LHR Breathtest. Update: Captain jailed
Our jobs involve following rules and regulations ,that's why we have Civil Aviation ORDERS ,ORDERS to Flight Crew etc .If the book says X amount of alcohol is the limit then that's it ,it's no use arguing about how much more you think you can drink and still be unimpaired.
A number of years ago I had the "pleasure " of flying with a heavy drinker and have absolutely no doubt that had he been tested prior to one of our 6.00am Monday morning departures ,he would have registered far in excess of this particular captain ,considering he started drinking before lunch on Sunday and continued through dinner time. And before you ask yes I did report him ,as did another F/O and he was eventually fired ,not before time.
Whilst he may have appeared sober ,his performance was certainly below standard ,with some very serious errors, thankfully we were mostly VFR.
I have seen a pilot down the best part of a bottle of whisky in the evening and go flying the next morning ,I have also had another pilot request me to lower my voice during breakfast because of his hangover !
A recent survey showed pilots to be one of the most trusted professions ,along with nurses. How much longer will this continue if headlines about drunk pilots keep appearing ?
Some jobs require your lifestyle to conform ,would you like a drunk surgeon operating on your wife for example ? If my barber has a gambling problem I couldn't care less ,not so my accountant.
The security guard concerned was quite correct in reporting the Captain. Passengers have a right to expect flight crew entrusted with their lives to be sober ,if this means no more drinking binges other than when on leave and not flying for some time than so be it.
If drink means that much than become a turf accountant or scrap metal merchant ,where heavy drinking is normal ,indeed expected.
A number of years ago I had the "pleasure " of flying with a heavy drinker and have absolutely no doubt that had he been tested prior to one of our 6.00am Monday morning departures ,he would have registered far in excess of this particular captain ,considering he started drinking before lunch on Sunday and continued through dinner time. And before you ask yes I did report him ,as did another F/O and he was eventually fired ,not before time.
Whilst he may have appeared sober ,his performance was certainly below standard ,with some very serious errors, thankfully we were mostly VFR.
I have seen a pilot down the best part of a bottle of whisky in the evening and go flying the next morning ,I have also had another pilot request me to lower my voice during breakfast because of his hangover !
A recent survey showed pilots to be one of the most trusted professions ,along with nurses. How much longer will this continue if headlines about drunk pilots keep appearing ?
Some jobs require your lifestyle to conform ,would you like a drunk surgeon operating on your wife for example ? If my barber has a gambling problem I couldn't care less ,not so my accountant.
The security guard concerned was quite correct in reporting the Captain. Passengers have a right to expect flight crew entrusted with their lives to be sober ,if this means no more drinking binges other than when on leave and not flying for some time than so be it.
If drink means that much than become a turf accountant or scrap metal merchant ,where heavy drinking is normal ,indeed expected.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FL
I think everyone on here would think well of him had he done that. However he didn't, was under NO obligation to do so.
Having spent a fair time working at Heathrow, and seen the way Security staff are treated, by thier own management, but aircrew and by Police then I am not suprised he didn't do it the way you and others have suggested.
The BAA lay down very strict rules for thier security staff, at his level he is not paid to make decisions, he's paid to do what his book tells him, and any deviation from that is in the BAA's eyes misconduct and he would face the sack. His 'book' will tell him he must report it to his supervisor, and thats how it will have gone up the line until it reached the point where someone was authorised to call the Police.
You have already noted that the airlines handling agent was also informed and that they spoke to him and he didn't think there was a problem. In which case, as he had this belief he was OK being spoken to by security would have had no effect.
I agree the sentences for both were on the face of it, harsh. The judges comments you quoted however seem to point to the Courts taking a very heavy line with this offence. I don't agree that a community service order would have been appropriate given the position of responsibility both men held, but a prison sentence of a month would probably have been sufficent.
I would agree with your comments on the shoplifer comparison if the guard had been in possession of the full facts, which of course he could not have been. The Guard cannot have know if he was going to fly knowing he'd had a drink or not.
I think everyone on here would think well of him had he done that. However he didn't, was under NO obligation to do so.
