easyJet - pilot tested over the limit?
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Top of the World
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am I alone in finding it additionally irritating that all the tabloid coverage has focused so heavily on the fact that this pilot is female?
One has only see the ratio of male pilots to female pilots in Easyjet & elsewhere in aviation for that matter to understand why the press thinks it will grab more public attention, its a rarer occurence, after all so many male pilots have been found p*ssed or allegedly recently p*ssed at the controls or about to take control it's a bit old hat. Unusual different stories sell papers, I know when I was on the tube the other day I was as guily of this as anyone else. When I saw the headlines 'female pilot found drunk' or whatever my curiosity became so insurmountable I ended up reading a strangers paper while she was reading it much to my colleagues embarassment.
Of course the press will emphasise the novelty of it being a member of the fairer sex in this case and of course the public are interested in this fact. One may not like it but one can't change human nature and public preceptions. Of course she was going to be thrown to the sharks & IMHO if shes guilty she deserves to be as much as her male colleagues.
Personally I'm fed up with the drink culture that appears to exist among pilots. When I get into a plane I am putting my life in these so called responsible peoples hand, the concern whether they've recently hit the bottle or not & are fully sober should not need to be there. Personally I think she and any other pilot who takes the controls without observing the bottle to throttle limit are a disgrace to themselves, their company & profession and do not deserve to wear the stripes they do on their sleeves.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 820
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My hunch is bjcc stopped being a cop a long time ago and don't want to let on he's out of date and 'air traffic' means air traffic security guard not a controller. 
Last edited by Bronx; 13th Jan 2005 at 23:32.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Omaha said rather more than he appreciated when he posted the following (my italics, not his)
To echo Dannys previous points, how many flights operate to, from or within the UK each day on G or EI registered aircraft? Perhaps a thousand? Probably not far off at a guess, which means upwards of 300,000 commercial flights each year. And how many operators of those flights are found to be over the incredibly restrictive limit of 20 promilles? If my memory serves me correctly, just one pilot of a G or EI registered aircraft failed a breath test last year. Thats one in 300,000+. That doesn't strike me as even statistically significant. Human error/failing/weakness exists in every job which involves human involvement. That is simply impossible to avoid. Yet the puritans amongst us, notably those from the Nordic states, would ask us to invest heavily in expensive detection systems to find that one in 300,000 , rather than invest in technologies that would provide far greater returns in safety but would not sell newspapers.
Well to paraphrase a previous poster, personally I'm fed up with the drink culture that appears to exist among pilots simply because the gutter press can sell papers on it. I'm also fed up with the idea that I can't enjoy a pint or two downroute, should I feel like it, because it upsets some puritan who doesn't have an inkling about flight safety, metabolic rates or perspective. If they have a problem with that then I'm sure an unmanned airline will be along very soon and they can fly on that. I won't be joining them on it.
Personally I'm fed up with the drink culture that appears to exist among pilots
Well to paraphrase a previous poster, personally I'm fed up with the drink culture that appears to exist among pilots simply because the gutter press can sell papers on it. I'm also fed up with the idea that I can't enjoy a pint or two downroute, should I feel like it, because it upsets some puritan who doesn't have an inkling about flight safety, metabolic rates or perspective. If they have a problem with that then I'm sure an unmanned airline will be along very soon and they can fly on that. I won't be joining them on it.
I think it’s really very silly to suggest that, in the absence of any comprehensive testing or control system and with new, very low blood alcohol limits, that the recent high profile cases represent 100% of all the occasions where a pilot has flown whilst over the limit.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
this is getting me anoyed
My posts normally try to introduce a level of moderation and sense, however this thread is getting me anoyed.
Omaha ststed ' a drink culture that appears to exist'. The last one to admit he has a proble IS the alcholic. Think about it. The stories of flight crews on benders in hotels are legendary and rife. It may not happen the way it used to, but to say it doesn't go on at all is plain wrong.
Fact, the law has introduced rightly or wrongly an alcohole level that is to all intense and purpose zero. Accept it, live with it or get anotther job before you get a spel at HM's holiday camp.
