LHR Breathtest. Update: Captain jailed
Astrodome, Thanks.
I was not meaning to say that aircrew should not be subject to screening for alcohol or drugs - in fact it has surprised me how long it has taken for aviation to catch up with other sectors such as the railways in this regard.
I think what I am questioning is the actual limit of 20mg. Who has decided this figure is a benchmark? Laws are surely designed to protect society in general but I feel that the politicians (who have never been pilots) do not really understand the issues - this seems to borne out by the cavalier attitude with respect to FTL within Europe etc. - they are not listening to what we (the pilots) are trying to tell them!
One has to ask the question just how many aircraft accidents/incidents have been caused by aircrew having excess alcohol in their system?
I would like to stress that I am NOT in favour of mixing (!) alcohol with any safety critical task and I AM in favour of screening but it seems to me that too much attention is being put into this area to the detriment of making significant safety improvements in other areas such as fatigue etc.
I was not meaning to say that aircrew should not be subject to screening for alcohol or drugs - in fact it has surprised me how long it has taken for aviation to catch up with other sectors such as the railways in this regard.
I think what I am questioning is the actual limit of 20mg. Who has decided this figure is a benchmark? Laws are surely designed to protect society in general but I feel that the politicians (who have never been pilots) do not really understand the issues - this seems to borne out by the cavalier attitude with respect to FTL within Europe etc. - they are not listening to what we (the pilots) are trying to tell them!
One has to ask the question just how many aircraft accidents/incidents have been caused by aircrew having excess alcohol in their system?
I would like to stress that I am NOT in favour of mixing (!) alcohol with any safety critical task and I AM in favour of screening but it seems to me that too much attention is being put into this area to the detriment of making significant safety improvements in other areas such as fatigue etc.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fireflybob
Thanks, I was obviously misunderstanding your post, so thanks for explaining.
Re the 20 mg limit. Yes I do agree it does seem to be rather arbitrary and I am reliably informed that even teetotallers in the right circumstances can give alcohol trace readings of this level.
I wonder how readily such a limit will bring about 'false positives' and what way the aviation industry will respond when for example a non-drinking person is screened alcohol positive?
Something that has been discovered in the Railway testing system is that Hamburger rolls with sesame seeds will trip a positive drug screen (I seem to recall that it reports Heroin).
It came to light when a train Driver tested positive.
There was clearly absolutely no reason why this guy should have tested positive, however the Policy states that immediate dismissal must follow.
Fortunately British Rail being a good employer recognised that this particular guy would not have been a drug user and deemed the test result 'suspect' and 'stayed' any action.
British Rail scientific services undertook an awful lot of detective work and established that the sesame seeds had brought about the 'false positive'.
It was subsequently established that the sesame seeds oh a burger meal he had taken for lunch earlier had caused the problem.
Clearly a situation that could have led to the widespread loss of confidence in the system, together with the resultant breakdown of staff relations and morale was handled splendidly, with no upset on anyone's side.
I am not sure if they were ever able to modify the actual screening process, and even today we always make sure we steer clear of hamburger chains prior to an announced drug screen.
Just a thought for you guys !
Re the 20 mg limit. Yes I do agree it does seem to be rather arbitrary and I am reliably informed that even teetotallers in the right circumstances can give alcohol trace readings of this level.
I wonder how readily such a limit will bring about 'false positives' and what way the aviation industry will respond when for example a non-drinking person is screened alcohol positive?
Something that has been discovered in the Railway testing system is that Hamburger rolls with sesame seeds will trip a positive drug screen (I seem to recall that it reports Heroin).
It came to light when a train Driver tested positive.
There was clearly absolutely no reason why this guy should have tested positive, however the Policy states that immediate dismissal must follow.
Fortunately British Rail being a good employer recognised that this particular guy would not have been a drug user and deemed the test result 'suspect' and 'stayed' any action.
British Rail scientific services undertook an awful lot of detective work and established that the sesame seeds had brought about the 'false positive'.
It was subsequently established that the sesame seeds oh a burger meal he had taken for lunch earlier had caused the problem.
Clearly a situation that could have led to the widespread loss of confidence in the system, together with the resultant breakdown of staff relations and morale was handled splendidly, with no upset on anyone's side.
I am not sure if they were ever able to modify the actual screening process, and even today we always make sure we steer clear of hamburger chains prior to an announced drug screen.
Just a thought for you guys !
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
random breath testing
The chief executive of a large UK passenger airline apparently believes that one in ten pilots would fail a pre-flight breath test and is keen to bring in random breath testing. Is he right to worry?