Having spent a fair time working at Heathrow, and seen the way Security staff are treated, by thier own management, but aircrew and by Police then I am not suprised he didn't do it the way you and others have suggested.
The BAA lay down very strict rules for thier security staff, at his level he is not paid to make decisions, he's paid to do what his book tells him, and any deviation from that is in the BAA's eyes misconduct and he would face the sack. His 'book' will tell him he must report it to his supervisor, and thats how it will have gone up the line until it reached the point where someone was authorised to call the Police.
You have already noted that the airlines handling agent was also informed and that they spoke to him and he didn't think there was a problem. In which case, as he had this belief he was OK being spoken to by security would have had no effect.
I agree the sentences for both were on the face of it, harsh. The judges comments you quoted however seem to point to the Courts taking a very heavy line with this offence. I don't agree that a community service order would have been appropriate given the position of responsibility both men held, but a prison sentence of a month would probably have been sufficent.
I would agree with your comments on the shoplifer comparison if the guard had been in possession of the full facts, which of course he could not have been. The Guard cannot have know if he was going to fly knowing he'd had a drink or not.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
>>...A recent survey showed pilots to be one of the most trusted professions ,along with nurses. How much longer will this continue if headlines about drunk pilots keep appearing ?<<
Yep, we need to stay away from the other end of the list with the lawyers, journalists and car salesmen:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/12/07/lif...eut/index.html
>>Some jobs require your lifestyle to conform ,would you like a drunk surgeon operating on your wife for example ? If my barber has a gambling problem I couldn't care less ,not so my accountant.<<
Good point.
Yep, we need to stay away from the other end of the list with the lawyers, journalists and car salesmen:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/12/07/lif...eut/index.html
>>Some jobs require your lifestyle to conform ,would you like a drunk surgeon operating on your wife for example ? If my barber has a gambling problem I couldn't care less ,not so my accountant.<<
Good point.
Also we must remember that Royal Brunei is the national airline of a muslim country ,where Islam is taken seriously ie. RBA is a dry airline ,prayers to Allah are said over the IFE prior to departure and at regular intervals during flight an indicator showing distance/direction to Mecca is shown on the screens.
How do you think the Moslem passengers ,even the Sultan felt upon hearing one of the pilots had been arrested for drinking ?
This incident has reflected very badly on western pilots in the Moslem world, possibly damaging career prospects for those hoping to employed in the Middle East ,or Islamic countries.
How do you think the Moslem passengers ,even the Sultan felt upon hearing one of the pilots had been arrested for drinking ?
This incident has reflected very badly on western pilots in the Moslem world, possibly damaging career prospects for those hoping to employed in the Middle East ,or Islamic countries.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying Lawyer,
the 20 mg limit is so low a pilot could easily commit this offence unintentionally.
Simply put, I can think of two ways to test at this level.
1) A small amount of alcohol close in time to the test
2) A large amount of alcohol not close in time to the test
(1) would require the pilot to have a quick drink within the eight hours prior to duty. That's intentional.
(2) would require the pilot to have at least 9 units of alcohol in a session finishing at least eight hour prior to duty. Lets look at this one.
Now I will be hammered by the apologists on this forum because we are all different, but it's pretty widely accepted that humans breaking down one unit of alcohol per hour is a good guide. That is what responsible people should be guided by.
9 units in a single session is over twice that considered healthy for daily intake. 10 units in a single session is considered Binge Drinking by the Royal College of Physicians of London - for a male. Lets not forget that females are airline pilots as well, and they are considered Binge Drinkers at 7 units in a single session.
So I would argue that for a pilot to turn up with a reading of 20, he is either deliberately drinking within the eight hours prior to duty (gross misconduct, fired), or has an alcohol problem and needs help. He/she should certainly not be flying a passenger jet and should be grounded until he sorts his drinking out, the airline should be supportive of him as long as he admits to it first.
And lets not get onto hangovers, or the effect of alcohol on sleep patterns, and thus fatigue.
slag (no 'D's after his name, but two 'M's, one from the august body referenced above
)
the 20 mg limit is so low a pilot could easily commit this offence unintentionally.
