woke up to this, and supplied some real guidance or applied the same rules to all judges etc. ( that would get it changed pretty quick!!)

How about access to proper breath testing equipment calibrated to a common scale so that we can work out a sensible personal limit for the different countries. Not to difficult if they are really interested in safety.

However, there is the rub, this is nothing to do with safety. In 80 years of air crash investigation in the RAF only one accident could be attributed to alcohol, and given the amount consumed that is a real suprise.

A proper mature look at this involving representative bodies from all concerned is long overdue, rather than the knee jerk overeaction that the press drives which is of course what will happen.

PS having heard the rumors of what some of our younger pilots/cabin crew take to relax I would much rather fly with someone who`s up to the limit on alcohol!!

[Jetlegs]

You can try to obfuscate the argument by waffling on about maid's aprons and moaning about pilots not knowing the limits in the different counties, but how complicated is NO residual alcohol in the bloodstream when reporting for duty really?? :rolleyes:


You are afraid of being framed by the media? Don't drink in public.
You want to make sure you will never ever have a problem? Don't drink in the 24 hours before going to work
You know you can't stop drinking once you start? Don't start drinking when you're nightstoppping.
Can't function without that 'unwind' drink? Get help.
You want to to drink socially with fellow crew because it is enjoyable? Do the simple maths involved, build in a safety margin, and you'll be fine. From the above example, 70kgs is 154 pound. Women beware, you metabolise at a slower pace.


All of the above is pretty straightforward and in one form or another practiced daily and without problem by the vast majority of both cockpit and cabin crews all over the world.

[moggie]

posted by flapsforty

A grown man who weighs about 70 kg

where do you find these anorexics, then?

[Flip Flop Flyer]

It would seem that the Scandinavians are just following EU Doctrine, i.e. 0.05 for driving and 0.02 for safety critical jobs. Mind you, those are the maximum allowable levels, any state is well within it's rights to have more strict levels. However, Norway is not an EU member, but is by and large following the same procedures. And anyone who has ever been to Norway or Sweden will tell you they are extremely strict and enforce the law to the letter. If you get caught driving in SE with even 0.02% the your drivers license is history for a minimum of 3 months + a fine and if you're drunk enough, you'll end up in jail. That is the law of the land, and if you have a problem with then you're better off staying away.

And now for something that'll really get me in deep problems with some crew members of UK origin. Every airline staff member in the world who's ever had the pleasure of spending a night in the same hotel as a UK crew, especially BA, will tell you that they love their landing beers. In fact, they love landing beer and socialsing with their fellow crewmembers so much that they're regularly the last ones to leave the bar. Early morning reporting or not, they stay up very late. Not all of them of course, but the last crews to leave any hotel bar will enevitably be UK, and usually BA. I don't know what kind of culture promotes kicking it back all night, but it is there. Some will deny this to all and sundry, and they will also be the one's cooking up excuses for crews caught on camera with pathetic thesis like "it could've been light beer" and "the presenter said they had 10 beers, but I only counted 8" and so on and so forth. Denial is ripe with BA, sadly even amongst peers on a public forum like this. Before BA seriously addresses these issues, even to the extent of issuing a decrete stating that a landing beer or a glass of wine for dinner is acceptable, and nothing more, and introduce measures to enforce such rules, the problem will not go away. Maybe it's got to do with the British mentality, maybe it's a heritage thing. But flying and alcohol does not go together, pure and simple. You are trusted with people's life and millions worth of hardware, have to memorize very technical and complex systems and procedures, have to read through and understand technical documents, yet some claim that simple rules like staying off the bottle the night before a flight are too difficult to work with. Frankly, how you expect anyone to fall for that is beyond me.

I'm all for having a landing beer, or even two. It's all about professionalism and a respect for the jobs we hold, and knowing when to call it a day. The initial test of the FO from this latest incident, revealed an estimated alcohol content of 0.09%. That means he would have been more than just a little dizzy on the night, and should have known damn well he wouldn't be fit for duty the next day. Someone here stated that it could have been solved by the BA rep. quitely suggesting them to call in sick. No, no and yet again no. If the crew themselves are too stupid to call in sick, then they display an extremely poor sense of judgement. The aviation industry is better off without such individuals.

All over this industry you'll find people telling you to consider carefully before booking an early morning departure with BA from an out-station. You think there could be a reason for that?

[NotAgain]

Once again BA pilots are pilloried in the press.

Perhaps BA needs to sit down and think what it takes to be a good pilot. Perhaps my fellow BA pilots need to consider how they behave downroute, and what should be considered acceptable behaviour. Would they carry on the same way at home for instance?

Perhaps BA also need to return to concentrating on piloting skills, away from the track they are taking with CRM. Why is SS introducing a new Line Check form with virtually only one box for piloting stuff, but loads on "how you mix" etc?

A sad day for all concerned, and a wake up call for us all, yet again.

Edited.... you have quoted well out of context material from a private website which you have no right so to do.

[Chalky]

Some of you seem to have a very short memory, or a short history in commercial aviation.

There was a similar furore about three years ago when the Dutch announced that they would be breath-testing pilots, and their limit is exactly the same as the "zero-tolerant" Scandinavians - 0.2 promille.


Chalky

[Scottie]

Whizzjet, if you need alcohol to unwind from the stresses of the day, seek help quick :oh:

Flip flop flyer and Jetlegs spot on :ok:

[acmi48]

old hat again but do the french still give the crew a bottle of wine with the catering,the americans get a lot of this unwanted publicity aswell on this substance abuse

meanwhile the anon phone caller- is he/she right or wrong and how did he/she know that they were crew

hope it all dies down,the sun is having a field day

[A Very Civil Pilot]

Doesn't the proposed EU flight time limitations allow flying at a fatigue level that equates to having an alcohol level of 0.4 mg/100 ml of blood?

[M609]

meanwhile the anon phone caller- is he/she right or wrong and how did he/she know that they were crew

According to a norwegian paper, the caller was a BA groundcrew that was alerted by passengers.

I love the UK tabloids, the really are entertaining! :E
http://home.online.no/~anderfo/pprune/Aleways.JPG:

[lord melchett]

As far as the UK is concerned, the new Transport and Railway Safety Act 2003 (or summat like that) spells it all out in law now with (very) stringent limits on alcohol in breath, blood, and piddle for aircrew (and others). I think this just legalises what was already a JAR rule anyway. Plod can take samples if there are grounds to suspect. More details can be found on the HMSO website.

[Captain_Happy]

This winds me up...

As a BA pilot, I take my job and my image as a professional pilot extremely seriously. Why do some people on this thread (and in the media in general) seem so very determined to tar all BA crews as a generic clone-like breed of people??

We are all different, all know the rules and let us not forget (as many have already pointed out) that these guys are innocent until proven guilty ... Let's not be like the media and be quite so quick to judge, eh guys??

[staticwick]

Im sort of thinking about that bit that says "before you pick the splinter out of someone elses eye pick the plank out of your own.
Its dead easy to have a pop at Big Airways,there an easy target.Envy springs to mind but I may be nieve.
This unfortunate incident over the drinking matter could have happened to a great many of us over the years, or am I still being nieve!
Lets hope our friends our dealt with compassionately

[Flip Flop Flyer]

Because, from personal experience, BA crews are very fond of landing beers and socialising until the wee early hours of the morning. You may not have noticed it, though I find it difficult to belive, but I've lost track of the number of times I've seen BA crews getting more than just a drink or two. And before you start asking what I was doing there, I didn't operate the next day.

Secondly, BA crews has been caught on more than just one or two occasion. Each time it receives huge press attention. I'll give you that the UK gutter press is horrible at best, pure witch hunting at worst. That's just one more reason not to do something stupid. Blaming the press is a poor excuse for inappropriate behaviour. Some seem to think that it's ok to cheat as long as you don't get caught. Perhaps in some areas, but not when it comes to drinking and flying in my opinion.

Finally, the crews failed a breath analyzer test which reportedly showed 0.09% for one of the crew members. So please spare us the "innocent until proven guilty" rubbish unless you think that it's all a big conspiracy against BA.

BA crews have, again, been caught doing something they damn well know is stupid in the extreme, and yet again BA's name is dragged through the press, tarnishing its good name, not to mention the employees of BA. How a BA collegue can post a defence for someone who tarnishes their name and profession, and ultimately their livelihood, is beyond me.

[soddim]

Seems like both pilots are accused - now when me and the wife go out she stays off the pop so that she can drive home. Can't BA do the same?

[ornithopter]

Why do people talk about 'BA pilots' and the culture within when they don't know? I am a BA pilot and I don't drink, ever.

In my experience, most people go and hide in their hotel rooms rather than drink to all hours. And as for socialising in the bar - I do it all the time, but I don't drink alcohol and I don't stay up to all hours. If you need alcohol to unwind, get help - you don't need it, otherwise I would have permanently clenched teeth!

Almost all of my colleagues are very responsible and take their jobs very seriously, and it annoys all of us if someone is reckless. However we must remember that these people are innocent until proven guilty. If anything, this incident will make everyone hide in their rooms even more and poor old Ornithopter will have no one to socialise with!

The initial test of the FO from this latest incident, revealed an estimated alcohol content of 0.09%. That means he would have been more than just a little dizzy on the night, and should have known damn well he wouldn't be fit for duty the next day.

Alcohol impairs your judgement - hence the fact it is hard to assess yourself.

And why is it 'always' BA - well its not - its just that we are the biggest and so an easy target, and because of the famous programme on telly, it works as a follow up. Plenty of famous people have been convicted of Drink Driving for instance, and do you ever hear about it? Not as good a story.

[Pirate]

I think that the BA people here who are rushing to say "why knock us?" should reflect a little. None of us who give the matter any thought are taking potshots because you work for Birdseed - we know that the majority of you are careful professionals.

The problem is that, in the minds of the press and public, BA is British civil aviation, so when stuff like this hits the fan we all get tarred with the same brush - sorry to mix metaphors.

I've been in this business a long time and the reality of short haul rostering is that a "legal" drink is seldom possible these days. It does make sense for careful professionals - see above. Orange juice really isn't that bad, but if you're feeling like living dangerously, try tomato juice with Worcester, well iced!

[martinidoc]

I think the problem lies in the lack of consistency in the regulations, and some very difficult regs.

A zero tolerance reg is in my opinion both unecessary, and practically very difficult to comply with safely. What is needed is an evidence based and universally adopted blood alcohol level, which all can accept.

Consumption of alcohol, (particularly red wine) has numerous health benefits, including : reduction in stroke, heart disease and certain cancers. It is therefore important that individuals in any walk of life should not be denied the choice of taking alcohol in moderation. If we accept that, then zero tolerance is unfair.

The airline industry should take the lead in supporting research into the appropriate maximum levels of alcohol above which performance is significantly impaired. I'm certain there would be plenty of volunteers.

There is some, (not very good) evidence about fatigue and psycho-motor performance, and this is at least as important as blood alcohol.

I do not condone reckless excessive late night binge drinking, but I think there should be a consistent, fair and sensible approach to the problem rather than a blanket ban, which can reck pilots' lives unecessarily.

Let us all hope that the crew involved are innocent.

[effcix]

does A 4 have his Church parade rostered?Such outbursts are usually intended to hide a sheltered life,which most pilots don,t have/want.

[OSCAR YANKEE]

The zero tolerance being 0,2 (promille) has nothing to do with chocolates and mouthwash.
It simply has to do with the tolerance of the measuring equipment and the testing method.

[Navy_Adversary]

When was the last time a UK airliner had an accident because the flight crew had been drinking the night before ?
As SLF I would rather fly with a UK airline where the crew had had a few drinks the night before than with certain foreign airlines whose crew are zero alcohol.

[Captain_Happy]

Some seem to think that it's ok to cheat as long as you don't get caught. Perhaps in some areas, but not when it comes to drinking and flying in my opinion.

FFF, if you seriously think I'd ever condone mixing drinking and flying then you obviously haven't read my post correctly.

How a BA collegue can post a defence for someone who tarnishes their name and profession, and ultimately their livelihood, is beyond me.

See my first point; nothing in my post stated that I was defending them. I would merely suggest that you let legal proceedings take place first before hanging these guys up on a noose.