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Nova
Posts: 1,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't know which chief executive this refers to, but perhaps he is correct.
The limit is set so RIDICULOUSLY low anyone who is very close to stone cold sober could fail!
Of course, 3 or 4 of the 10 may be experiencing a level of FATIGUE towards the end of a working block, that affects their performance FAR more than a miniscule amount of alcohol. But we don't test for that do we!
Oh, and the chief wouldn't like being told he was working his pilots so hard, it was affecting safety!
The limit is set so RIDICULOUSLY low anyone who is very close to stone cold sober could fail!
Of course, 3 or 4 of the 10 may be experiencing a level of FATIGUE towards the end of a working block, that affects their performance FAR more than a miniscule amount of alcohol. But we don't test for that do we!
Oh, and the chief wouldn't like being told he was working his pilots so hard, it was affecting safety!
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, you can start your stopwatch and count the seconds before someone brings up the old favorite 'fatigue' again!
I flew for thirty years and never got 'fatigued' - a bit tired sometimes but every working person does at some time or other. I know of no other job, many far more physically demanding than airline flying, where people are so quick to whimper that 'fatigue' word. In fact I think I've only ever heard pilots use it... (civilian pilots, that is)
I flew for thirty years and never got 'fatigued' - a bit tired sometimes but every working person does at some time or other. I know of no other job, many far more physically demanding than airline flying, where people are so quick to whimper that 'fatigue' word. In fact I think I've only ever heard pilots use it... (civilian pilots, that is)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: hkg
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Joyce, like many you confuse the old, respected profession of pilot with the new 'bus driver' job. Fatigue can now be a real problem; you are lucky to have never experienced it!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Joyce Tick fails to mention what type of flying he did for those thirty years.
If it was only the aeroclub's Auster at weekends, well I doubt very much he was ever fatigued.
I would be interested to have him along for an August roster with any IT operator, and see how he feels at the end of it.
If it was only the aeroclub's Auster at weekends, well I doubt very much he was ever fatigued.
I would be interested to have him along for an August roster with any IT operator, and see how he feels at the end of it.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: fEELS LIKE THE FLIGHTDECK
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Try 90 hours in 14 days solid, no 'days' off just 24 hour periods.....each month. Fatigue yes, exhaustion yes, with average of 7 hour period time changes per sector. Oh for the good old days of an eight hour sector then three days off to polish up the skiing or complete that sailing course! My choice so mustn't grumble....must I?
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: eire
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More to the point, I think the statement originally referred to is absolutely ridiculous. No I certainly do not think anywhere near 10% of operating flight crew would fail even the new and amazingly low limits (Probably not even 0.1% given the heightened state of awareness in the industry).
Tho I have to bet that a similar breathalyzer applied to the likes of the individual who made the statement, on their morning drive to work, would likely fail in the vicinity of 25-30%. Think about that oh holy one(s)!
Walk a mile in our shoes...
Tho I have to bet that a similar breathalyzer applied to the likes of the individual who made the statement, on their morning drive to work, would likely fail in the vicinity of 25-30%. Think about that oh holy one(s)!
Walk a mile in our shoes...
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: western europe
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A senior U.K. Police Chief announced today that he wants the Car Driving limit reduced dramatically because Drivers feel, at the present level, they can have a drink or two and be ok to drive ..... the Chief wants the level reduced to a level that effectively means Car Drivers "can't Drink and Drive" Period!!!
This effectively is the approach the Aviation World seems to be taking
This effectively is the approach the Aviation World seems to be taking
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's the other thing you can set your watch by: disagree with the 'whinge' party line and you must be a private pilot, a failed airline pilot or management!
No need to be rude , 6000PIC, I freely admit to getting tired, especially towards the end of a second consecutive night flight (yes, I was charter for 15 years, Random) but it was never anything a good sleep didn't cure. Last time I was 'fatigued' was after three days without sleep at a military winter survival school in -20C and a tent!
No need to be rude , 6000PIC, I freely admit to getting tired, especially towards the end of a second consecutive night flight (yes, I was charter for 15 years, Random) but it was never anything a good sleep didn't cure. Last time I was 'fatigued' was after three days without sleep at a military winter survival school in -20C and a tent!