Simply put, I can think of two ways to test at this level.
1) A small amount of alcohol close in time to the test
2) A large amount of alcohol not close in time to the test
(1) would require the pilot to have a quick drink within the eight hours prior to duty. That's intentional.
(2) would require the pilot to have at least 9 units of alcohol in a session finishing at least eight hour prior to duty. Lets look at this one.
Now I will be hammered by the apologists on this forum because we are all different, but it's pretty widely accepted that humans breaking down one unit of alcohol per hour is a good guide. That is what responsible people should be guided by.
9 units in a single session is over twice that considered healthy for daily intake. 10 units in a single session is considered Binge Drinking by the Royal College of Physicians of London - for a male. Lets not forget that females are airline pilots as well, and they are considered Binge Drinkers at 7 units in a single session.
So I would argue that for a pilot to turn up with a reading of 20, he is either deliberately drinking within the eight hours prior to duty (gross misconduct, fired), or has an alcohol problem and needs help. He/she should certainly not be flying a passenger jet and should be grounded until he sorts his drinking out, the airline should be supportive of him as long as he admits to it first.
And lets not get onto hangovers, or the effect of alcohol on sleep patterns, and thus fatigue.
slag (no 'D's after his name, but two 'M's, one from the august body referenced above
)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Abeam the Trent and Mersey!
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have followed both the alcohol threads on Prune and I have noted the polarised views with interest. I feel sorry for both Captains who I believe without intent reported for duty over the limit, however, I also believe that if you choose to make your living exercising the privileges of a licence, you abide by the conditions thereof.
Alcohol is a dangerous drug but it can also be a recreational therapy. Each individual controls how much they pour down their own neck and must take responsibility for exercising their free will.
The limit for flying is a deservedly low given the responsibility of the job, however, be it the limit for flying or driving, up to the limit you are an individual exercising your free will, 1 sherry trifle later you have joined the incapable, irresponsible life threatening idiots brigade. It would appear from the 2 cases, the punishment was just for crossing the limit. The punishments show no graduation for the lack of self control each of the individuals had for how far they went over the line.
I was of the opinion Flight Safety was an industry goal. My company actively involves everybody in the safety culture and embraces every effort made by the airport authority to do the same. The security man played his role. Whether you agree on the way he did it is open to opinion. In my experience, the relationship between Flight Deck and Security is not often healthy. I have seen Flight Deck being pompous and arrogant towards security staff and I have also witnessed obtuse, jobsworth security personnel. Fortunately, both are a minority, however, it does not prevent both sides polarising their views of each other based on the few.
I would like to thank both Captain Nicholls and Flying Lawyer for their input into this thread. Many learning/reinforcement points in aviation come from the mistakes of others. Such points are only available if the person concerned is open and honest in their reporting. No one has a flawless flying career which means at some point, there by the grace of god go I.
Regards,
MrE.
Alcohol is a dangerous drug but it can also be a recreational therapy. Each individual controls how much they pour down their own neck and must take responsibility for exercising their free will.
The limit for flying is a deservedly low given the responsibility of the job, however, be it the limit for flying or driving, up to the limit you are an individual exercising your free will, 1 sherry trifle later you have joined the incapable, irresponsible life threatening idiots brigade. It would appear from the 2 cases, the punishment was just for crossing the limit. The punishments show no graduation for the lack of self control each of the individuals had for how far they went over the line.
I was of the opinion Flight Safety was an industry goal. My company actively involves everybody in the safety culture and embraces every effort made by the airport authority to do the same. The security man played his role. Whether you agree on the way he did it is open to opinion. In my experience, the relationship between Flight Deck and Security is not often healthy. I have seen Flight Deck being pompous and arrogant towards security staff and I have also witnessed obtuse, jobsworth security personnel. Fortunately, both are a minority, however, it does not prevent both sides polarising their views of each other based on the few.
I would like to thank both Captain Nicholls and Flying Lawyer for their input into this thread. Many learning/reinforcement points in aviation come from the mistakes of others. Such points are only available if the person concerned is open and honest in their reporting. No one has a flawless flying career which means at some point, there by the grace of god go I.