I think Ornithopter registered what I was getting at; as a member of a BA crew I take great pride in my work and don't want to be seen as "just another Nigel." Besides which, on many occasions the whole crew just go to bed knackered...

BA are no different to any other airline - this could have happened to anyone, in any airline, and to suggest otherwise is naive and hypocritical.

[niAd20]

Martinidoc

What sort of rubbish is this:

"Consumption of alcohol, (particularly red wine) has numerous health benefits, including : reduction in stroke, heart disease and certain cancers. It is therefore important that individuals in any walk of life should not be denied the choice of taking alcohol in moderation. If we accept that, then zero tolerance is unfair."

Are you trying to tell us that if we don't drink ONE night we risk our health? Get a grip, please. Nobody is telling us we should never drink, but they are saying (and this is nothing new) don't drink excesively while on duty. And if excesively translates as no more than 1 unit of alcohol due to the current levels, then no one should do it. We get paid to come to work, not to get rat arsed every night. Maybe we need better guidelines, but if someone is unsure of local law, then surely they should abstain. Better safe than sorry?

And no, I'm not taking a pot shot at BA. This happens in every airline in every country. BA just happens to be the most visible target, due size and fame. But there might be some truth in the cultural differences argument. Drinking to excess is something typically British, and don't bother arguing, first hand experience and all that.

At the end of the day, the law should be respected wherever you are. And I would like to think than when I get in ANY flight anywhere, I will be safe and the crew will be fully alert and functional. That's what they are there for.

[A4]

effcix :D

I think I've only said what many others have also said ....... and I practice what I preach (on my church parade :) )

Sheltered....? Non. Still I'm glad that my "outburst" moved you enough to post your first ever post!

A4 :)

[kfw]

Someone asked how many accidents have been attributed to alcohol in Briish aviation since the war ?

The answer is ZERO so alcohol is obviously a huge problem...NOT

Airlines have ( this is for the hacks ) a quick access recorder that monitors almost 2000 parameters that if exceeded can be investigated . Is there a correllation between early starts and incidents ? Well I've never heard of it and I'm sure we all would have if it were the case .

As for the plonker who quoted the BALPA site and BAs new route cx form , just about every investigation into CFIT or near CFIT would disagree with you . If you don't believe that good CRM is fundamental to flight safety , I really hope you are not a pilot and if you are can I do your next rte cx ?

Get off the alcohol case and get onto flight time limitations and anything else that will improve the crews situation awareness case.

[Globaliser]

Rocco in Budapest: prattbrat, what was the point of naming them? Makes you feel better about yourself doesn't it.Up & Away: No excuse on this forum to mention any names!!Unfortunately, the names are already on page 1 of today's Times for anyone who happens to have started reading it at the front, or indeed for anyone who reads it online. The names are said to have been confirmed by the company.

[Hap Hazard]

Just to change the subject slightly as I am not interested in speculation and cant be bothered reading through all dross, can anyone tell me with a degree of accuracy just how long should an average Joe should allow for say a glass of wine, before flying so as to be legal at 0.2gr/1000gr?
I normally allow at least 12hrs, but without testing myself, I am now wondering if this is sufficient?
I do know it depends on your weight and health as well, but I would be interested to hear from someone who knows a lot more than me on the subject.:sad:

[Dan Winterland]

There is one instance of alchohol being attributable to an accident, although not in civil aviation. In the 70s, a RAF Jet Provost flew into a resevoir in Yorkshire early one morning. The pilot had been seen to partake in a quite a few bevvies late the previous evening. I'm not sure if there was medical evidence, but the Board of Inquiry attributed alchohol as a factor.

[Zlin526]

I can't see what all the fuss is about. Why the hell BA (or any airline for that matter) haven't come up with a 'No alcohol on duty' policy yet is beyond me. Lets face it, ANY alcohol isn't acceptable, let alone leaving the decision up to the very people who are drinking as to how much they should or shouldn't drink. I certainly wouldn't want to be driven around the busy skies of Europe by a pair of pissheads with hangovers....

If found guilty, sack 'em good and proper. Yeehar......:ok:

[trytofly]

zlin 52..whatever.

your sweeping statement shows nothing but your ignorance of the whole issue.
BA DO ALREADY have a zero tolerance with regard to alcohol drinking on duty !!!? as you put it, and also with regard to residual alchohol in the blood when reporting for duty.

Further to this...it is a MINEFIELD..this 'zero' label stuff.

Another reason to get out of this god-forsaken industry ! If I could....I would. It ain't worth it.:{

[M609]

Are criminal proceedings in Norway a possibility?

According to some reports in the local media, yes. Not seen anything official on it, they are awaiting the blood tests.
Offence happend on Norwegian soil, so why not?
Jail is a common type of punishment in drunk driving cases..... :cool:

[CH4]

Zlin,

Trytofly is correct. There are two real issues here

1) How the hell does a pilot know if he is breaching the limit? He's told that it is 0.2 or whatever, a very low figure, but how does he determine that? The real 'rule breakers' will know for sure, they went on a bender maybe and broke all the obvious rules. That does not account for most pilots, I believe. This is an issue that the airlines have to address too. Somehow, a pilot needs to know if he 'meets the rules'. At the moment it is haphazard, to say the least. The pilot needs to ascertain if he meets the rules and givemn the 'chance' to make himself 'unavailable for duty'!

2. Short haul pilots. These are the guys most vunerable. Most normal people like a drink and who the hell can deny them that right. But, if you give a pilot the minimum 8 stautory days off in 28, then why shouldn't he be allowed to have a sensible drink during his 'time off'? The new rules would inhibit a guy the chance to even have a sensible, moderated dinner party on a legitimate day off, if he had to report the next day for duty! Again, maybe this is the airlines' problem to solve with the 'rule makers' and maybe you have to grant a 'drying out day' after the 'statutory days off'.

3. The airlines cannot just throw the 'rule book' at the pilots. They need to be proactively involved, so should the unions, such as BALPA.

It's an industry problem, not just a pilot problem. IMHO

[Farty Flaps]

I may be missing something here but had the captain signed for the aircraft or were the doors closed. If not they are only guilty of thinking about going flying. You cant be done for drink driving unless youve started driving, just prevented from following thru an error of judgement.

Reminds me of the duty decoy in the car park joke.

Go to any hotel with crew in it and there are off duty crew boozing. Right or wrong its a fact, so lets stop making out its confined to BA.

[prattbrat]

CH4

“1) How the hell does a pilot know if he is breaching the limit? “

You’ve got to be kidding!!!

“Short haul pilots. These are the guys most vunerable. Most normal people like a drink and who the hell can deny them that right.”

Are you saying BA pilots are “normal” human beings (people)? (tongue firmly in cheek here)
Errmm, “most vurneable” to what? Drinking and driving?

As far as I am concerned – drink yourself silly if you like, no-one can deny you this right. But the policies are set for a reason. Can’t comply?, why not choose a profession where management will tolerate intoxicated workers. (Please point me to one and I will apply) :ok:

“3. The airlines cannot just throw the 'rule book' at the pilots. They need to be proactively involved, so should the unions, such as BALPA.
It's an industry problem, not just a pilot problem. IMHO”

In THIS case; the stupidest statement I read in a while.


Oh, and this:

"Again, maybe this is the airlines' problem to solve with the 'rule makers' and maybe you have to grant a 'drying out day' after the 'statutory days off'."


Nice try at a wind-up CH4, or you are drunk.

[COWPAT]

Why do we need a judicial system? We have prattbrat instead. We weren't there, we dont know the details and you feel able to make statements like that.

I hope that you never end up in a situation like theirs, and if ever you do I hope that you are not subjected to the type of comments that you are making now.

Way out of line as we dont know the facts. Wait until due process has been followed before you comment on the outcome.

[Bad medicine]

Just a few non-personal comments from a medical point of view.

There are health benefits to alcohol consumption. The effect is limited, however, to no more than 2 standard drinks per day, with a minimum of 2 alcohol-free days per week. Any more than that, and the adverse health effects outweigh any benefit. The WHO limits for healthy drinking (ie. not causing long term damage) are, for men, 4 standard drinks per day, and for women, 2 per day, also with a minimum of 2 alcohol-free days per week.

The performance effects of alcohol are well known, and I won't go into it here. There is also a lot of evidence of the LATE performance effects, long after the blood alcohol has returned to zero. For example, the vestibular effects after a big night are measurable for at least 36hours after the blood alcohol returns to zero.

There have been studies on the cognitive effects.

One that is easy to obtain is:

Yesavage, J.A. and Leirer, V.O. “Hangover Effects on Aircraft Pilots 14 Hours After Alcohol Ingestion: A Preliminary Report in American Journal Psychiatry 143:12, December 1986 p 1546-1550.

It found, “Using a repeated measure counterbalanced design, the authors had 10 [US] Navy P3-C Orion pilots fly two carefully designed simulated flights under control (no hangover) and hangover conditions. For the control condition, pilots drank no alcohol within 48 hours before the simulated flight. For the hangover condition, they flew 14 hours after drinking enough ethanol mixed with diet soft drinks (the equivalent of 6-7 standard drinks) to attain a blood alcohol concentration of 100 mg/dl [BAC of 0.1%]. Pilot performance was worse in the hangover condition on virtually all measures but significantly worse on three of six variance measures". The performance decrement has been attributed to alcohol’s impairment of both working memory, and the ability to divide attention between tasks. Alcohol also reduces the ability to perform non-routine acts, and has an even greater effect when an alternative, non-typical response is required. In terms of pilot performance, this suggests that in emergency conditions, the adverse performance effects of alcohol may be most pronounced.

It has also been shown in a number of scientific studies that, particularly at higher doses, the consumption of alcohol before sleep, causes increased wake periods, or light Stage 1 sleep, especially during the second half of the sleep period. Alcohol is also a diuretic, resulting in increased urine production, and frequently hence the need to urinate during the night, further disrupting sleep.

At levels of alcohol significantly below that which could have been expected following the consumption of 6 standard drinks, next- day alertness and divided-attention performance haves been measured to be impaired. This illustrates that alcohol consumption can directly impair daytime alertness and performance through disruptive effects on sleep.

No one is saying don't enjoy a drink. 1 or 2 drinks 8 hours before reporting for duty will be gone in those with normal alcohol metabolism. But it is also important to remember that just because you have a zero blood alcohol after a large number of drinks doesn't mean that you won't be significantly impaired.

Cheers,

BM

[blaireau]

The Royal Navy used to define drunkenness in general terms, as being unable to perform any task that could reasonably be asked of the person in question.
Watching Jolly Jack trying to compose himself before "walking" up the plank after a run ashore was one of the few pleasures for Officer of the Watch alongside in port.

[Bigpants]

Prattbrat

Just a suggestion but have you considered a career in politics?

Boozing is perfectly acceptable indeed, I believe "George W" had a bit of an "alcohol problem" but that did not stop him making it all the way to the top.

Mind you given some of his recent decisions, I think the world would be a safer place if he reverted to his old lifestyle. You know like that Russian President from a few years ago... the happy one who was always having a laugh conducting bands...smiling a lot!

Regards BP

edited spelling grammar etc

[Rowardennan]

You cant be done for drink driving unless youve started driving, just prevented from following thru an error of judgement

You can however be prosecuted for being 'In charge' which has a similar penalty,however the 12 month disqualification isn't mandatory in an 'In charge case'

You technically become in charge of a motor vehicle the moment you pick up the keys.

For example if you were found to be in excess of the limit whilst in a car in possession of the keys,regardless of whether they were in the ignition or not you are guilty of an offence..unless you can prove that you had no intention of driving the vehicle

eg: you were intending to sleep in it or you were looking for something in the glove compartment

In this instance the burden of proof is on you,that is YOU have to prove that you had no intention of driving the vehicle.


In practice most police forces will wait until you attempt to move the vehicle and then collar you,just to build a stronger case and go for the driving offence,which is a lot easier to prove and a lot harder to wriggle out of


I have no idea how this relates to aviation,but I thought I should clear up that particular point for your own good

Just in case!

[Miserlou]

Interesing point you raise, Rowardennan.

I'm afraid it says a lot about the society that the police would rather than wait until an offence has been comitted than prevent it!