Fact, with a near zero alcohole level, if your breath smells of booze you are almost certain to fail the breath test.
I am amazed by how many flight crew still tell me that there rules are 8, 10, 12, 24 hours bottle to throttle. It seam a lot of people (flight crew) just haven't caught up with what the law means. I would suggest that collegues, unions and the companies themselves need to do some urgent education.
These threads are full of how we think pilots are wounderful highly educated and talented proffessionals who work in poor conditions. My message is, if that's how you view yourself, act like it. 'Proffessional' is taking the bad with the good, not just cherry picking the good bits and saying 'I'm above the bad bits'
there have been a couple of threads recently about how wounderful women pilots are and how life is so hard for them compared to their male colleagues. I believe (see my other posts) in fair and equal treatment. If this female pilot was doing somthing wounderful she would be all for 'I'm a women and I'm great' therefore she can not expect to have the fact that she is a women overlooked, nay some would say 'be unmentionable as it's not PC' when she's done somthing bad. And being the first bad female pilot, and apparently very bad, is going to get the headlines, that's life.
To the coupple of posters who have implied 'that because pilots aren't caught over the limit there aren't any over the limit' or implied that all pilots over the limit have been caught; what planet are you on? FL I suspect you are applying the innocent until proven guilty stance, but it doesn't stack up statistically.
Sadly, I suspect that we are going to see a steady stream of flight crew being caught out by this legislation, both of the heavy drinkers and the accidental 'I had no idea' type. Eventually they will stop making the news as old news doesn't sell, but it will still put a premature end to people's career and probably liberty.
Omaha ststed ' a drink culture that appears to exist'. The last one to admit he has a proble IS the alcholic. Think about it. The stories of flight crews on benders in hotels are legendary and rife. It may not happen the way it used to, but to say it doesn't go on at all is plain wrong.
Fact, the law has introduced rightly or wrongly an alcohole level that is to all intense and purpose zero. Accept it, live with it or get anotther job before you get a spel at HM's holiday camp.
Fact, with a near zero alcohole level, if your breath smells of booze you are almost certain to fail the breath test.
I am amazed by how many flight crew still tell me that there rules are 8, 10, 12, 24 hours bottle to throttle. It seam a lot of people (flight crew) just haven't caught up with what the law means. I would suggest that collegues, unions and the companies themselves need to do some urgent education.
These threads are full of how we think pilots are wounderful highly educated and talented proffessionals who work in poor conditions. My message is, if that's how you view yourself, act like it. 'Proffessional' is taking the bad with the good, not just cherry picking the good bits and saying 'I'm above the bad bits'
there have been a couple of threads recently about how wounderful women pilots are and how life is so hard for them compared to their male colleagues. I believe (see my other posts) in fair and equal treatment. If this female pilot was doing somthing wounderful she would be all for 'I'm a women and I'm great' therefore she can not expect to have the fact that she is a women overlooked, nay some would say 'be unmentionable as it's not PC' when she's done somthing bad. And being the first bad female pilot, and apparently very bad, is going to get the headlines, that's life.
To the coupple of posters who have implied 'that because pilots aren't caught over the limit there aren't any over the limit' or implied that all pilots over the limit have been caught; what planet are you on? FL I suspect you are applying the innocent until proven guilty stance, but it doesn't stack up statistically.
Sadly, I suspect that we are going to see a steady stream of flight crew being caught out by this legislation, both of the heavy drinkers and the accidental 'I had no idea' type. Eventually they will stop making the news as old news doesn't sell, but it will still put a premature end to people's career and probably liberty.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mgc
I do take the "innocent until proven guilty stance" because I think it's fair, especially when someone has been identified, but that wasn't the point I was making in this discussion.
I merely challenged Crossbars claim that the general public think if one pilot is caught every year they can be certain there are 'a whole lot more' who aren't caught. That may be public belief in Sweden where he lives, but I don't accept it's true of the general public in the UK.
I don't believe the overwhelming majority of the general public in the UK even think about the issue - except for a few days when the press/media try to whip up concern and make exaggerated and inaccurate comments about 'drunk' pilots. Public attention soon turns to some other hot topic.