Regards,
MrE.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Heliport, I considered the security man in case as part of the authority to ensure the maximum of security for commercial aviation. Pls correct me if I'm wrong, but for once I don't agree with you; IMHO the security man had no choice.
In case a commercial pilot has been arrested/convicted for acohol abuse, is his CPL suspended, for a certain period or indefinitively?
In case a commercial pilot has been arrested/convicted for acohol abuse, is his CPL suspended, for a certain period or indefinitively?
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Apa, apo ndi kulikonse!
Posts: 1,757
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely it is the duty of everyone - inc Pax - to report a potentially drunken flight crew member/ATCO/aircraft engineer?
It is a sad event - but hopefully we will all learn from it.
(and with the Christmas season upon us there will be even more breathalyser tests on the road in the UK)
It is a sad event - but hopefully we will all learn from it.
(and with the Christmas season upon us there will be even more breathalyser tests on the road in the UK)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They used to have to report anything unusal to thier supervisor. It could be said that a pilot smelling of drink is unusal.
Security staff don't call Police direct, they, as I said report to thier supervisor, who reports things to the next level up. At some stage the information arrives at BAA's control Centre. It is they that call Police, based on if they think Police need to be informed, irrespective of whether or not Police were asked for initialy.
In this case someone took the decision to inform the airlines handling agent as well, so it could be said that the security guard did do his job properly, that the BAA did try to help the guy out. The Pilot didn't take any action as the result of the warning that Police were or would be informed (albeit because he didn't see any need) and as a result he was arrested.
Security staff don't call Police direct, they, as I said report to thier supervisor, who reports things to the next level up. At some stage the information arrives at BAA's control Centre. It is they that call Police, based on if they think Police need to be informed, irrespective of whether or not Police were asked for initialy.
In this case someone took the decision to inform the airlines handling agent as well, so it could be said that the security guard did do his job properly, that the BAA did try to help the guy out. The Pilot didn't take any action as the result of the warning that Police were or would be informed (albeit because he didn't see any need) and as a result he was arrested.
Big Kahuna
We all know drinking goes on in Islamic countries ,and we know about the behaviour of some of their citizens abroad ;prostitutes ,gambling etc. As long as it is kept discreet everyone can pretend it doesn't happen and everyone is happy.
It provides a safety valve for people to go abroad and live it up ,come home and be saintly.
Bit different when it makes headline news ,major loss of face for the country concerned.
We all know drinking goes on in Islamic countries ,and we know about the behaviour of some of their citizens abroad ;prostitutes ,gambling etc. As long as it is kept discreet everyone can pretend it doesn't happen and everyone is happy.
It provides a safety valve for people to go abroad and live it up ,come home and be saintly.
Bit different when it makes headline news ,major loss of face for the country concerned.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: At the foot of the Lammermuirs
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FL
Of the 6 months how long will he stay inside? I would also assume that he will do some of the time in a "normal" prison before being moved to an open prison???
Question for all those who say the security gaurd was wrong:-
You witness a very drunk person putting their chidren in to a car and preparing to drive off. Do you:-
(a) Have a quite word?
(b) Call the Police?
(c) Do nothing?
Of the 6 months how long will he stay inside? I would also assume that he will do some of the time in a "normal" prison before being moved to an open prison???
Question for all those who say the security gaurd was wrong:-
You witness a very drunk person putting their chidren in to a car and preparing to drive off. Do you:-
(a) Have a quite word?
(b) Call the Police?
(c) Do nothing?
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I Ford it has everything to do with safety.
A few years ago during one of the xmas drink drive campaigns they showed a presenter on the local news here driving a car simulator. First, with no drink at all..then with progressivly more. The results? From the first drink thier ability to drive was impaired.
I stopped a woman driving out of Heathrow one evening. Her driving was appauling. She got out of the car, appeared stone cold sober, she probably was 'sober' in that she wasn't drunk. She gave no real indication of having been drinking at all...Having established, as far as I could there was no other reason for her bad driving, I breath tested her. Result? She was double the drink drive limits.