Having followed the debate, though, I draw the conclusion, by mixing the various sources that one could, if one dared, consume one unit of alcohol whilst on duty and remain below the o.2 promille limit with the blessing of the WHO.

Fortunately , the SOP's state "No alcohol whilst on duty or in uniform!!"

[5150]

Farty - yes, you are missing something.....intent.

The very fact that they turned up to work is good enough evidence in the eyes of British Law, as Rowardennan correctly mentions with regard to drinking and driving.

The crew (if the allegations are true), would have been better off pulling a sicky. (I know of no one who has turned up to work, in uniform, with the intention reporting in sick - and if it was these guys' intention, they'll struggle to prove it...)

Let's face it we all know it happens and is certainly not confined to BA, unfortunately for them, got caught.....

[CH4]

Pratbratt

All I can say is that, as common here, you 'engage mouth before brain'. If you really bothered to read what I said, you might at least understand what I was saying! Maybe you' too, are too pissed or stupid to listen to what others say here?

'How does a pilot know if he is complying with the legislation?' We are told that the limit for flying an airplane is maybe a quater of the limit for driving a car in the UK. Depending on size, weight, metabolism of the individual etc, that translates to maybe a quarter of two pints of beer, less if you are a small guy.

I'm not advocating drinking to the limit, but you will understand many people's predicament here. My example of a dinner party, on a day off, followed by a report for duty next day is a real issue. Can you have one glass of wine at 9 pm or two? Who the hell knows? They need to know, otherwise they will unknowingly and unwillingly fall foul of the rules.

But a 'day off' should be just that; a day in which you can do what the hell you want and unwind. If you fly close to the 900 hr limit a year, you SHOULD be entitled to do what the hell you want on your day off.

All I was saying is, the agencies involved (airlines and unions) need to get their act together and help and advise all pilots. I'm not stating that the rules are wrong. Does that make sense to you Prattbrat? I doubt it! Will I get a sensible answer form this guy? Forgive me for being a cynic!

and btw Prattbratt, I think you could do with a drink to calm down and chill out; maybe then you can rejoin the human race!

[Zlin526]

CH4,

How the hell does a pilot know if he is breaching the limit?

I'll tell you how. By staying off the sherbets and not drinking anything vaguely alcoholic before piloting an aircraft, especially one thats carrying 100+ passengers who expect the Captain to be sober!

If people can't have a good night out without getting tanked up, then they havent got much of a life..

P.S I'm not some freaky temperence campaigner by the way. I do like a pint or three (of proper beer, not that cheap foreign piss), but in the right circumstances..

Hic..

[CH4]

Zlin

You too put mouth into gear before brain. RTFQ! Answer my question please....How much can a pilot drink before reporting for duty without exceeding the limts?

We are not talking about drinking at the gate or the door of the airplane; how much 8 hours before? Do you know hw much is acceptable?

That is my question.

RTFQ

[Zlin526]

CH4,

No need to swear old chap, I did read the question...No need to be aggressive

I don't know how much a pilot can drink before being over the limit. And I'm sure he/she doesn't either, which is why I advocate not drinking alcohol at all anywhere near an aeroplane, either before, after or during the flight in question. 8 Hours/12 hours who knows?? Depends on lots of factors, size, weight, full or empty stomach etc..

Part of the problem of alcohol related deaths on UK roads is the fact that people are allowed to drink a certain amount before being 'over the limit'. Make it illegal to drink any alcohol whilst driving/flying and there would be no doubt.

Sure it wouldn't stop people drinking and driving, but at least we'd all know where we stood with the limits i.e zero alcohol. Get caught, get prosecuted..easy

and btw Prattbratt, I think you could do with a drink to calm down and chill out; maybe then you can rejoin the human race!

Anyone who needs alcohol to cope with anything needs to see a doctor.

Have nice day:ok:

[Bad medicine]

The average male metabolises about 1 standard drink per hour. There is a fair bit of individual variation though, and a lot of variables including the type of alcohol, and the presence of food in the gut.

As I said in the earlier post, just timing your drinking so you arrive at the gate with a zero blood alcohol is only part of the story. There are a lot of effects on performance long after the blood alcohol reaches zero. So it depends on whether you just want to comply with the letter of the law, written for the lowest common denominator, or whether you want to maximise your performance as a professional aviator.

Cheers,

BM

[trytofly]

CH4

Don't let them wind you up.

Zlin5....whatever
and
pratt or bratt ( either works for me )

CH4 is trying to establish a more useable bottom line...one that is understandable by all, assessable by all and sensible. I do not believe he is saying it is ok to drink the night before a flight, but that there is a wider issue here.

Pooling ideas creates the best solutions.

Stubborn characters have killed more airline passengers than all the beer on the planet ! That is a fact.
Your attitudes are ( at best ) stubborn, narrow, selfish, etc etc

try listening and understanding before opening gob !

zlin

just seen your last post as I put the above in.

Yes...zero tolerance is in fact how it is now in BA. One will not report with any alchohol in ones blood or one will be sacked.
I think I explained this to you earlier.

This is not a suggestion to a new rule....it is already there.

So, how does this help me know when I have to stop drinking ?
Is it 24 hrs, 36 hrs, 48 hrs...1 week ?? Come on...how do we know ?

Perhaps we should be given the opportunity to breathalyse ourselves as we report...a sort of amnesty time, just in case that glass of red wine of 36hrs ago is still there.

It is not such an easy issue.

[CH4]

Zlin

Thank you; you did answer my question. You don't know either! How much you can drink on a night off before reporting for duty the next day, without exceeding the limit? That is exactly my point; someone needs to advise pilots what the limit is. Who the f***k knows what 0.02 is? I don't, do you?

Educate us all and we can keep within the rules. That's why I potentially have a lot of sympathy with the crew concerned!

P.S. Trytofly. at least I can identify with someone who is on the same planet as me, 'talks the same language'! :O

[smellster]

Nothing to do with whether Nigel had a a few too many G & T's.

However there seems to be a few posters on here who need to pull their finger out of their holier than thou anally retentive a*rse h*oles

Most crews on a nightstop will have a beer or two, this is normal, like it or not. Posters who say 'you have a problem if you need alcohol to relax'. Retire or go back to your bible.

B*llox to the human performance question: which of these is not an accepted form of relaxation after a flight. It happens, and no I'm not an alcoholic.

However most of the 'Most' crews know when to draw the line, now will you all please shut up.

Smellster

XXX

[Alberville]

Bottom line - Only Captain Nigel could afford to get tanked in Norway!!!!

[Carnage Matey!]

Take a deep breath normal_nigel. The Suns 'supergrass' isn't an ex-pilot, he's an ex-steward, although he wasn't sacked for 'sleeping off a hangover'. He was fired for sexually harassing several stewardesses, amongst other matters. Strange how the Sun didn't choose to mention that in their description of the lying toerag. Besides, he'll get his comeuppance. Anyone living in 'Old Windsor' should really think carefully before slating BA crew. I believe whatshername from Dispatches had to spend her 30 pieces of silver on moving house afterwards!

[Ignition Override]

In the US (for what it is worth...), the airline managements only want to severely punish anyone whose actions create any sort of negative publicity for the airline, no matter what the reason, and the FAA can and will do anything to justify its over-bloated bureaucracy. Never mind hoping that any airlines can be motivated to try to better clarify how much alcohol any person, i.e. 170 lbs, can legally consume about xy hours before departure time! However, if a member of the Board of Directors was found by airport security to have a 'smoking' pipe when traveling out west, then not even a wrist was slapped..................................................... ..................

Remember, many airlines and the FAA are run by lawyers/barristers/solicitors (or CPAs), not people who initially had any interest in airline operations or aviation.

Don't forget that in many hotels, various anonymous airline employees (staff) or airline mgmt types can be sitting next to you in the bar-sometimes a few passengers who you just flew in. They can recognize us from quite a distance, even in street clothes! I have recognized several unfamiliar pilots here in casual clothing, just by the way they walk through Clark Tower parking lot on a layover, and have chatted with them just to prove it!

Many people in the hotel/restaurant industry have a grudge against all airline pilots, many of whom have often overheard very loose talk and worse, distorted rumours, about salaries (one airline here pays lots of overtime so pilots working on multiple "days off" can pay for two ex-wives, or furniture for the home, which had almost none...), total days off, homes, boats, cars and the well-known fact that all of us earn huge salaries and only sit there and push buttons, which requires no systems, FOM, weather or other procedural knowledge, judgement and the ability to often coordinate many things at once in crappy weather etc.:oh:

[Techman]

Isn't it amazing how many explanations and excuses people can come up with....

[ojs]

Given that:

(a) One of the themes of posters here is that it's impossible to have a nil reading for blood-alcohol; and

(b) We can assume that Norweigan authorities perform alcohol tests frequently and have a zero tolerance level

Why don't we hear about crews getting taken away for being over the (Norway) limit all the time?..

Surely the point is that there are occasions when people are over the limit and while we shouldn't all be quick to condem, we should recognise that sometimes crews don't respect the limits and they do get caught.

IIRC, after the C4 documentary this board was full of "it's all exaggerated nonsense, don't believe a word of it, it's so unfair" type messages; but once all the dust was settled we did find the rules had been breached and that some of the allegations made had been correct...

Like airport security, industry topics like this are as much about perception as they are reality.

[Croqueteer]

Many moons ago, a young Lightning pilot was pulled from the last night bash on exercise in Cyprus by the O.O . to ferry an aircraft back to Leuchars at 6am. It was a non-stop flight with five en-route tankerings, he was stopped on the way home and failed the bag.
Don't slag me off, I'm only telling the tale.

[Basil]

<< non-stop flight with five en-route tankerings>>
Hope the p-tube was done up tight :O

[Basil]

Bad Medicine writes:
<<Alcohol . . . has an even greater effect when an . . non-typical response is required. . . . in emergency conditions, the adverse performance effects . . . most pronounced.>>

Basil executed an informal demo of foregoing in the 60s and, yes, the multi emergency situation provided the clearest indication of performance decrement. i.e: giggling does not put the fire out or restore hydraulics.

p.s: for those of a delicate disposition - and Basil's continued wellbeing - the demo was in a sim.

[Brit312]

Sligtly getting away from the subject, but if I was part of this airline management team I would be very interested in talking to the ground staff member who called in the police.
Surely there was another way around this problem such as advising the crew of your worries and perhaps advising them that that it was time for the aircraft to go faulty for a few hours.Now perhaps this was tried and the advice ignored, but by calling the police in straight away can only bring the airline bad publicity.
I always thought that your body took 2 hours to neutralize a unit of alcohol [ 1/2 pint ] so that is some guide but with zero tolerance I would not like to use it if my job was at stake
:zzz:

[wes_wall]

I don’t know how any of you can even remotely justify this crews actions, or when flying the line, even consider that drinking “according to the limits " provides an adequate safeguard. If the facts as reported are true, then their
flying days should be over, period. Even a temporary exemption to fly a kite would be in order.

[CH4]

Wes-Wall

I don't see many here justifying anyone's actions. Nobody here knows what their actions were! Until such time as we do, then who can venture an opinion on whether they did right or wrong? Maybe they did, maybe they didn't, but here again you are the 'classic case' of jumping into a debate with all guns blazing, without first taking time to reflect and think and absorb the information around you. Bad trait for a professional pilot, IMHO!

[viaEGLL]

How many times will it take for flight crew to learn a simple lesson save the drinking until your of duty and you then can drink as much as you like.Im not preaching but even i dont drink before duty and thats saying something, even if it was zero tolerance you thought the last case would have made that stick in everybodies mind.Enjoy your pint:O :O

[CH4]

viaEGLL. You too have just made a judgement, in the absence of the facts. No-one has proved anything yet. See what I mean?

[ATC Watcher]

Lots of Priests and judges among us...:rolleyes:

The days of breathing 100% O2 for 10 min before starting the engines are over . Those old enough to remember this have learned in the meantime that it is no longer acceptable and will cost your carreer straight away. The glass of wine with the crew meal in AF is long gone.
. Those who choose to play with it today are either too young or fools. Those guys played with the rules, got caught, it is not bad luck, it is plain stupid. Period.
This is not to be reflecting on BA or UK pilots however. Best of the lot I would say..and the tradition of the After Landing Beer ( but one only ) is far more desirable than everyone immediately splitting away on arrival to their room to check their e-mails...