What percentage of the thousands of people who board flights in the UK today do you think will give even a moment's thought to whether their pilots might be over the prescribed limit?
The UK public knows its aviation industry has a well-deserved fine reputation and a superb safety record, and I simply don't believe public opinion has changed because of a couple of widely-publicised cases.
Of course, that might eventually change if enough members of the public read some of the comments in these discussions - or the press quotes from posts which may have been made by people who aren't professional pilots and know little or nothing about the industry.
eg A journalist reading your post could accurately report that 'mgc' on 'the professional pilots website' referred to flight crews on benders in hotels, saying "It may not happen the way it used to, but to say it doesn't go on at all is plain wrong" - without knowing (or caring) if you're aircrew and speaking from personal observation or simply making a sweeping allegation based on nothing more than stories you've heard.
I do take the "innocent until proven guilty stance" because I think it's fair, especially when someone has been identified, but that wasn't the point I was making in this discussion.
I merely challenged Crossbars claim that the general public think if one pilot is caught every year they can be certain there are 'a whole lot more' who aren't caught. That may be public belief in Sweden where he lives, but I don't accept it's true of the general public in the UK.
I don't believe the overwhelming majority of the general public in the UK even think about the issue - except for a few days when the press/media try to whip up concern and make exaggerated and inaccurate comments about 'drunk' pilots. Public attention soon turns to some other hot topic.
What percentage of the thousands of people who board flights in the UK today do you think will give even a moment's thought to whether their pilots might be over the prescribed limit?
The UK public knows its aviation industry has a well-deserved fine reputation and a superb safety record, and I simply don't believe public opinion has changed because of a couple of widely-publicised cases.
Of course, that might eventually change if enough members of the public read some of the comments in these discussions - or the press quotes from posts which may have been made by people who aren't professional pilots and know little or nothing about the industry.
eg A journalist reading your post could accurately report that 'mgc' on 'the professional pilots website' referred to flight crews on benders in hotels, saying "It may not happen the way it used to, but to say it doesn't go on at all is plain wrong" - without knowing (or caring) if you're aircrew and speaking from personal observation or simply making a sweeping allegation based on nothing more than stories you've heard.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Scandinavia
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That’s one in 300,000+. That doesn't strike me as even statistically significant
That is simply impossible to avoid. Yet the puritans amongst us, notably those from the Nordic states, would ask us to invest heavily in expensive detection systems to find that one in 300,000
Anyone remember two Lufthansa pilots taken from their airplan at Helsinki Airport? Both were above the limit. Now what's the odds of that? 2 out of 600 000 IN THE SAME PLANE!? Sh*t, if they had only played the lottery.
I'm also fed up with the idea that I can't enjoy a pint or two downroute, should I feel like it, because it upsets some puritan who doesn't have an inkling about flight safety, metabolic rates or perspective
Flying Lawyer, let me get this strait. You're not worried that the general public is influenced of what's printed in the paper but you are actually worried about what's said here??? Get real! And to think that they are stupid enough not to draw the conclusion that there probably are more pilots out there not being caught is
.Say stories of politicians caught for fraud is printed in the paper. You don't think that the publics trust for politicians are influenced by this?? And that some might think that a lot more politicians are probably also greedy suckers?
I'm not out to get breath test just for the fun of it. But I'm willing to take the collective burden of what some of us have bean able to create. If you can tell me that there is absolutely no mistrust for pilots here and that future stories will have no such affect, well then I would gladly skip the testing.
Last edited by CrossBars; 14th Jan 2005 at 10:18.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: A25R
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, there are some bitter people who have clearly been raised in a flying world far different to mine. Wish I could be so perfect.
I note that article 54 (from memory) of the ANO states that it is also illegal to be under the influence as a passenger in an aeroplane, yet this coveniently appears to be largely ignored save for the occasional profile case. Strange how the law is used so selectively.
I note that article 54 (from memory) of the ANO states that it is also illegal to be under the influence as a passenger in an aeroplane, yet this coveniently appears to be largely ignored save for the occasional profile case. Strange how the law is used so selectively.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PAX
My "neighbour" to the left (where it is marginly preferable to like compared to the one on "the right") makes some interesting comments. Of course, Nanny Persson does like to restrict the sales of alcohol and keep the prices high through Systembolaget.