Now, these 2 examples are obviously car drivers. However I would suggest to you that the level of impairment you can get away with in a car is higher than it is in an aircraft. Secondly, there are many references to fatigue on here, combine that with alcohol and the problem is exassabated.
Turning to your suggestion that about drunkenness. NO ONE HAS SUGGESTED THEY WERE 'Drunk'.
The offence they were both convicted of has to do with an arbatary blood alcohol limit, not a level of drunkness or otherwise.
A 'Sobriaty' test is irrelevent.
Remote, and others who suggest starting a war with security staff, a word of caution. Think about it a while. Security are not subject to the same legislation, rightly or wrongly. You can accuse them, and one or two may be sacked. What effect do you think that will have in return? It's been suggested that the security staff 'should' have had a word with the captain, do you think a security guard is going to be more disposed to do that if he read this and the related thread?
A few years ago during one of the xmas drink drive campaigns they showed a presenter on the local news here driving a car simulator. First, with no drink at all..then with progressivly more. The results? From the first drink thier ability to drive was impaired.
I stopped a woman driving out of Heathrow one evening. Her driving was appauling. She got out of the car, appeared stone cold sober, she probably was 'sober' in that she wasn't drunk. She gave no real indication of having been drinking at all...Having established, as far as I could there was no other reason for her bad driving, I breath tested her. Result? She was double the drink drive limits.
Now, these 2 examples are obviously car drivers. However I would suggest to you that the level of impairment you can get away with in a car is higher than it is in an aircraft. Secondly, there are many references to fatigue on here, combine that with alcohol and the problem is exassabated.
Turning to your suggestion that about drunkenness. NO ONE HAS SUGGESTED THEY WERE 'Drunk'.
The offence they were both convicted of has to do with an arbatary blood alcohol limit, not a level of drunkness or otherwise.
A 'Sobriaty' test is irrelevent.
Remote, and others who suggest starting a war with security staff, a word of caution. Think about it a while. Security are not subject to the same legislation, rightly or wrongly. You can accuse them, and one or two may be sacked. What effect do you think that will have in return? It's been suggested that the security staff 'should' have had a word with the captain, do you think a security guard is going to be more disposed to do that if he read this and the related thread?
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: uk
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However I would suggest to you that the level of impairment you can get away with in a car is higher than it is in an aircraft
How many people get killed on he roads due to DD and how many people get killed in the air due to "Drink Flying"?
I suggest to you that the opposite is true implying that you may well be talking from the wrong end.
But Oh I forgot, coppers know everything.
Sorry.
NN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NN
Are you now suggesting that, not only should this law be repealled, but it is perfectly acceptable for pilots to fly drunk, because so far (in the UK) just one accident has happened because of alcohol?
We can argue about the level of impairment and the effect of flying v driving till the cows come home, apart from being ammusing it will achieve nothing. At some stage, a member of the medical profession would have given his opinon, which holds more weight than yours, or mine on the subject, which is why the levels are lower for pilots than drivers.
Even if you are correct.....then my point still applies, that ANY ALCOHOL impairs you ability.
Are you now suggesting that, not only should this law be repealled, but it is perfectly acceptable for pilots to fly drunk, because so far (in the UK) just one accident has happened because of alcohol?
We can argue about the level of impairment and the effect of flying v driving till the cows come home, apart from being ammusing it will achieve nothing. At some stage, a member of the medical profession would have given his opinon, which holds more weight than yours, or mine on the subject, which is why the levels are lower for pilots than drivers.
Even if you are correct.....then my point still applies, that ANY ALCOHOL impairs you ability.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: uk
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not suggesting anyone should fly under the influence of alcohol. However despite what any medics may say I am generally permitted to get into a car after say 2 pints but above the flying limit. I can then steam down the M1 in rush hour or drive aroiund a busy city.
I would say there is considerably less chance of an incident in an aircraft.
Therefore I say that the limit set for aviation is not well thought out and sensationalist.
Why is the figure different to driving?
Why set is very close to potential natural alcohol levels in the body?