[B.L.G Bob]

The only limit I would adhere to, and be disciplined enough to undertake is no booze. If you all know that short haul are more at risk, then take positive steps to reduce the risk. Ultimately if you have forked out a fortune for your training you should be disciplined enough not end up "splashing" it up against the wall. I am not employed in the airline industry but work in the industry which extracts the "go go juice" that keeps the turbines turning. Random breath tests are carried out. Currently, I have an evening departure to an offshore installation and have to spend a whole day waiting. Even if I had a drink with lunch and I feel O.K. there is the high risk of getting breath tested and getting caught. Now some of you will argue that I would be alright. I am not prepared to undertake that risk. It is hard enough to find another job. IF hangovers are being slept off on the flight deck then privileges are being taken for granted. I am also a PPL and if I am flying the next day I do not drink the night before. You guys make decisions day in day out, I think this one should be one of the easiest, if not then you should not be flying.

If I have passed judgement on the situation I apologise.

[Airbubba]

>>Don't forget that in many hotels, various anonymous airline employees (staff) or airline mgmt types can be sitting next to you in the bar-sometimes a few passengers who you just flew in. <<

Yep, it is time to once again review the bitter lessons of the infamous Northwest alcohol incident in Fargo:

Don't drink in your own hotel. Always pay cash. And, above all, never, ever stiff the bartender!

[ILS 119.5]

At the moment the crew are being branded as "guilty". As professionals we should not do this. Our first line should be support for these people. If they are found "guilty" then so be it, but I think that the company procedures should be the first to be examined rather than the crew. Years ago I used to travel with my Dad (BOAC days), after landing drinks were a tradition and nights out were, however all the crew menbers always tried to refrain from drinking before departure. I think in todays aviation industry most of us are professional in views towards drinking before duty. In the old days if the pilots were under the influence then that was it, nowadays if the pilots are pissed then there are two auto pilots. (sorry, that's not an excuse). Maybe automation gives the flight crew a get out "well if I'm not OK then then autopilot will be"
Finally, only my opinion, if staff or more so company procedures are lagging behind the drag curve then the rules governing the curve should be addressed first which will sort the staff out. If the rules are then still not being observed then unfortunately the blame will come unto those who are disregarding. After 20 years in the Aviation business plus the 10 years flying with my dad I can that I could guarantee that 99.9% of Aircrew, Engineers or ATCO's have turned up for work with the levels of alchohol in thier blood as the accused BA staff.

[Bigmouth]

I get the impression here that it´s ok for BA jocks (and others) to drink up untill 8 hours prior to a flight/check in. Is this correct?
Every job I ever had, company rules have said I have to be SOBER 8 hours prior.

[Maximum]

At the heart of this issue is the question of how much of any kind of "normal" lifestyle is left, especially to UK and European shorthaul drivers.

With the kind of 6 on/2 off roster that is increasingly becoming the norm, it is very hard to actually plan to safely have any drink at all. As someone else has said, all the companies are doing is throwing the rulebook at us, without making any attempt to manage the lifestyle problems which this creates.

Moderate consumption of alcohol is part of our culture, it can be a sociable, pleasurable and relaxing experience. I would argue that making it increasingly difficult for crews to enjoy this activity will lead to increased levels of stress and discontent, and feelings of antagonism towards airline management and the legislators and enforcers, which in turn can only have a negative effect on flight safety.

The irony of all this is the drink culture in the cabin - the company directors enjoying their "champagne breakfast" before a day's hard decision making(!?). The amount of alcohol I've seen consumed by men in suits at all sorts of inappropriate times when I've been paxing has always made my jaw drop somewhat......

[buzz boy]

its quite simple really.

the common practice of rostering 5 to 6 night away in short haul, along with cabin crew leads to one thing, girls and boys will play!! and usually this involves alcohol!!

the kind of personality drawn to this job is usually outgoing etc, this means work hard and play hard.

doesnt mean that it makes it right, but how many of us have been involved in a spontainious piss up and fun (room party etc)??

by the grace of god...............

[Jet II]

Brit312

Surely there was another way around this problem such as advising the crew of your worries and perhaps advising them that that it was time for the aircraft to go faulty for a few hours.Now perhaps this was tried and the advice ignored, but by calling the police in straight away can only bring the airline bad publicity.

Are you suggesting that when staff see illegal activity they should hush it up and keep it in house?

[40KTSOFFOG]

Are all the staff that play such a responsible role in maintaining aviation security covered by the same legislation. Perhaps they should!:ouch:

[Cathar]

It' not illegal if they don't take the a/c is it??

I cannot comment on the Norwegian legislation but so far as the UK is concerned the answer will shortly be yes. The Railways and Transport Safety Act provides that it is an offence to report for duty with a blood alcohol in excess of the prescribed limit.

[no reds]

Airbubba - brilliant, couldn`t agree more !:ok:

[Brit312]

Jet 11
Yes that is exactly what I am proposing, as it saves the airlines name getting in the press and prevents the aircraft from getting airbourne with what might be a some what unsafe crew.
Now if the crew fail to listen to your advice, then perhaps the manager involved would have to take more serious actions which could in the end mean calling in the police, but surely this should be the last action and not what appeared to be, the first.
No airline that I know of considers crew turning up for duty, somewhat unfit for that duty, lightly and believe me crew reported for doing so would rapidly have to answer for their actions within the airline it self, wnd this could result in dissmissal
As somebody has already said there are an awful lot of saints here, who would crucify somebody for the slightest breakage of rules. Buzz Boy I entirely agree with your post

[missive]

I see the usual bunch of the self righteous telling us all what we should do from petrol pump attendants to ppl’s (place in what ever order you consider most fitting) As pointed out a number of times, in the absence of the facts, give the guys a rest. Most of us take the odd glass of wine with dinner, perhaps even a pre dinner sherry. It’s quite normal and in most cases reasonable. Unless of course a trace of alcohol remains the next day and you are in the land of the zero tolerant! Suddenly you are a criminal, in clink, job probably gone, and future in doubt for merely living in your usual reasonable manner. Think about it. For sure, the level of fatigue we work with all the time is a damn site more dangerous than the odd trace.

[four_two]

missive,

I assume from the tenor of your post that you are a commercial pilot.
Quote:
“For sure, the level of fatigue “we” work with all the time is a damn site (sic) more dangerous than the odd trace.”

Well I’m not a pilot, and nor am I “self righteous” so you’ll have to excuse me having the temerity to post here on this forum.
Pilots are not the only ones having to abide by regulations, many people in all walks of life these days have to do so. In the Transport business Tube/Bus/Train drivers all are subject to the law with regard to alcohol for instance. As an aircraft engineer (or should I have said “petrol pump attendant”) I was also subject to the restrictions laid out in ANO/JAR66.50.
Would you be happy to fly an aircraft serviced by an engineer who had ignored those restrictions? Not drunk perhaps, but not quite at peak efficiency because of alcohol.

Quote:

“ Most of us take the odd glass of wine with dinner, perhaps even a pre dinner sherry. It’s quite normal and in most cases reasonable. Unless of course a trace of alcohol remains the next day and you are in the land of the zero tolerant! Suddenly you are a criminal, in clink, job probably gone, and future in doubt for merely living in your usual reasonable manner”

How can you have it any other way? I’m afraid it can’t be left up to the individual to decide if he/she is fit to carry out their duty. Pilots are human beings with exactly the same faults as the rest of us, and we’ve all read of those pilots who have been caught breaking the law. (Regarding alcohol)

I am NOT commenting on the aircrew that this thread is about, I don’t know the facts.

[Stampe]

Well 4-2 missive raises a valuable point.its scientifically proven that a pilot landing after a long night duty has the same level of performance degredation as having consumed between 2 and 3 pints of beer.Funny old thing the authorities don,t seem in the least bit concerned about addressing that issue and I guess you won,t be either as the price of your flights would have to go up.As for aircraft engineers your totally wrong the new Transport and Shipping act actually sets a permitted level of blood alcohol at 80mg/ml (the current drink drive limit )4 times higher than the new limit for pilots.controllers why???.A CAA doctor informs me that it will be quite possible for a teetotaller to fail a breathe test for the new limit for pilots given certain types of diets/eating habits.The low limit was set as the lowest level detectable with current technology,trouble is you don,t have to had a drink to achieve that level.Be careful out there guys the CAA are budgeting fot 20 prosecutions a year.The lunatics are running the asylum.

[Boeing 7E7]

Stampe,
I've also heard the one about landing an aircraft after a night flight and 2-3 pints of beer. Scientificlly proved?! Can you prove the statement?

I rather suspect it's a rumour and not true. If anyone can show us the reference to such research I think we'd be very interested (and so would the CAA!)

Here you go: Fatigue, Alcohol and Performance Impairment (http://cf.alpa.org/internet/projects/ftdt/backgr/fatigue_performance_impairment_1997.html)

[Stampe]

Research carried out and published in Australia I believe.Balpa,s technical section at Lgw. will be able to furnish more information if not I can most probably source the info.I believe its a fact that there have never been any western passenger jets hull losses attributed to crew alcohol consumption.Anyone prove me wrong.!!

[MOR]

An awful lot of tripe being talked here.

Some say don't judge without the facts. But the facts are known- the crew members were arrested after testing positive for alcohol. If they had not tested positive, they wouldn't have been arrested. So the facts are known- even if the excuses aren't.

Some seem to think that there is some reasonable excuse for having any traces of alcohol in the body (apart from that which occurs naturally), when in a country that has zero tolerance. There isn't. Part of being a professional pilot is having both the judgement, and the discipline, to know when it is inappropriate to drink alcohol. Nobody "needs" alcohol in any measure unless they are ipso facto unfit to fly.

Some say that drinking is part of our culture. Irrelevant. You could just as easily say that drug abuse is part of our culture, or sexual or racial discrimination is part of our culture. They may be, but they are parts of our culture that are not acceptable in this profession.

Some of you need to wake up.

Some of you need to grow up.

Some of you, thank goodness, have the wisdom to understand that alcohol and flying do not mix, in any measure, and that anybody caught has no excuse, and deserves no sympathy- but almost certainly needs psychological help with their behaviour.

When will they ever learn...

[Stampe]

Boeing thanks for finding that knew it existed and of course those of us who work long night duties know it to be true!!.This research has been drawn to the attention of the CAA a long time ago, your faith in them is misguided they are not interested in flight safety if cost is involved, they are puppets to the airlines who are their paymasters.MOR no one condones alcohol consumption before flying, my own personal limit is no alcohol within 24 hours of flying and has been for many years.I make no comment on the case that started this thread.The new impossibly low limit puts all of us (including teetotallers) at risk of career trauma from naturally occuring alcohol in the body.There is great potential for miscarriage of justice.Would you feel so smug if you were found to have a alcohol level of say 21mg .per 100ml and hadn,t consumed?.The Transport and Shipping act level of Alcohol is set way to low, 40 or 50 would have been a realistic level and one that would have found support in the industry and profession.This debate requires science not hysteria.

[Kurtz]

Not trying to be contentious, or goody-two shoes here, just sticking with facts.
I know in the morning if I have had a drink or two the night before, even a couple of glasses of wine. I KNOW there is a difference in my reaction and thinking time, because I can feel - albeit only very slightly - the difference.
I also know this does not apply to everyone. It wasn't always so, in fact I can remember mess dinners and aviating the next morning in probably highly dubious states - but that was then, and this is now.
The world has changed in the perception of drink driving. Once it was a 'there but for the grace of God etc etc....' but now it is rightly considered a fairly serious anti-social potentially lethal offence. Same therefore with hauling pax around in a like condition. By all means object to Euro law, or British law and campaign to have it changed - but in the meantime be aware of it.

However, the thing that cracks me up the most, being (regrettably I admit) part of BA, is the total apparent lack of CDF.
There have now been almost numerous examples of the Company's attitude to reporting for duty with traces of alcohol present in one's system. It's the dole queue, with the knowledge there will need to be a bloody big pilot shortage before any employer offers one a job again.