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: eire
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Probably the same idiot who was adamantly in favor of "zero tolerance" policing regards the speed limit issue - 1 mph over the limit and you're a criminal. Get real or get a life -preferably in some cozy little dictatorship where your likes can comfortably exercise your delusional needs for power/control.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: EGLL
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do not agree with random breath testing but I do agree with compulsory breath testing. This should be provided by the employer. As much as any Pilot or Controller can say that they have not had a drink, this does not say that they do not have alchohol in their blood. As members have said before the limit is too low. On a monetary basis it is far more better for a company to stop someone working for one day rather than losing them completely. The cost to replace a Pilot or an ATCO would be loss of one days work plus overtime compared to training someone or advertising and training the right person. The Aviation Profession is in a bad state at the moment due to the belittleing of qualified personnel. If laws are broken then fine, but as professionals we and our management should ensure that the laws are not broken. At the moment anyone can report any licenced professional for smelling of alchohol, not forgetting that the reporter might of had eight pints the previous night and working with the mate they had been out with. They might also have a grudge against a certain person passing through security.
What about this scenario. One of the MOD Security suspects that he has smelt alchohol on a few members of staff passing through the gates at NERC. Are they controllers, assistants, tels, admin. Who knows?. The report is made to the local constabulary. Next minute the Police arrive, the only people they can test are the controllers, where do they start?, which sector?, who looks drunk? I know, start with the watch manager and work down. Try to test a Daventry controller whilst busy. Who is endangering life then?
I am not condoning drinking and working but saying that firstly the limit is too low. Secondly as previousely said that if every controller was breath tested at NERC (sorry,not just NERC but every other unit in the country), then the results under the present limit would be frightening. If 10% of the working pilots and controllers proved positive on one day then the country would come to a standstill for air travel. Thirdly, the financial affects on the Aviation industry would be too much to handle, for airlines and airports.
It is far more easier for companies (financially) to introduce compulsory testing, rather than losing staff.
What if someone at work has a grudge against you? They accuse you of smelling of alchohol and then report you? I was always taught that the Aviation Industry worked as a team. Not anymore.
I hope someone tries in the future to realise that our industry is a TEAM industry. My god if we were at war then many of the backstabbers would not be around. We should look after each other and not try to trip each other up.
You should realise that in 100 years we will all be dead. Enjoy your life, be friends and help everyone. Please do not try and ruin other people. Life is all about working as a team.
Rgds
ILS 119.5
What about this scenario. One of the MOD Security suspects that he has smelt alchohol on a few members of staff passing through the gates at NERC. Are they controllers, assistants, tels, admin. Who knows?. The report is made to the local constabulary. Next minute the Police arrive, the only people they can test are the controllers, where do they start?, which sector?, who looks drunk? I know, start with the watch manager and work down. Try to test a Daventry controller whilst busy. Who is endangering life then?
I am not condoning drinking and working but saying that firstly the limit is too low. Secondly as previousely said that if every controller was breath tested at NERC (sorry,not just NERC but every other unit in the country), then the results under the present limit would be frightening. If 10% of the working pilots and controllers proved positive on one day then the country would come to a standstill for air travel. Thirdly, the financial affects on the Aviation industry would be too much to handle, for airlines and airports.
It is far more easier for companies (financially) to introduce compulsory testing, rather than losing staff.
What if someone at work has a grudge against you? They accuse you of smelling of alchohol and then report you? I was always taught that the Aviation Industry worked as a team. Not anymore.
I hope someone tries in the future to realise that our industry is a TEAM industry. My god if we were at war then many of the backstabbers would not be around. We should look after each other and not try to trip each other up.
You should realise that in 100 years we will all be dead. Enjoy your life, be friends and help everyone. Please do not try and ruin other people. Life is all about working as a team.
Rgds
ILS 119.5
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Sandman
Can't disagree the majority of senior police officers are idiots.
However, is there a problem with lowering the drink drive limits? It may well get rid of the uncertainty.
1 mph over the limit? I think you live in a different world on that....
but lets see you back it up with some fact...
119.5
'MOD security at Nerc'. Have you ever been there?
If you mean Group 4 security think that someones been drinking when they drive in then they can pass the VRM to Hampshires finest. So why would the local old bill breath test everyone? Just driving in the gate does not constitute an offence, unless you mean drink driving. In which case it matters not what the drivers occupation is. They can still be breath tested.
As for breath testing someone sat on DTY.....I really don't think so do you? Common sense would dictate your mythical controller being taken off radar first. In exactly the same way as Police wouldn't test a driver while they were still driving.
You may be right about the BAC limits, you may be wrong. I don't see the Medical Pofession howling about it being wrong. The CAA were the people that had the legislation introduced, try asking them to justify it.
The legislation you are on about does not just apply to people who are 'grassed', a breath test can be required after an incident, or an accident.
Can't disagree the majority of senior police officers are idiots.
However, is there a problem with lowering the drink drive limits? It may well get rid of the uncertainty.