If you are going to have any limit other than zero (actually it is in BA FCO's) whats the difference betwen driving and flying? Where's the evidence?
Oh and what's the one incident you refer to? Not a commercial incident to my knowledge.
Oh and don't take it personally. I hang around with a lot of cops. Its just the jumped up under trained newer ones that get on my nerves.
NN
I would say there is considerably less chance of an incident in an aircraft.
Therefore I say that the limit set for aviation is not well thought out and sensationalist.
Why is the figure different to driving?
Why set is very close to potential natural alcohol levels in the body?
If you are going to have any limit other than zero (actually it is in BA FCO's) whats the difference betwen driving and flying? Where's the evidence?
Oh and what's the one incident you refer to? Not a commercial incident to my knowledge.
Oh and don't take it personally. I hang around with a lot of cops. Its just the jumped up under trained newer ones that get on my nerves.
NN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NN
A piece of advice, 2 pints could put you way over the drink drive limit.
I would agree with a zero limit, for flying or driving. However I don't make legislation.
Why the differences? As I said, try the medics for the answer to that. I would presume because the level of concentration required for flying is probably higher than it is for driving.
Ill thought out the limits may well be, but I don't think sensationalist, afterall it's only on here really that its being talked about. The press will call anyone 'drunk' who convicted of a drink driving or flying offence, irrespective of thier level of 'drunkeness', it sells papers that way.
No, the incident I refer to was not commercial, but if you think about it you can't have a piece of legislation that says if you have a PPL you can't drink, if you have a commercial one you can. Would that mean that you could drink when flying passengers but get in a cessna you can't? You would consider that wrong, so would most people.
I don't take it personaly, it's all rather amusing to me. Younger Police become older Police eventualy they get the message.
A piece of advice, 2 pints could put you way over the drink drive limit.
I would agree with a zero limit, for flying or driving. However I don't make legislation.
Why the differences? As I said, try the medics for the answer to that. I would presume because the level of concentration required for flying is probably higher than it is for driving.
Ill thought out the limits may well be, but I don't think sensationalist, afterall it's only on here really that its being talked about. The press will call anyone 'drunk' who convicted of a drink driving or flying offence, irrespective of thier level of 'drunkeness', it sells papers that way.
No, the incident I refer to was not commercial, but if you think about it you can't have a piece of legislation that says if you have a PPL you can't drink, if you have a commercial one you can. Would that mean that you could drink when flying passengers but get in a cessna you can't? You would consider that wrong, so would most people.
I don't take it personaly, it's all rather amusing to me. Younger Police become older Police eventualy they get the message.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well it's all entertaining stuff. Professional pilots thinking they are experts on the effects of alcohol now, that is just as ludicrous as doctors thinking they are experts on swept-wing aerodynamics.
You minority of pilots who think if somebody 'knows how to drink' they will be better pilots that the 50% who don't (I'd take real offence to that) are really giving the rest of your peer group a bad name. You need to clean up your act.
Facts are, if you turn up to work with 20mg% of alcohol you have either been drinking within eight hours, or you went to bed pretty pissed (that's drunk to our American friends). There ain't no other way.
If you turn up to work with 120mg% (that's legally drunk by the way) and claim you haven't had a drink for 12 hours you must have been staggering off to bed. Again, there ain't no other way.
Whether Binge Drinking is acceptable the day before you take the controls of a passenger jet, I'll let the layman decide. You don't need to be an expert to work that one out. And if you ever get into court and try to argue the toss like whet is happening on this web site you will find lots of expert witnesses of the medical variety who will testify that you are indeed a Binge Drinker (Royal College of Physicians says so). Judges will accept that, they like doctors, they consider us fellow professionals you see. Best thing to do is plead guilty, keep the noise level down and take it on the chin, suspect this was the good advice given by his legal team.
This is a sad story, remote's well meaning, but somewhat foolish, defence of the guy suggests there were signs of problem drinking before hand. It would have been better for his friends in the airline to do something about it before a security official was forced to. It would be really good for professional pilots to sort their mates out, because when the courts do so it isn't pretty. That's the way doctors sorted out the drink problems that existed 20 years ago, self regulation before the law stepped in. And here endeth the lesson,
You minority of pilots who think if somebody 'knows how to drink' they will be better pilots that the 50% who don't (I'd take real offence to that) are really giving the rest of your peer group a bad name. You need to clean up your act.