This happens regularly. By all means use your CC to try and negotiate a change in the rules - but try and be realistic about your chances, imagine the headlines. "BA relaxes drinking rules for pilots!!!! The world's most drunken airline" - I don't think so!

So, to conclude:
1. You know the rules.
2. Breaking them (or even taking a chance) is taking a huge huge risk with your career.

I just cannot understand why anyone would want to take that risk, regardless of the efficiency of their metabolism and/or flying skills. I suppose one should remember that pilots are just another population grouping, and therefore, just like any other group will have broadly the same percentage of alcoholics and people with substance dependency problems.

[Quick edit - already been asked what CDF stands for......'Common Dog F#ck' otherwise known as Common Sense!;) ]

[Boeing 7E7]

Thanks for the link.

[viaEGLL]

A late reply to CH4.
It was not a judgement without facts they have been reported for drinking so i was giving by view of the now frequent reports of this happening. We have all gone out and got p***** but you should be mature enough to think that if heaven forbid you have to react to a TCAS would you be as sharp as normal i think not, so add that to your judgement without using anybody as an example. Enjoy the whisky chaser!!!:yuk: :yuk: :yuk:

[wes_wall]

This from today's AVFlash. Read it and then think if you can still drink and fly...

http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/148-full.html#186090

[Fright Level]

Read it and then think if you can still drink and fly...

wes_wall, read the original article in "The Sun" (http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2003530588,00.html) and decide again if you think this was a truly scientific test worthy of your comment.

[sky9]

Surely the time has come for pilots to carry a breathaliser as part of his equipment If you find that you have any trace of alcohol, report "unfit for duty".

The problem at the present time is that we have no proper guidance as to what is an acceptable intake to indicate a zero reading.
Breathalisers are available on the internet at a reasonable price.

[CH4]

viaEGLL, I don't entirely disagree with your last post, except to assert that you didn't properly read what I said, yet again. You had said before that pilots should be able to refrain from drinking until they are off duty; no-one could disagree with that!

I don't think anyone here, apart from you maybe, has even suspected for one minute that they were drinking whilst on duty! The question here is 'how much' and 'how long' before duty can a crew safely drink, 'in moderation', without being at risk of failing the stringent limits. I've not seen anyone here that has been able to give a satisfactory explanation to that. That's why I said that I thought it was an industry wide problem; everyone needs to know what is or what is not acceptable. Don't you see that? Maybe the solution is to demand that all pilots become teetotal, for fear of them breaking some rather 'obtuse and unexplainable' limits. Ha, then who's going to fly anyone's airplanes?

Final point, the crew may have 'been reported', but that doesn't mean they were guilty. They have even 'failed' the preliminary, on the spot check, yet again that does not mean they are guilty! Until such time as the actual blood test results become available, no one is guilty of 'cock all'! THat is my POINT. If those results find against them, then they will be guilty for sure, the extent of that guilt being entirely dependant on how much they have exceeded the limit, for all the good reasons given.

Does that make sense? It does to me, one who lives on the planet I live one, but I do sometimes wonder if I'm the only one living on my planet, and maybe I'm just maladjusted and a weird thinker?

[MaxProp]

How does all this mostly self-righteous opinion fit into the fact that the UK goverment apparently thinks its more or less ok for its citizens to use cannabis?.
I think there is a complete head in the sand attitude going on--its ok for a drugged crazed idiot to massacre on the A38. but a pilot caught in a zero tolerance regime loses his job (without prejudice to the facts of the current case).
This is a mainly uk problem----we all agree that the rules must be followed-- but how many punters would rather sit behind a pilot on drugs than a pilot with a hangover ?

[Caslance]

Speaking as mere SLF, I'd rather not sit behind a pilot in either of those states, thank you very much!:ooh:

[CH4]

Caslance

I can't speak for Maxprop, but I rather gather he is trying to 'amplify' his point, by comparison, rather than make a case for pilots generally being 'unfit to fly'. He does say 'without prejudice' to the facts being revealed in this case.

[Cathar]

its ok for a drugged crazed idiot to massacre on the A38.

? It is illegal to drive while under the influence of drugs and causing death by careless driving when under the influence of drugs is an offence punishable by up to ten years imprisonment.

[Caslance]

Ah, I see CH4.

I was just answering the question in his posting.:cool:

[CH4]

O come on Cathar, is that what you really think Maxprop is really saying? Take a chill pill and go read again. Maybe you suffer from English not being you're native language and you cannot see the nuances involved. If that's the case beware about 'jumping in with both big feet' until you understand what is being conveyed.

If English is your language, then I recommend a course of comprehension. No offence intended, but such posts are a bit ridiculous, IMHO.

Caslance <laffin>, I think we would all agree. We'd all sooner be up the front driving in any case. No offence intended, you are very right in what you say.

No one here condones any pilot reporting for duty, knowingly breaking any rules of soberness or fitnes to fly. That is the bottom line in what most people are saying, even if they chose different ways of saying it. :O

[Caslance]

We'd all sooner be up the front driving in any case Me too, alas! (sigh):sad:

[LatviaCalling]

I'd like to mention the great propaganda films of WW II when British Spitfire and Hurricane pilots came home to their base and raised one or two or three, or maybe even four pints to the lost comrades who, on the way back, didn't land on those grassy airfields.

Those films gave me a sensation as a young boy that pilots were a special breed who could drink all night and fly out in the early dawn to tackle the Nazis. They were unstopable. In every film I saw, whether they were British or American, the pilots always gathered at a pub aftwerwards for a heavy night of indulgence and some were carried out by their chaps to fly again the next morning.

Was this Hollywood and/or Rank to give us the idea that these young pilots were indestructible. For one thing, I don't think that they had alcohol testing in those days. No matter how bad your hangover was the next morning, you flew. Somehow they managed to win the Battle of Britain and then some.

Another point I want to make is if a pilot has a cough and he takes a dose of syrup for that, do you realize that most of them have 40% alcohol. If he's alergic to something and takes Claritin or some other equal brand, he may not operate heavy machinery etc...

The WHO again says that a glass of red wine at night will help your from getting a heart attack. This is too far fetched, but would you rather have a pilot with a glass of wine in his system, than one who falls dead while piloting the plane.

[curmudgeon]

In the UK, causing death by dangerous driving even whilst stone cold sober, or even unstoned, is a criminal offence carrying a penalty of up to 10 years imprisonment.

As maximum tarrifs go, I think this a bit light, but that's the subject of another thread.

cur

[buzz boy]

can anybody quote me an airliner accident in the past 75 years that has been attributed to alcohol???? probably NONE!!!!

can you say the same for roads?? rail?? etc???

[LastCall]

Buzz Boy

Here's one:

http://www.jacdec.de/JAL.htm

Quote:

3.01.1977 Douglas DC-8-62F JA8054 46148 Anchorage-Intl AP /AK USA 2 + 3 0

With a cargo of 57 live cattle, the DC-8 was on a flight from Anchorage to Tokyo-Haneda (JL 8054). Very soon after liftoff the aircraft enetered a stall lost height and crashed 300 m past the runway. There were no survivors.

It was determined that the pilot in command had a blood alcohol level of 0.298 % at the time.

He rotated the DC-8 beyond its maximum angle resulting in a loss of lift. A small amount of ice accumulated on the aircraft´s wings during taxy for departure making the aircraft vulnerable to a stall.

Neither any other crewmember or one of the ground dispatcher made an attempt to prevent the captain from flying.

...Unquote

[Bames]

Reading through this topic, I cannot help getting the idea that we have a bunch of grown-up men acting like adolescent boys, trying to find an excuse for using alcohol when they really shouldn't.
While I can understand somebody wanting scientifically proven, 100% sure method of being at absolutely zero level of alcohol at a certain time, I do not understand why you don't use moderation. As somebody here has said before, one unit of alcohol (i.e. one pint of beer, glass of wine etc) takes approximately two hours to burn off for a normal person. So, assuming you allow yourself a sleeping time of 8 hours, have a breakfast, travel to airport, and your body has more or less 10 hours to burn off alcohol. That is 5 units. Just have four, and you'll be safe. And, btw, your body doesn't wait until you are in bed to start burning off alcohol, its starts it right away, an extra safety margin - the drinking time.
Believe me, I used to have access to a breathalyzer and tested it, both on duty mornings (always achieved 0) and also sometimes off-duty mornings, after long and wet dinners. To have 0.09 per cent alcohol in your blood, say 7 o'clock in the morning, you'd really have to be p***ed the night before.
Yes, I can hear somebody saying that on short haul overnights, you're likely not to have the luxury of 8 hours rest in your hotel room. Fine, try having three pints, or maybe two. Or is it entirely impossible to have just one, or perhaps none? I know, difficult, but it can be done...
Also, people seem to think that body's normal metabolism can raise the alcohol level to above zero, especially with some diets.
Well, I know that if you eat Scandinavian dark sour bread and immediately blow into the brathalyzer, the needle will flicker, but after 5 minutes it won't. And have a teaspoon of your cough medicine, yes, again you may get a slight indication. But don't take your medicine just before reporting to duty. Take it first thing in the morning - or after airborne...
As for the effect of fatigue vs. alcohol, I agree, being fatigued can be as dangerous as having had a couple of drinks. But if you have a wet evening before a flight, you'll be fatigued before the start of the day. So I think we are talking about two different things here. Use of alcohol is something each one of us has a direct control on, fatigue, well, more a matter of rostering, management and FTLs.

[Bad medicine]

Lots of good common sense stuff there Bames. Only 1 comment, a pint of beer is 2 standard drinks, not one. Potential for a bit of a problem there!

Cheers,

BM

[Airbus Girl]

Days off are going to have to be redefined. At the moment they are meant to be days when you can do what you like, relax away from work, etc. but when you finish late, have 2 days off, then start early, you cannot go out with friends for the evening and have any drinks at all.
I'm not saying that alcohol is a necessity just that the rules and rosters are getting to the point where airlines rule your entire life, and there is no "time off" in reality.
I do not condone anyone going out and getting plastered the night before an early report.

But if the CAA should say that 1/4 of the drink drive limit is the maximum for aircrew over here, then they should provide rules "for the avoidance of fatigue" that mean you never fly with a fatigue level that is equivalen to 1/4 of the drink drive level.
But it doesn't happen.

So to all those observers out there who are telling aircrew not to drink, could you instead start lobbying the CAA to provide rules on fatigue that protect the passengers too?

[Bames]

Thanks, Bad medicine, I stand corrected. Dunno what I was thinking, probably had a drink too much last night...
Airbus Girl: true, it is a shame that we can't do whatever we like on the last day off. But, like you said, this again is a matter of rostering etc...

With the current developements in salaries, sometimes I feel like going to the nearest bank and robbing it, but can't do that either...

[viaEGLL]

CH4 if you had given me such a detailed view in the first place then i may have just a small chance to see your point :confused: :confused:

[BEagle]

In the 1970s, folk were pretty unaware of the effect of the demon drink. For example, beer in the Officers' Mess at Scampton was 20p per pint and there were 5 in a Vulcan crew. To pop in to the scruffs' bar and have a 'crew round' (everyone bought their £1's worth) wasn't unusual - and then we drove home. Because we just didn't know any better, had no idea of how many beers it took to go over the 80 milliwhatsits - and in any case, Lincolnshire Plod didn't persecute HM's aviators particularly.....

But nowadays there's no real excuse. Even as SLF in business class, it's easy to go over the limit. "Aperitif, Sir" (the little gin miniature is actually 47% abv!), then the meal "Wine sir?" Probably a 187 ml bottle. "Would sir like a cognac with his coffee?" Yes sir would - and a 2 unit bottle of cognac is quaffed, or probably more if the cabin staff have poured it. So that's around 6-7 units in 2 hours, not including whatever has been guzzled in the business lounge.... How many then drive home with that little lot inside them? Would they be over the UK limit? I don't know; fortunately I don't have to drive anything after an outbound business flight and inbound it'll be tomato juice with Tabasco in the lounge and one glass of wine max with the meal.

'Zero-limit' is not the same as 'zero tolerance'. Set a limit, but then educate people as to how to stay below it - don't just pontificate about 'no safe limit' or 'they'll only drink up to the limit if you tell them how' or any other such sanctimonious tosh.