However it would be nice if all passengers could be breath tested too, and not just those flying AY or SK routes (actually, the Scandinavians that drink tend to get on with the drinking as a rule, not shouting about it as the Brits seems to do !)
An exercise in study is going to Alko (Finnish alcohol monopoly in Tornio) just by the border to Sweden.. Full of Swedes buying cheap (!) booze..
But as a pilot, if it makes your passengers feel safer, what's the problem of blowing into the bag. Noone expects you to do it by the cockpit door as the C class PAX parade on or an Intercom announcement "This is a non smoking flight.. Captain MadeupName is in command and he has scored 0.011 on the alcohometer, thus passing the mandatory limit of 0.0200 and thus he is cleared to fly this Boeing 747+400 today en route to Osaka:"
find similar stats for number of drink drivers each day / number of individual a to b car journeys and then buses, lorries and suchlike?
As a drinker myself, I think there\'s far too much emphasis placed on drinking, especially with the British and Irish people (as compared to others who drink heavily like Italians, Swedes, Danes and a few Finns).
Why is it that the British stag party has a worse reputation than a Polish one or a Finnish one in the same resorts+ Same with football "supporters".
Of course not all of the orchard has a crop of bad apples, mind.
Mr Flying Lawyer said: "I merely challenged Crossbars claim that the general public think if one pilot is caught every year they can be certain there are \'a whole lot more\' who aren\'t caught. That may be true of the general public in Sweden where he lives, but I don\'t accept it\'s true of the general public in the UK."
Maybe the typical British person does not think that they can/could have an alcohol problem and that alcohol problems in society are mostly "teenagers" and the smelly old wino drinking meths, instead of looking closer to home. Governments can have their "initiatives" but they don\'t have much impact. Scandinavian countries have their own problems and in some ways "alcohol problems" are accepted, but not accepted if you know what I mean, elements of society but the same degree of public nuisance causing, wantom damage, beating up passers by etc is not, on the whole, here. Same with knives and the like.
Of course, I\'ve not heard of any pilots brawling at an airport after imbibing so this is not strictly just about pilots or cabin crews.
Interestingly, in the Uk press this week, I read that there is more problem with binge drinking amonst the younger ladies now. Ladetteism is on the increase.
"I don\'t believe the overwhelming majority of the general public in the UK even think about the issue - except for a few days when the press/media try.."
Maybe because the "pilot" is still held in esteem like "the doctor" or "the lawyer" even though many jokes can be made or nasty comments made. The gold bars on the shoulder pander to security, trust and suchlike.
But the public is easy to manipulate anyway !
However it would be nice if all passengers could be breath tested too, and not just those flying AY or SK routes (actually, the Scandinavians that drink tend to get on with the drinking as a rule, not shouting about it as the Brits seems to do !)
An exercise in study is going to Alko (Finnish alcohol monopoly in Tornio) just by the border to Sweden.. Full of Swedes buying cheap (!) booze..
But as a pilot, if it makes your passengers feel safer, what's the problem of blowing into the bag. Noone expects you to do it by the cockpit door as the C class PAX parade on or an Intercom announcement "This is a non smoking flight.. Captain MadeupName is in command and he has scored 0.011 on the alcohometer, thus passing the mandatory limit of 0.0200 and thus he is cleared to fly this Boeing 747+400 today en route to Osaka:"
find similar stats for number of drink drivers each day / number of individual a to b car journeys and then buses, lorries and suchlike?
As a drinker myself, I think there\'s far too much emphasis placed on drinking, especially with the British and Irish people (as compared to others who drink heavily like Italians, Swedes, Danes and a few Finns).
Why is it that the British stag party has a worse reputation than a Polish one or a Finnish one in the same resorts+ Same with football "supporters".
Of course not all of the orchard has a crop of bad apples, mind.
Mr Flying Lawyer said: "I merely challenged Crossbars claim that the general public think if one pilot is caught every year they can be certain there are \'a whole lot more\' who aren\'t caught. That may be true of the general public in Sweden where he lives, but I don\'t accept it\'s true of the general public in the UK."