Facts are, if you turn up to work with 20mg% of alcohol you have either been drinking within eight hours, or you went to bed pretty pissed (that's drunk to our American friends). There ain't no other way.
If you turn up to work with 120mg% (that's legally drunk by the way) and claim you haven't had a drink for 12 hours you must have been staggering off to bed. Again, there ain't no other way.
Whether Binge Drinking is acceptable the day before you take the controls of a passenger jet, I'll let the layman decide. You don't need to be an expert to work that one out. And if you ever get into court and try to argue the toss like whet is happening on this web site you will find lots of expert witnesses of the medical variety who will testify that you are indeed a Binge Drinker (Royal College of Physicians says so). Judges will accept that, they like doctors, they consider us fellow professionals you see. Best thing to do is plead guilty, keep the noise level down and take it on the chin, suspect this was the good advice given by his legal team.
This is a sad story, remote's well meaning, but somewhat foolish, defence of the guy suggests there were signs of problem drinking before hand. It would have been better for his friends in the airline to do something about it before a security official was forced to. It would be really good for professional pilots to sort their mates out, because when the courts do so it isn't pretty. That's the way doctors sorted out the drink problems that existed 20 years ago, self regulation before the law stepped in. And here endeth the lesson,
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interestingly,nobody has connected the social and moral vacuum that plagues todays commercial aviation(and some may say society) to this incident and others like it.With companies like Ryanair and easyjet ousting traditional companies,forcing pilots to re-think their role and fight for survival,it is amazing that there arent more out there who drink.
Abuse and misinterpretation of CRM and the breakdown of the crew concept as a single unit with the Captain at its head has eroded the social and moral values that were once taken for granted.Go back just twenty years and this thing wouldnt have happened;simply because the crew wouldnt have allowed it to happen.Watching out for your fellow crew members(cockpit and FA's) used to be second-nature for all airline crews;nowadays,its probably the FA or F/O who will do the snitching.
All it needed was an experienced F/O(not some kid who just bought his type-rating ) to talk the Captain out of reporting for duty.He was on the same layover for Chrissakes.Did he not use his peripheral vision and clock how many drinks the skipper had?
Have you ever watched a smooth F/O talk a newish skipper into taking a couple of extra thousands pounds of fuel?Same thing here.Gentle art of persuasion.Go sick.Call in a standby.
Instead,this modern mannerless politically-correct world gives us thought police and little or no empathy from our fellow humans.
If both pilots hit the wagon,then the security staff,as a last line of defence,are there and they have a job to do.How they do it is usually an indication of their upbringing but can also reflect any personal grudges they may have(and many do).A quiet but firm warning at first,followed by arrest if it doesnt deter.
Abuse and misinterpretation of CRM and the breakdown of the crew concept as a single unit with the Captain at its head has eroded the social and moral values that were once taken for granted.Go back just twenty years and this thing wouldnt have happened;simply because the crew wouldnt have allowed it to happen.Watching out for your fellow crew members(cockpit and FA's) used to be second-nature for all airline crews;nowadays,its probably the FA or F/O who will do the snitching.
All it needed was an experienced F/O(not some kid who just bought his type-rating ) to talk the Captain out of reporting for duty.He was on the same layover for Chrissakes.Did he not use his peripheral vision and clock how many drinks the skipper had?
Have you ever watched a smooth F/O talk a newish skipper into taking a couple of extra thousands pounds of fuel?Same thing here.Gentle art of persuasion.Go sick.Call in a standby.
Instead,this modern mannerless politically-correct world gives us thought police and little or no empathy from our fellow humans.
If both pilots hit the wagon,then the security staff,as a last line of defence,are there and they have a job to do.How they do it is usually an indication of their upbringing but can also reflect any personal grudges they may have(and many do).A quiet but firm warning at first,followed by arrest if it doesnt deter.