But I do recall my early days on the Vickers Funbus when "Shutdown checks complete" would be immediately followed by a tray of industrial strength gin and tonics with ice and lemon in 'borrowed' ba glasses on a 'borrowed' ba silver plated tray. I hasten to add that was only when weren't flying again or driving for a day or so!

[maxy101]

The point is though bames , If you work for the Worlds Favourite, and register more than Zero point Zero , you will lose your job.

[CH4]

viaEGLL,

That's where you have to read a whole post to see what has been said before! Go back and look at what I said here earlier in this post and then you can Decide what someone is saying.

Airbusgirl sums up exactly what I was saying and in less words. Must be a clever girl! :O

[calltheball]

Have just heard on the BBC news that both Captain and FO have resigned from BA.

Regardless of the rights and wrongs of this situation, if this information is true then I feel terribly sad for both individuals.

[Airbubba]

BA pilots resign over drink claims 01:59, Nov 20 2003

LONDON (Reuters) - Two British Airways pilots who were suspended last week over allegations they had been drinking before a flight have resigned, the airline says.

Captain William McAuliffe, 50, and first officer David Ryan, 26, were detained at Oslo airport last week shortly before going on duty to fly a passenger jet to London.

A BA spokeswoman said: "They (the two pilots) have resigned and their resignations have been accepted.

"The internal disciplinary investigation into the allegations made against a member of cabin crew is continuing."

The two pilots and a female purser were reported to Norwegian police by British Airways staff at Oslo Airport after they reported late for duty.

BA said the three crew members were alleged to have breached the airline's rules about alcohol consumption before duty.

They were about to fly to Heathrow. The service was cancelled and its 55 passengers eventually dispersed onto other services.

______________________________________________

BA's boozy pilots quit

By CHARLES RAE
and JAMIE PYATT

TWO boozy British Airways pilots who were arrested in their cockpit minutes before take-off resigned yesterday.


Captain William McAuliffe, 50, and First Officer David Ryan, 26, quit before BA could sack them.

Bosses have accepted the resignations “with immediate effect”. It means internal disciplinary action against the pair will not now take place.

Both were suspended after The Sun revealed last week they were arrested and breathalysed on an Airbus 320 due to fly to London from Oslo, Norway.

Cops had been called after ground crew staff said the cockpit “reeked of alcohol”. They both failed breath tests.

It later emerged Ryan drank so much he could not be woken by hotel staff.

A third crew member, purser Michele Giannandrea, 48, from Manchester, was also arrested.

She failed a breath test. Action against her is going ahead.

BA chiefs are still waiting for blood tests on all three to arrive from Norway. But the pilots were told by bosses their careers were effectively over.

Capt McAuliffe, of Dublin, earned around £75,000 and had been with BA for 13 years.

First Officer Ryan, of Keysoe, Beds, earned around £50,000 and was with BA for two years.

Neither will get any pay-off and it will be difficult for them to work for any other airline.

BA has a total ban on drinking eight hours before a flight.


http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2003532650,00.html

[Basil]

BEagle !
<<20p per pint >>
It was 9p a pint at either Cotty or Wyton. Unsurprisingly, can't remember which - you could have had 10 pints each (almost a Friday nights worth :D )

p.s. No scruffs bar these days. Basil quite shocked when standing in mess bar a couple of years ago to note many growbags in evidence - world gone to the dogs! Baah! etc. :*

[Mach Buffet]

You are still presuming they are guilty.

[Tartan Giant]

I see they have now resigned.

Sad ending, but if you indulge in stupidity then what is the alternative.

There is no excuse for any pilot to drink when the rules and common sense dictate he should not.


If anybody thinks they can hold their drink and it does not affect their motor-skills, then try this on your days off !

http://www.hurtwood.demon.co.uk/Fun/copter.swf


Keep safe and well sober.

Cheers

TG

[nurjio]

Airbus Girl says:

"I'm not saying that alcohol is a necessity just that the rules and rosters are getting to the point where airlines rule your entire life, and there is no "time off" in reality".




:sad: :confused: :} :mad: :rolleyes: :cool: ;) :O :( :8

....What is she on about?

[5150]

Where now for them?

Good luck, is all I can say.......

[Basil]

<<....What is she on about?>>

Hmm, thought I could understand but I'll leave it to AG to elucidate.

[Arkroyal]

BBc news today said they'd been arrested for being over their company limit!

I think not, they were allegedly over the national Norwegian limit of Naff All.

Guilty or not of this misdemeanor, it is wrong to call them 'boozy pilots'

I put it to all but the tee-total, and then some of them will have a natural level above zero, that any one of us could fall foul of a zero limit. It is a nonsense, and as Airbusgirl says, impinges more and more on what private life the airlines give us time to 'enjoy'.

Soon only be able to have a few beers during the first week of a two week leave period, but still have your tax assessed by a pie-eyed tax man or accountant and your vital parts diced by a surgeon one over the eight!

Funny old world :bored: :confused:

[overstress]

Hmm

So the Sun gave the F/O a pay rise and sacked him in the same fell swoop. ("after the Sun revealed....etc")

Wish I was a journo, It'd be payback time. Doncha love the Scum's deliberately provocative use of language?

I hope that the guys concerned go home, reflect soberly (no pun intended) on what they've done, and after a few months, return to aviation sadder and wiser men.

Or is some little Hitler now going to suggest they never fly again??

[Dai Rear]

I don't remember the exact details but a few years ago, a BA pilot almost landed his 747 on the motorway near Heathrow and was immediately suspended pending company investigation. He was a Scottish lad. No great surprise to learn that he quietly disappeared and was found a few days later in the Black Isle with a hose pipe from his exhaust into his car.
I agree with the earlier comment that these two lads will most likely never work in the industry again so I pray to God that they don't go the same way.
What would you come home and say to your wife and family if it was you?

[aztruck]

Dai rear, might I suggest that you do some research before posting your ill considered insinuations about the 747 incident.
Alcohol was not a factor.

[5150]

Aztruck,

I don't think Dai Rear is insinuating alcohol in his post reference the 747 incident, merely referring to how he was treated/lynched afterwards.....with a tragic outcome.

[Dai Rear]

I never insinuated anything – on the contrary I displayed consideration and graciousness.
I never said that alcohol was a factor.
I stated clearly that I could not remember exact details.
If I had ; it is a rumour site.

[PPRuNe Pop]

Dai Rear.

Putting my mod hat on I think you have only yourself to blame, and aztruck may have a point.

The title of thread refers to a crew testing positive for alcohol. Putting your comments about the unfortunate incident at LHR on the same thread infers that it was perhaps alcohol related. Which it certainly was not. Rumour has nothing to do with it. It was thoroughly investigated by the CAA and a positive conclusion made.

The outcome however, was very sad indeed.

See the point?

PPP

[MOR]

And still people seem to have their heads in the sand.

You don't resign if you are not guilty. You use the not-inconsiderable legal resources available to you through BALPA and you fight.

The fact that BA were clearly going to terminate them with no compensation, and that they didn't put up any fight at all, tells you all you need to know. They clearly accepted that they were guilty, and the subsequent events indicate that they accepted that they were guilty of a lot more than having trace amounts of alcohol in their bloodstream in a zero-tolerance country.

I feel sorry for them personally,, but frankly the industry is better off without people who have such poor professional judgement.

[Dai Rear]

PPRuNe Pop,
No, I don’t accept that. I have been totally up-front. For the second time, I haven’t insinuated anything. If PPRuNe Pop wishes to be consistent with your own argument, then you have to go through this entire web page, look at and scrutinise every individual entry from every member, and offer the same chastisement to every one who has deviated from the main thread of the heading. Good luck!
I see that PPRuNe Pop has 122 entries on this web page, many of which have nothing to do with the main category under which they were originally listed. Similarly, Aztruck has 101 entries and the same applies. Check for yourself. Sauce for the goose comes to mind.
I am surprised about educated professional people attacking other similar colleagues accusing them of saying something that they have gone to great lengths to clarify and state that they are not saying at all.
If you really find my remarks out of order, despite my clarifications, then you should click on the hyperlink at the bottom right “Report this to a moderator” and insist in the strongest possible terms that I either categorically withdraw my remarks, capitulate humbly, and offer a grovelling apology, or be struck off. If this is unsuccessful, then you could resign your own membership of this web page in a fit of pique and insist that all your supporters do the same.
To those who are really thick and/or are on a self-righteous pilgrimage, please permit me to be crystal clear. My sympathies are to the poor blokes – them and their families - who have made some sort of error of judgement and who have lost their livelihood and/or paid the highest price.
There but for the grace of God . . . .
I think that they deserve better. They won’t get it from BA.

[jmc-man]

Dai Rear,

I agree with you...a case of RTFQ, I think. I knew the 747 Captain involved. A tragic waste of a human life brought about by poor company procedures for dealing with people who get themselves in trouble for WHATEVER reason.

Interesting bit of insider stuff. I understand that resigning, the guys protect their pension and notice payments. Not much for the FO, but serious money for the Captain . I also heard from an inside source that , as Visual has already posted,after tendering their resignations, the Norwegian medical results came back showing a blood level result of ZERO !!!!!

The Norwegians have requested that the pilots return for further tests. I assume they've been told where to go.

[Mach Buffet]

0

Zero


Zero Alcohol in blood test.


Yes that's what the results have come back as.

Yet this thread goes to show how big a bunch of two faced shysters are out there. Plenty of so-called "professional" colleagues out there have acted as judge, juror and executioner before any evidence was produced.

Visual, naieve, am I? It seems you changed your tune a little since your earlier post. Maybe the answer to your question might lie in being blackmailed over pension entitlements, bullying, or perhaps in having had more than enough hurt done to him by all those around. Who knows? Personally I wouldn't want to work either for or alongside those who have cast so many aspertions over my professionalism, and let's face it, a lot of people have been quoted in the papers recently.

As for the hacks that crawl through these forums after a heavy session, looking for some tripe to assemble through a drunken haze, you are the lowest of the low. Not a chance you will be filling the front page headlines with the truth of the matter. Not a chance.

[Dai Rear]

To PPRuNe Pop,
your earler attack on me . . . . .
"Putting your comments about the unfortunate incident at LHR on the same thread infers that it was perhaps alcohol related."
The key word here is 'perhaps.'
Aren't you sure?

[MOR]

Visual

If (a very big if, coming from a paper) there was zero alcohol in the blood- why did he resign? Would you, if you knew you were completely innocent? I wouldn't. I'd use BALPA and fight.

The captain might have gained something if he was offered his pension and a notice payment, but the FO would have gained little, considering what he has given up.

For both of them, there are various remedies open to them if they are indeed innocent.

If they knew their blood alcohol was zero, and the Norwegians agree, BA have no basis for asking for their resignations and that could easily be reversed- either as part of the internal disciplinary procedure, or later in an Industrial Tribunal. I rather doubt that BA would try to get rid of them if they were not satisfied that the allegations were substantially true.

As I said before, the fact they resigned so quickly tells its own story.

[Carnage Matey!]

You obviously don't know BA very well MOR. There are plenty of things they could sack the Captain even with a zero blood test. They'd throw every rule in the book at him until they could fnid something that stuck, then they'd fire him, then he'd have to go to an industrial tribunal, and even if he won BA are still not required to re-employ him and it would require industrial action by the pilots to force his reinstatement. Perhaps he simply decided it wasn't worth all the stress, especially as the last guy who went through the tribunal process dropped dead as a result of the stress.

[S76Heavy]

So some of you are saying that it is possible that any BA employee who has it in for another BA employee can report them for possible alcohol abuse and those accused will have to resign or suffer the terrible consequences, even when it can be proven that they were never guilty of alcohol abuse? Because if no disciplinary action is brought against those who make false accusations, that is what you are implying.

That is rather sobering thought...no pun intended.
Time for a rethink of company attitude?

[MOR]

Carnage Matey

No, sorry, I don't wear that at all. It is probably fair to assume that other than this allegation, BA had no grievance with the Captain. If they did, the obvious question is why they hadn't dealt with it before.

The only way they could sack them immediately would be to show gross misconduct.