Maybe the typical British person does not think that they can/could have an alcohol problem and that alcohol problems in society are mostly "teenagers" and the smelly old wino drinking meths, instead of looking closer to home. Governments can have their "initiatives" but they don\'t have much impact. Scandinavian countries have their own problems and in some ways "alcohol problems" are accepted, but not accepted if you know what I mean, elements of society but the same degree of public nuisance causing, wantom damage, beating up passers by etc is not, on the whole, here. Same with knives and the like.
Of course, I\'ve not heard of any pilots brawling at an airport after imbibing so this is not strictly just about pilots or cabin crews.
Interestingly, in the Uk press this week, I read that there is more problem with binge drinking amonst the younger ladies now. Ladetteism is on the increase.
"I don\'t believe the overwhelming majority of the general public in the UK even think about the issue - except for a few days when the press/media try.."
Maybe because the "pilot" is still held in esteem like "the doctor" or "the lawyer" even though many jokes can be made or nasty comments made. The gold bars on the shoulder pander to security, trust and suchlike.
But the public is easy to manipulate anyway !
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why not look at it another way as a statistic.
How many commercial a/c have been involved with incidents where the handling pilot has been so called "drunk" - zilch I would think.
Unless you were falling about pissed with bad DT's or speech so slurred ATC could not understand your clearance, what problem would you have flying the a/c from A to B
How many commercial a/c have been involved with incidents where the handling pilot has been so called "drunk" - zilch I would think.
Unless you were falling about pissed with bad DT's or speech so slurred ATC could not understand your clearance, what problem would you have flying the a/c from A to B
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Finland
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jammydonut: I make no comment on the specifics but much research shows handling of machinery, cars, tools etc IS IMPAIRED by alcohol from the first drop through the "max drink" level and higher.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Scandinavia
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jammydonut
Well then we might as well go ahead and get stoned befor every flight. Obviously that hasn't had any impact on incidents so why not? Can't recall any incident where the pilot was f**ked up on cocaine - must be safe then, right?
If I would worry about anything posted on this forum getting to the press, it's comment like yours suggesting that: screw the limit, just try not to be too pissed. Scary really!
And might I say that attitudes of that sort just proves that there absolutely should be a mandatory testing system before each flight. Not to get rid of bad publicity but because some people obviously have a pretty screwed up idea of how alcohol impair judgment and performance. Hope you don't have to deal with an emergency on that flight - god forbid you would have to disconnect the AP.
And when it comes to your question, I sure as hell can't answer it. Havn't tried the "just-below-not-being-able-to-communicate-level" while flying. Hope you don't speak from own experience.
If I would worry about anything posted on this forum getting to the press, it's comment like yours suggesting that: screw the limit, just try not to be too pissed. Scary really!
And might I say that attitudes of that sort just proves that there absolutely should be a mandatory testing system before each flight. Not to get rid of bad publicity but because some people obviously have a pretty screwed up idea of how alcohol impair judgment and performance. Hope you don't have to deal with an emergency on that flight - god forbid you would have to disconnect the AP.
And when it comes to your question, I sure as hell can't answer it. Havn't tried the "just-below-not-being-able-to-communicate-level" while flying. Hope you don't speak from own experience.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hangar 69
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, if you believe what's been said in this thread, a lot of pilots at EZY are maybe flying around 'drunk' anyway, without even toughing a bottle of booze! 
I'm curious to see what the reaction of EZY management will be to the pilot in question. Will they take the same approach as the way they combat their grueling schedules/rostering? Will they show their 'true' Southwest Airlines spirit and look at any possible human tragidy of the person involved before rushing to a decision? Or will they just fire her, ignore everything else and move on pretending nothing has happened?
I'm curious to see what the reaction of EZY management will be to the pilot in question. Will they take the same approach as the way they combat their grueling schedules/rostering? Will they show their 'true' Southwest Airlines spirit and look at any possible human tragidy of the person involved before rushing to a decision? Or will they just fire her, ignore everything else and move on pretending nothing has happened?
