24hr Bottle To Throttle Rule Inbound?
 

A bloke in the pub recently told me that a change to the current regs regarding alcohol comsuption prior to flying are being closely looked at. Apparently the intention is to increase the period of abtsainance from 12 to 24 hrs. While I am a firm believer that booze and flying don't mix, does this strike anyone else as a little bit over the top? I can see several problems, not least:

8pm phone call at home, "Sorry mate, need you for a trip to ****** tommorow, departure time 1200Z,that OK?"

Arty replies " Soz mate, just had a glass of wine with my dinner, will have to slip departure to 1900Z for me to sober up!"

An end to late notice tasking? Perhaps this is a welfare move, or maybe we will (as at some american units) have a total alcohol ban unless on leave.

Blinding move I say, anyone got any thoughts?

Actually nothing new then?

In the early 80's most of us were dry Sunday night to Friday. The sqn manning was so tight that you were either due to fly or on QRA or first reserve.

On a FJ sqn you might expect to be in the sim, or to fly. Maybe a pm flight would be OK but could you always predict you would not be on an early?

Where it would really kick in is the overseas RTB. Not for nothing did the V-force usually have a minimum 3-day away with the middle day as a rest day. Most crews obeyed the unwritten rule and didn't get wazzed on that last night.

So you introduce a stand-by readiness state, with no alcohol for 24 hrs before going on stand-by. If not on stand-by, nor on a planned task, then you are free to drink. Which means permanent stand-by unless on leave in some units....;)

24 hours bottle-to-throttle does sound excessive but, IMHO, the current regs are inadequate. 10 hours isn't always enough for a full recovery from a good session, and we all know how often the guidance of "no more than 2.5 units in the preceding 24" is ignored!

The most troubling scenario I've typically encountered is when authorising crews from a distance, ie after an overnighter away from home base. It's 99.9% certain that the crew will have been out on the p*ss, however the Auth has no option but to take the crew's word that they're "fit-to-fly". Whilst my trust in crew's has never (to my knowledge!) been abused, this will catch someone out someday - guaranteed!

God, I sound like a doddery old killjoy...

Actually I believe it has been more honoured than broken.

I remember one occasion where our skipper went beyond the point of discretion but the rest of the crew were more abstemious. Really OC Goose should have grounded us.

On another occasion, same crew, and I was plastered. A sqn cdr from a different group was most disproving but didn't make the sensibl ecommand decision to ground me. Fortunately the aircraft broke.

Many years later, on large crewed aircraft none of the pilots I flew with drank to any extent the night before. Mores do change.

But it must be recognised that to err is human and not to force someone to lie if they did drink too much.

Seems to me the only reason to legislate further is to provide a means to prosecute; those who break the existing limits will continue to do so, until they grow up or are killed, while those who are wiser will continue to operate sensibly.

I think the original poster's 'bloke in a pub' scenario is as far as any change has got - alcohol is out of the system by 12hrs, and an arbitrary figure of 24hrs has no basis to be any better than, say, 16hrs. That said, their airships are unemployed enough to bother themselves with more trifling matters, such as issuing diktats about blue uniform, so I won't head down the bookies just yet, to place my tenner on this being made-up.

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a3...rnet/zxzxz.jpg

Speak for yourself, mate. That certainly wasn't the case where I was.

People are generally self-regulating far more sensibly these days than was ever the case in the late 70s, for example.

No point in fixing what ain't broke. But breathalysing half the air farce board every time they come up with daft 'Friday afternoon ideas' might prove revealing!

Same goes for some of those near catatonic people who've been stupid enough to have a 'gozome' session at some Malvinas drinking den before pouring themselves into the northbound TriShaw.....

BEagle, was that manning wasn't tight but crews were?:)

I remember a station call out during the evening back in the early 1980s....

My Flt Cdr wanted me to fly, an offer that I had to turn down having recently partaken in a couple of beers. (I had got a lift into work). Follow up was a hats on in front of the Sqn Boss next day for refusing to fly.

So much for rule books. :ouch:

I remember a TacEval/MinEval at Coningsby in the mid-70s that was called at about 0200 after a particularly heavy session in the OM. Lots of shuffling of feet when it came to generation of aircraft . . . . . :\:(:\

I remember in the eighties being sent off on an early morning solo aerobatics sortie on the Bulldog as punishment for being too hungover after a long session the night before. One of the QFIs followed along behind in another Bulldog to ensure that I did the requisite number of Cuban8s and slow-rolls etc.