It is also obviously in BAs interest to show that the allegations were baseless to begin with. They too have essentially admitted
that the pilots were in fact over the limit, which is a serious failure on their part as well.

I have been to an Industrial Tribunal, they are designed to be non-threatening and the experience is hardly traumatic- certainly not as traumatic as losing your career with no compensation.

No, they did a deal along the lines of "go now and you get a tiny bit of recompense, make us sack you and you get nothing".

The fact that these guys rolled over so easily tells any future employer that they are guilty as charged, whatever the truth might be.

[Carnage Matey!]

You have great, and completely misplaced, faith in BA human resources chaps! I'll speculate wildly here, but if it did happen to be the case that the Captain was clean, and it did happen to be the case that the FO missed his pick-up, and it did happen to be the case that the FO was obviously worse for wear, do you think BA would let the Captain who took him flying get away scot free? Not a hope in hell.They'll call that gross misconduct just for a start.

Why do you assume its fair to say BA had no grievance with this Captain? Do you know him? Those within the company say there's evidence that BA already did have a previous grievance with him. BA management have grievances with lots of people, and when they can't get them on technical breaches of the rule they criticise them for the entirely subjective crime of 'poor handling of the situation'. Its always happened, it's still happening and purportedly there was already one resignation in the pipeline from one disgusted Captain prior to this event.

BAs interest is to bury the story as quickly as possible, not to debunk the story. Did we see any official company rebuttal of the Dispatches program with its many fictitious claims? No. What we saw were people strung up by the company, including two guys who were actually sacked for no wrongdoing and later reinstated on appeal.

On the subject of false accusations, many people in BA are falsely accused of many things by their colleagues every year, from aclohol abuse to sexual harassament to racism to bullying to theft. I've personally known two people subjected to false allegations. They were stood down from flying, with associated loss of flying pay, whilst the allegations were investigated and found to be unfounded. Both accusers continued to fly and received no punishment.

[TATprobe]

Is it really true that the alcohol blood tests came back negative? If so, I hope the guys involved are talking to Messrs. Sue Grabbit and Runne about suing those self important, hypocritical and irresponsible reptiles in the media, especially the Sun.

As for the internal politics and staff relations at BA, I thought the situation in my own company was bad enough, but BA does seem to have a particular problem in this area. I have many friends flying for BA, and all mention a climate of fear and intimidation. Not conducive to Flight Safety, IMHO.

[Faire d'income]

This thread has typefied more than any I can think of the pompous, pointless preaching that a majority of posters here indulge in.

To the handfull that said 'innocent till proven guilty' bravo, the rest of you should hang your oversized heads in shame. But I doubt if you would even understand why.

To the Captain involved I hope you get a good lawyer that will savage that paper the way they savaged your BA career. :ok:

[M609]

Captain and senior CC sentenced in a Norwegian court today, reciving 6 months and 45 days in jail respectivly.

The 2Ps case have not appeared in court yet.

Nrk.no (Norwegian only) (http://www.nrk.no/nyheter/innenriks/4853426.html)

This is regarding the incident on 11. Nov 2003 at Oslo Gardermoen. (2P and senior CC drunk when boarding the plane)

[Shore Guy]

British Airways Pilot Jailed for Six Months



A Norwegian court today sentenced the pilot of a British Airways plane to six months in prison for preparing to fly even though members of his crew were drunk.

The flight’s chief air stewardess was sentenced to 45 days in prison for being drunk on duty.

Neither was present at the trial this week, and both have the right to appeal. A similar case against the co-pilot was still pending.

All three resigned from British Airways shortly after the November 11, 2003, incident.

The Eidsvoll District Court found that the pilot, William A. McAuliffe, 51, was sober but must have known his co-pilot, David J. Ryan, 27, was intoxicated when preparing for take-off from Oslo’s airport.

“The court notes that McAuliffe (as captain) was the highest authority on board the aircraft and was responsible for his personnel being in a condition that allowed them to perform their jobs,” the ruling said.

The case stems from a British Airways flight scheduled to leave from Oslo to London with 55 passengers. British Airways ground personnel suspected some of the crew had been drinking and called police, who went on board the Airbus A320 to conduct breath tests.

The flight was cancelled, and police took McAuliffe, Ryan, and Michelle Giannandrea, 50, to hospital for blood tests.

Under Norwegian law, flight crews must have a blood alcohol level of less than 0.2 parts per million.

Ryan is accused of having a blood alcohol level of 1.02 parts per million, while Giannandrea’s level was 1.34 parts per million.

McAuliffe tested negative for alcohol, but the court said ignoring the intoxicated state of crew members was a very grave offence, and a threat to air safety.

The court said hotel personnel told McAuliffe that Ryan had returned to his room at about 3am, appearing “drunk.”

McAuliffe went to Ryan’s room twice to wake him, at least once throwing water in his face and shaking him, the ruling said. The pilots then raced to the airport for the 8am flight.

McAuliffe “knew that a crewman was under the influence of alcohol, but did nothing about it,” the court said.

The case against Ryan was postponed because prosecutors had not been able to advise him of the charges ahead of the trial in Eidsvoll, about 30 miles north of Oslo, the ruling said.

It was not immediately clear if the other two defendants would appeal. If their convictions are upheld, Norway could ask for them to be extradited if they don’t surrender voluntarily.

British Airways spokeswomen Cathy L. West in London said the airline has a zero-tolerance policy on drinking before flying, and that all three resigned before facing any company disciplinary action.

“This was a rare incident but one incident is one too many,” she said.

“The airline recently introduced a new drugs and alcohol policy for all staff to adhere to which includes testing of staff.”



Latest News:

[Damienmk]

Amazing isn't it. You have people out there in street who kill people whilst drunk, driving a car which they are disqualified from driving. Usually, there's no insurance, no MOT etc. Some defence lawyer stands up and bleats on about how his client has had a hard life etc, I won't bore you with the rest.

The court then lets the defendant go with a slap on the wrist, suspended sentence of some description or whatever. But not prison. There is usually a lot of wailing about "Justice in this country", a few politicians come out of the woodwork to gnash there teeth, but what happens? Give it six month, it's quietly forgotten about, the law doesn't change, a person is still dead and a family is still grieving.

Now, I in no way condone what happened in Norway. The Capt, FO were complete idiots for getting into the state which they did. BUT, they didn't kill anyone. They didn't hurt anyone. I appreciate they might have had they actually got airborne in the state they were in, but the fact is they didn't. Six months for being drunk in charge of a motor vehicle is unheard of, it would never happen. So six months for being drunk on the ground in a plane seems a bit excessive to me.

As for the CC getting 45 days. How absurd is that? What was he/she going to do, mow someone down with her trolley? If that's the case then the police will have to patrol every bloody supermarket to ensure boozed up customers aren't creating havoc in the frozen food section.

The sentences handed down here are not about justice. Loss of one's career for a night of drunken japes is a heavy enough sentence. This sentence is about politics.

Like I said earlier, I in no way condone what happened. But sentences really should reflect the events of an offence. I repeat what I said earlier. No one got hurt. The crew have lost their livelihoods. Isn't that punishment enough?

[Daysleeper]

The Capt, FO were complete idiots for getting into the state which they did

Read the article.

McAuliffe tested negative for alcohol,

[GMEDX]

Strikes me the sentance on the CC was proportionate. She was well over the drink drive limit. Her responsibilty in the cabin is for safety, not trolley pushing which is a secondary duty.
Let us all learn from this that drinking is not to be tolerated.
Years ago I allowed a drunk CC to position back with us "sick", but she was still in uniform and although not directly working was a huge embarrassment. Now I hope I would just leave her behind.

[smith]

DamienMK

The CC being intoxicated could have caused problems in the event of an emergency or an evacuation. I don't think mowing someone down with the trolley really comes into it.

On saying that I do think the sentences are a bit harsh.

[Rainboe]

Read it again!
Now, I in no way condone what happened in Norway. The Capt, FO were complete idiots for getting into the state which they did.

What it actually says is:

McAuliffe tested negative for alcohol, but the court said ignoring the intoxicated state of crew members was a very grave offence, and a threat to air safety.

How sad that when 'tested negative for alcohol', your career ends up in ashes and you get sentenced to prison?

[Airbubba]

>>How sad that when 'tested negative for alcohol', your career ends up in ashes and you get sentenced to prison?<<

The old days of overlooking a drunk crewmember and joking about it in the bar later are gone I'm afraid. Times have changed. And, when you're the captain, you do take a little responsibility for what happens on your aircraft from my experience. I realize he was probably trying to cover for his troops but once he let the flight get under way he was committing a crime, in some countries at least. The usual defenses of I've been through rehab, we didn't know we were going flying, it was ripe fruit and mouthwash didn't seem to work this time.

Wasn't this the guy that "resigned", proving his innocence, according to some of the viewpoints here?

[Jetlegs]

Stop playing dumb Rainboe :rolleyes:
His career ended because he abrogated his command responsibilty.

And yes, that is very sad.

[Flying Lawyer]

Damienmk
Yes, amazing isn't it.
Amazing that an ex-policeman should come out with such drivel about drivers who kill whilst drunk and/or disqualifed being "let go with a slap on the wrist, suspended sentence of some description or whatever. But not prison."
That's as accurate as your comment that "the Capt, FO were complete idiots for getting into the state which they did."

Do you really think sentences should be less if pilots with excess alcohol are caught before they take off?
Why?
With one exception, in all the excess alcohol cases discussed here in recent times the pilots have been breath-tested before taking off. The only exception is that Manchester 'hard landing' nonsense where a passenger thought the pilots must have been drinking and some police constable(s) decided to breath-test both pilots. :rolleyes: (Both tested negative.)

Do you seriously think a driver 'drunk in charge' of a motor vehicle is in any way comparable to a pilot "drunk on the ground in a plane" before departure?
Or that the position of a cabin attendant is in any way comparable to a customer in a supermarket? True, they both push trolleys but, in addition to their inflight service role, CC also have a safety role - particularly in an emergency.

"This sentence is about politics."
What on earth does that mean? What politics? Whose politics? :confused:

"The crew have lost their livelihoods. Isn't that punishment enough?"
I think a substantial fine or community service is more appropriate in most excess alcohol cases, but that's not how the courts in various countries see it - read the threads about various incidents.
I think sending this Captain to prison at all was too harsh, and six months was outrageous. Losing his livelihood would have been more than sufficient punishment. I sincerely hope he finds another job when he's released.
I also think sending the CC to prison was harsh. However, given that pilots caught even fractionally over the limit have been sent to prison for much longer than that in various countries, it's proportionate. And, if the press reports are correct, she does appear to have been the CSD or Purser in charge of the cabin.

[BoeingMEL]

Well said JetLegs.... The responsibilities which are attached to command exceed merely staying sober! Another very unfortunate day for the profession and the industry. As for "careers finished"..... mmm.... well, not according to crew-room chatter. bm

[Rainboe]

I think sending this Captain to prison at all was too harsh, and six months was outrageous.

I'm a little uncomfortable with him being sent to prison at all. He tested negative for alcohol. He is punished far more than a crewmember who actually tested over the limit.

[A and C]

How can the captain of an aircraft decide if a crewmember is over the limit ?

The alcohol limit is so low that any man in the steet would not judge a person to be "drunk" if they were just over that limit and the captain has not got any testing equipment to make a judgment.

Now just what do you think would happen if a captain stopped a crewmember flying and they managed to prove that they were not over the limit ? will the captain get hauled in front of the courts on a deformation charge ?

If the captain is to be responsable for the conduct of other adults when off duty then the authoritys must provide captains with the powers enforce this responasbility.

[sammypilot]

Sorry A and C but that is why you get the extra money for command.

On this occasion the reported claims that the Captain had to visit and revisit the bedroom of the First Officer and eventually throw water in his face to wake him may have been a pointer that all was not well.

[Bronx]

sammypilot
In this instance maybe you got a point and maybe not but A and C was looking at the bigger picture not just this one case.

Why do cops on Prune always see things in black and white?
They never think outside the box.
I know all cops aint like that, so maybe we just get the junior ranks here. :confused:

[exvicar]

I think these days you are just as likely to have to wake someone due to them being completely knackered. Waking someone doesn't mean the water thrower automatically assumes that their target is over the limit. Will the tabloids now run the headline, 'Pilot imprisoned & loses career for being sober'. No, didn't think so.