1 mph over the limit? I think you live in a different world on that....
but lets see you back it up with some fact...
119.5
'MOD security at Nerc'. Have you ever been there?
If you mean Group 4 security think that someones been drinking when they drive in then they can pass the VRM to Hampshires finest. So why would the local old bill breath test everyone? Just driving in the gate does not constitute an offence, unless you mean drink driving. In which case it matters not what the drivers occupation is. They can still be breath tested.
As for breath testing someone sat on DTY.....I really don't think so do you? Common sense would dictate your mythical controller being taken off radar first. In exactly the same way as Police wouldn't test a driver while they were still driving.
You may be right about the BAC limits, you may be wrong. I don't see the Medical Pofession howling about it being wrong. The CAA were the people that had the legislation introduced, try asking them to justify it.
The legislation you are on about does not just apply to people who are 'grassed', a breath test can be required after an incident, or an accident.
Last edited by bjcc; 7th Jan 2005 at 15:59.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Nova
Posts: 1,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Joyce Tick told us he had flown for 30 years, achieving 6000 hrs, and never felt fatigued!
Perhaps today's pilots feel fatigued because they can knock up the same total in a quarter of the time it took HIM.
To be fair, I think there IS a difference between tiredness (common more on shorthaul) and fatigue (perhaps more common on longhaul)
However, the point I was trying to make was this:
Where is the science that says flying with 20mg of alcohol in the blood has a more detrimental effect on performance, than the newly proposed EU FTL scheme.
I, along with many, suspect the evidence simply does not exist.
So the question is, how was this (extremely low) figure, arrived at?
Joyce; it's over to you.
Perhaps today's pilots feel fatigued because they can knock up the same total in a quarter of the time it took HIM.
To be fair, I think there IS a difference between tiredness (common more on shorthaul) and fatigue (perhaps more common on longhaul)
However, the point I was trying to make was this:
Where is the science that says flying with 20mg of alcohol in the blood has a more detrimental effect on performance, than the newly proposed EU FTL scheme.
I, along with many, suspect the evidence simply does not exist.
So the question is, how was this (extremely low) figure, arrived at?
Joyce; it's over to you.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: EGLL
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry have never worked at NERC and forgot it is Civvy only. When I was at LATCC then due to it being a military base then MOD Police were there.
Just driving past the gate does not constitute an offence nor does passing through security screening constitute an offence but that is what people are being reported for.
If a controller was thought to be over the limit whilst working then that person should be relieved immedietly, regardless. If a pilot reported for work smelling of drink they should not be allowed to work. If a Police Constable turns up for work and believes to be over the drink/drive limit they do not drive.
My point is, if a person suspects that someone smells of drink but is not sure who they are what do they do? I know report it. Who then is tested in a large unit? If everybody is not tested then negligence is on the Police. If the unit is not shut down immedietly due to the large scale of the investigation, and an accident happens due to someone being under the influence then it will be negligence due to the police. If the Police fail to act on any report and an accident happens then it will be due to their negligence. Just you try and substantiate any report followed by an accident an no investigation.
This whole situation is a great big grey can of worms. It will be ripped apart for the next few years until some noddy finally realises about our industry. Until then I am glad to be working my notice period and then bomb about outside CAS and keep a good look out. Nobody will test me, not that I am bothered, but in a LR45 I can go anywhere.
Rgds
ILS 119.5
Just driving past the gate does not constitute an offence nor does passing through security screening constitute an offence but that is what people are being reported for.
If a controller was thought to be over the limit whilst working then that person should be relieved immedietly, regardless. If a pilot reported for work smelling of drink they should not be allowed to work. If a Police Constable turns up for work and believes to be over the drink/drive limit they do not drive.
My point is, if a person suspects that someone smells of drink but is not sure who they are what do they do? I know report it. Who then is tested in a large unit? If everybody is not tested then negligence is on the Police. If the unit is not shut down immedietly due to the large scale of the investigation, and an accident happens due to someone being under the influence then it will be negligence due to the police. If the Police fail to act on any report and an accident happens then it will be due to their negligence. Just you try and substantiate any report followed by an accident an no investigation.
This whole situation is a great big grey can of worms. It will be ripped apart for the next few years until some noddy finally realises about our industry. Until then I am glad to be working my notice period and then bomb about outside CAS and keep a good look out. Nobody will test me, not that I am bothered, but in a LR45 I can go anywhere.
Rgds
ILS 119.5
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: eire
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BJCC:
Different world - no not really - just one you obviously don't follow:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/461624.stm
Different world - no not really - just one you obviously don't follow:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/461624.stm