Not really a problem these days.

Spend seven months of the year deployed OOA where alcohol is banned:mad:

Spend 2 months of the other 5 on standby duties:mad:

The days of the C130 fleet swanning around the world are long gone.

Not a bad idea to enforce a 24 hr rule if you ask me - most crews have been self-regulating for years now.

If any of my crew pitch up worse for wear they get a b:mad:ing! I also expect my crew to keep me in line!

In the days pf lunchtime drinking I remember one captain practically begging for a sortie that afternoon as he needed to fly. He was told no way and that he would only be put on the flypro when the flt cdr was ready.

Duly p1ssed off he went and had a glass of sherbet. About 1330 the FC returned and told him he was now flying a 1600. When he pointed out he had been drinking he was threatened that he would be charged with being drunk on duty and refusing an order.

What to do?

On a Vulcan easy peasey. Every good AEO carried a bunch of U/S fuses in his pencil box or recognised as suspected TRU failure.

Why stop at 24 hours? Why not 28? 36? 48?

Is the current 12 hours rule really a problem?

Are the current regulations causing problems then?

Has anyone turned up for work having stayed within the current rules and still had >0.2 mg of alcohol in their blood? I seriously doubt it.

If any problem does exist, it would be amongst those who already break the current rules - more stringent rules would make no difference.

In fact, a 24-hour rule is likely to be broken far more often. For example, an evening call for an aeromed the following morning may induce a crew member and his/her exec to ignore that glass of wine consumed with dinner. Both parties know that it would be undetectable the following day and would consider it ridiculous to refuse a task in such circumstances. They wouldn't receive much support from on high for applying the regulations to the letter, and "lack-of-flexibility" would be cited by those affected.

The absence of sensible regulation would result in reliance on self-policing balanced against the importance of the task.

Many years ago at a secret SH base in Hampshire the station was having an open day and had laid on all the revelries and air show stuff that they could. That morning an Italian transport, (type long lost in the crevices of an aging mind), pitched up. Lunchtime came and, being the outstanding hosts we were back then they were invited to the Sgts. Mess for lunch which they gratefully accepted.

So, there we are, we have our lunch and I'm sat opposite one of the crew who is craning his neck looking, obviously for something, along the whole table. Again, being an outstanding host, I asked our guest what I could help him with. He responded "Wine?". It turns out that in their messes at home they have carafes of wine on the table at lunchtime.

Upon further questioning, (since it might be possible the rear-crew might enjoy a tipple I was sure the two winged gods at the pointed end wouldn't), it turns out that a glass or two of wine over lunch before an afternoon trip was de riguer for both front and rear crew. We pointed out that the bar was open and they could buy some if they wished. Off they toddled and came back with a nice big glass of wine each. It was later confirmed by our two winged gods that theirs had done the same.

An hour or two later they were giving their display...:eek:

When I flew for BEA it was always reported that Air Chance pilots had wine with their on board crew meals.

I suppose it was a few years ago, but often FJ crew would strap in wearing their masks with the oxygen set to 100%.

Heard another story about a squadron exchange in Germany where the Yanks didn't turn up on day two because all of them were still pissed from the evening before... Mind you, that was in the days where drinking and driving were the norm.:=

Had that at Coningsby in '87 after the air show. USAFE had allocated us a C141 - we didn't want it as it was too big but it came anyway. Next morning the crew were to fly the jet to Mildenhall to collect a load and RTB. The crews were all reservists moonlighting from Pan Am and the like and not even out of bed at take-off time. Anyway they couldn't take-off until we had done a fod plod and cleared the ramp of all the stalls, barriers and aircraft.

Eventually they ramp was clear, about 1400. I found the captain still in bed. No problem, he said, we've gone tech, delay 24 hr to RTB direct.

Sure enough, full fuel load and off to the States, no pax, no freight and the worst that could happen would be a mild bollocking.

We live too much for now and in big scheme of things what does an extra day amount to?

Oh for the days when men were men and flying was a vocation rather than a job. No drinking on the ladder and no smoking in the cockpit seemed to work very well - never heard of a drink induced flying accident in my time but I met a lot of miserable sober people who couldn't fly but were good at making life miserable for those who did.