[egbt]

Flying Lawyer

Right on in every respect.

Probably the 1st time I have agreed with anything a lawyer has written without n iterations and huge fees! :O

[Jetlegs]

Rainboe, yet another specious post from your keyboard.
He is punished far more than a crewmember who actually tested over the limit.

The jailterm imposed on the captain is longer than the one imposed on the CSD/purser. Now unless my memory is really failing me rainboe, you are the one always whingeing about how overpaid CC are for the totally unimportant job they do on-board. You're the one always stressing how unlikely it is that in the course of their career CC will ever have to actually strutt their stuff in an emergency, as opposed to pilots who have to make grave and life-altering decisions every working day.
But now suddenly it's unfair to give an all important captain a longer sentence than a useless CSD? ;)

Try to strive for some consistency my dear chap, 't is either one argument or the other, not both.

[NigelOnDraft]

Please NB that these sentences / the hearing were conducted with the defendants being absent, presumably by their own choice (and likely on good advice!)

I presume (FL?) that in general, had they appeared and made some sort of defence, they might have expected less harsh results, albeit they would now be serving them?

[Flying Lawyer]

I don't see anything specious in Rainboe's post.
The CSD/Purser was jailed for just over 7 weeks for going on duty with excess alcohol; the Captain tested negative but was jailed for 26 weeks for failing to prevent her (and apparently the FO) from doing so.
IMHO that is bizarre, and very unfair - despite the Captain's greater degree of responsibility as the person in charge of the entire aircraft.

Nor do I see anything inconsistent with views (apparently) expressed by Rainboe in previous posts. He didn't suggest pilots and cabin attendants should be punished equally. That would arguably have been inconsistent.

Assuming roughly similar levels, I think pilots going to work with excess alcohol should be regarded as more serious than CC doing so, and punishments should reflect that.
If a pilot makes a mistake the consequences could potentially be far more serious than CC doing so. The scope for pilots turning a problem into an emergency (or actually causing an emergency) if they fail to perform properly is surely far greater than that of CC - even they are the CSD/Purser/FSM/ or whatever title a particular airline uses for the senior person running the cabin.
(I believe this to be true, but I'm open to correction by pilots or CC if I'm wrong.)

NoD
As a general proposition, yes. It would obviously depend upon the lawyer and how open the court was to being persuaded by argument.
The two pilots convicted in the UK both went to prison for 6 months. If that's the sort of sentence a pilot is to receive, and if it is more serious for a pilot to be over the limit, then 45 days for the Purser isn't out of line.

I haven't yet managed to find out what offence the Captain was said to have committed so I'm as much in the dark as everyone else at the moment. I suppose something like 'Endangering an aircraft' is a possibility, but that seems rather 'sledge-hammer and nut' on the facts.
One of the Jetblast moderators lives in Norway. I'll PM her to find out if she's read any Norwegian press reports which mention the actual offence.

[flapsforty]

At your service FL.

link (http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/iriks/article1067689.ece) from Norway's most 'serious' paper.
Two crewmembers from a BA flight between OSL and LHR on november the 11th 2003 have been sentenced to a jailterm in the Eidsvoll court.

In 2003 the police stated that the Captain, the FO and the Purser blew red when they were breathalyzed, but in the judgement handed down yesterday, it became apparent that the Captain had not been drunk. He still got a six month jail sentence because he was aware that 2 other crew-memebers were under the influence of alcohol and the safety on board was his responsibility.

The female Purser got 45 days, while the case against the FO has been postponed.

The reason the Captain got such a heavy sentence was because the Eidsvoll court gave great importance to the fact that the Captain, as the highest authority on board, was responsible for the crew being fit to execute their jobs.

The police was called in by BA's own ground staff, and bloodtest showed the Purser to have a blood alcohol promille of 1.02 while the FO had a promille of 1.34.

[TRISTAR1]

What kind of a world are we moving towards.

I retired from line flying afew years ago, and although I am still fit and a licence holder, there is no way I would go back to line flying no matter what the pay.

6 on 3 off rosters, buy your own type rating and go on your hands and knees to some HR girl for a job.

I am training newbies now and I can not understand for the life of me why anyone would want to work for an airline.

The new drink laws mean that what little social life there was is now forbidden. For the whole summer and winter season any crew member that goes to the bar is crazy and now if any Captain hears that any of his crew has been he has got to ground the aircraft and breath test the lot.

If all that rant and rave here about the responsibility turned their attention to the NHS we would not have an operational hospital in the country and what about trains, buses, nuclear power stations, chemical plants, oil refineries to name a few. All those staff have as much responsibilty as any airline pilot. Does it matter the number of people you kill.

There has not been one accident that I am aware of where booze was a contributory factor.

If all you politically correct people out there carry on like this you will not have an aviation industry. Where are you going to get your pilots?

Air fares are going to rocket, because if a pilot is going to live like a hermit he is going to want a pretty large salary. I for one would not like my 'driver' to be a person that doesnt drink (ever) doesnt smoke and cant have a laugh. Would he pass the pysch test?

RIP the likes of Dan Air, Laker, Air Europe, Ansett, Pan Am and all the other good employers.

[RoyHudd]

Crikey, reading this lot has upset me, amd i'm on duty in 5 hours. So just time for a few beverages mates, to steady the nerves and chill the soul.

Nobody can operate under this sort of pressure without recourse to a drink, before and after work at the very least.

I always keep a bottle handy in my flight bag, cos the thirst can strike pretty damn rapidly. And I'm not alone.

Guess this is off to the papers, courtesy of the criminally incompetent journos. well good luck to you, you hypocritical boozy crooks.

[cargosales]

From a passenger's point of view, it seems to me that the sentences are appropriate.

The Captain is just that The Captain , not The Pilot and he is the person in overall charge of the aircraft, crew and passengers. IMHO, he ignored at least some of his responsibilities, although it is possible he was unaware of the CSD's level of intoxication. But was he proposing not to leave the flight deck for so much as loo break during the flight, knowing that the First Officer might not be 100%?

Equally, CSD's are responsible for rather more than pushing a trolley! Like everything that happens the other side of the locked cockpit door! Not least getting the passengers off in the unlikely event of a problem, dealing with sick passengers (heart attacks etc). Rare but they do happen.

CSD's are by definition not juniors and (again IMHO) this one really should have known better. I haven't been to Norway for a few years now and it's a great country but (ignoring the precise legal limits for a minute) they're not exactly famous for their tolerance towards booze when driving cars or flying aircraft.

As it happens, I come into contact with quite a lot of crew and their individual attitudes towards work, alcohol intake etc vary hugely. One of my best mates is a Purser and I have rarely met a more dedicated, conscientious or responsible! person.

Bit boring when they have two beers then head off to bed at 10pm cos they have an early pickup but contrast that with those out partying till 3am and I know who'd I rather have looking after my safety on a flight. Or that of my offspring flying unmin. Or my mum. It's not rocket science I'm afraid.

My two pence worth.


CS

[Flying Lawyer]

flapsforty

Thanks for your help and very quick reponse.
PPRuNe is an amazing website. :ok:

Frustratingly, that report just like the others I've seen, repeats the court's criticism of the Captain but doesn't say what specific offence against Norwegian law he was found guilty of committing.

cargosales
"From a passenger's point of view ......."
I'm also only a passenger in this context. I disagree with you, but it's inevitable that opinions will vary.

[TRISTAR1]

Well how about the passengers. Dont they also have a duty of care not to be under the influence while onboard an aircraft.

Lets take this to its logical conclusion and ban booze completely from aviation. Lets have all the passengers breathalised before they board.

[Capt Pit Bull]

In this specific case it may be that the court had defintie evidence to suggest the the Capt knew his crew mwmbers were drunk. At least I certainly hope so. Because otherwise its just crazy.

Bear in mind that not all airlines even have their crew staying in the same hotel, so how can you reasonably be expected to know what your crew are up to? You might be on a different trip schedule, even between Captain and F/O, and only meet one another 20 minutes before pushback, with the law enforecment officer just a few footsteps behind you. How are you supposed to know if the other person is over a limit that requires a machine to test a very small number?

I'm so knackered on the early checkins I'm stumbling around like a brain dmaged gerbil, and its got nothing to do with booze.

This is just one more example of the kind of thing I'm happy to be leaving behind in 2 months time.

CPB

[Knackered Nigel]

Just going slightly off the topic.... with the tight rostering and long days most of us are working to, fatigue is likely to become more of a factor in the future than alcohol in terms of incidents.

Let us hope the EU Flight Time Limitation proposals don't become law. For those of you who are not aware, for the sake of "harmonisation", the EU plan is to allow even longer days, to ignore the effects of crossing time zones and night flying. It is not based on any physiological study (unlike current CAA regs), just someone's good idea!!

If this becomes a reality, then the skies will be full of fatigued pilots, who are by law legally allowed to fly (unless the declare themselves unfit). Of course, the airlines won't mind the EU plan, they will get more hours out of their pilots.

BALPA have been campaigning against the proposals, but it's all gone a bit quiet at the moment.

As a passenger, would you want to fly with sober but tired out pilots??
:uhoh:

[5150]

As a passenger, would you want to fly with sober but tired out pilots??

Yes, rather than fly with wide-awake pi$$ed ones!

[babybaby]

Fatigue can also be measured in "equivalent to an alcohol level of". I believe if up for 17 hours at 3 a.m. is equal to 50mg/100ml?

Saves a lot in allowances!

Seriously though, how many have flown knackered, or with knackered crew?

Perhaps if Captains started getting locked up for that then campaigns such as BALPA's Flying Fatigued would get more prominence and pilots worldwide would be far more empowered to put a stop to the issue the airlines and authorities don't seem that keen to tackle.

babybaby :{

[EPRman]

Another well researched article, this time in today's Daily Mail from columnist Peter McKay:

Flying a bit too high...

You have to wonder how difficult it must be to handle modern jet airliners when British Airways pilot William McAuliffe,55, of Dublin, felt OK about flying an Airbus319 from Oslo to London while being six times over the alcohol limit.
Before going on duty his first officer David Ryan , was too drunk to speak and could only be woken at his hotel by having water thrown over his face. Yet both of them - together with their binge companion, stewardess Michele Giannandrea, 50, eight times over the limit - were prepared to take their chances.
Airbus jets are famous for their 'fly by wire' controls. Maybe they're even more automated than we're told.

[brakedwell]

The article by Peter McKay is blatantly libellous. I hope Captain McAuliffe sues the journalistic toad for evey penny he has!

[Farrell]

oh, if McKay said that..............hang him high.

Capt. McAuliffe has been through more than enough already

[PPRuNe Radar]

Maybe someone should give the Editor a heads up ....

[email protected] :}

[egbt]

Unfortunately the offending item does not seem to be in the on-line addition so difficult unless you have the paper.

[PPRuNe Pop]

I can confirm that EPRman has the correctly shown the jots of Peter McKay as written in the Mail today.

[cargosales]

As a passenger, would you want to fly with sober but tired out pilots??

Good point KN. Nope, definitely not. Or crew for that matter.

CS

[Finger Bob]

Writing Journalistic Rubbish ...

You have to wonder how difficult it must be to write a newspaper article these days when Dreary Mail columnist Peter McKrap felt OK publishing more of his usual drivel.

Before writing the article, he realised what a sad existence his own life was and, unable to contribute anything constructive to society, realised there was easy money to be made by uninformed comment. Typically, a serious journalist would perform at least some research whereas there are no limits for a columnist - with zero research they can just take their chances and apologise later when they are wrong.

Gutter press columnists are famous for their automated responses. Given all one needs to do is react with superfluous observations to any news piece, maybe they are even more stupid than they appear.

[Arkroyal]

One wonders how many of the Dm's readership realise that even at 4 times over the limit, you could still legally drive a car in the UK.

Silly me, there I was thinking the truth rather than sensationalism was the hack's goal.:rolleyes:

[Farrell]

As well as giving the editor a head's up.......maybe someone should let Capt. McAuliffe know about it as well. Maybe he hasn't seen it?

I'd sure as hell want to know if someone dragged my name through the dirt.