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<<
How many commercial a/c have been involved with incidents where the handling pilot has been so called "drunk" - zilch I would think.
>>>
The usual response here is the Japan Air Lines DC-8-62 in 1977 where a take-off on the wrong runway and subsequent stall at Anchorage killed 5 on a cargo flight.
The record seems to show 4 other possible fatal incidents where high alcohol consumption may have been contributory, including a Dornier 228 in Tahiti in 1991, plus three others in Norway, India and Finland between 1961 and 1973.
How many commercial a/c have been involved with incidents where the handling pilot has been so called "drunk" - zilch I would think.
>>>
The usual response here is the Japan Air Lines DC-8-62 in 1977 where a take-off on the wrong runway and subsequent stall at Anchorage killed 5 on a cargo flight.
The record seems to show 4 other possible fatal incidents where high alcohol consumption may have been contributory, including a Dornier 228 in Tahiti in 1991, plus three others in Norway, India and Finland between 1961 and 1973.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No I don't think you get the point CrossBars. The statisitical fact is not that there are a lot more than the system reveals. Thats just speculation on your part. I've no doubt there are some more, but you have no evidence as to the scale of any problem that exists, you just prefer to speculate widely that everybodies drinking hard before flying. Well on a day to day basis I'm not seeing the evidence for it. The lack of incidents suggests my guesstimates are a lot closer to the mark than yours. We all pass through security umpteen times a day there's plenty of opportunity to stop somebody evidently over the limit. Personally I don't think any case like this should be tolerated. Just like no accident should be tolerated. But until you take the human being out of the flight deck it's going to happen whether you like it or not. So that brings us to your ridiculous call for mandatory testing. Of what? Why just alcohol? What if somebodys done a line of coke at the weekend? Or a few E's? Or smoked a joint of two? Evidently nobody in the industry can be trusted to police themselves and so a regulator is required to police them for all banned substances. Perhaps you could have a full blood and urine analysis before work to ensure closet drug abusers can't take to the skies. After all, nobodys been caught so by your logic there must be a lot of people doing it.
aka Capt PPRuNe
Join Date: May 1995
Location: UK
Posts: 4,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crossbar, you appear to assume that if every pilot was breath tested before every flight, let's say in the crew room before making their way to the aircraft, that that would prevent any pilots over the limit from getting near an aircraft and therefore the press wouldn't have any sensational stories to publish. All very nice but I would wager a months salary that every time (almost certainly very rarely) a pilot tested positive and had to be replaced before a flight that the information would be leaked, just as it was in this case and the press would have a field day.
You seem to be more worried about the image the public have of you. You are prepared to sacrifice your civil liberties so that your image isn't tarnished by the miniscule proportion of pilots who break the rules.
Someone mentioned the two LH pilots who were tested over the limit on the same aircraft. Well, doesn't that just go to prove once again that the system as it stands works. The two were tested and removed from duty before taking control of the aircraft which is again one of the reasons we haven't had any accidents where alcohol is a contributory factor.
If we're going to go into the statistics of accidents where alcohol was a contributory factor then lets look at UK or even EU registered a/c over 5700kg within the last 20 years. Once again, I challenge Crossbar to provide the total number of accidents where alcohol was a factor. You can claim that there are probably many more incidents where pilots who were over the legal limit 'got away with it' but you can't provide any hard facts. If there really were so many actually turning up for work over the limit then we would have the statistics to prove it on record.
Can anyone give me an idea how many departures of UK registered aircraft of over 5700kg there have been in the last 20 years? How many accidents involving UK registered aircraft where alcohol was a contributory factor? Until those of you who are so worried about your image because the media is highlighting a single incident where the pilot has tested positive get over it you should not have to force the rest of us who have enough confidence in our own abilities and professionalism to subject ourselves to knee-jerk solutions that are just extra chips in the block of civil liberties.
I would rather we had the occasional rip roaring headline when the system works and a pilot who has turned up for work is tested positive rather than to be presumed guilty until proven innocent by being forced to take a mandatory breath test before every flight. Statistics speak for themselves:
UK/EU Flights over last 20 years = millions
Accidents due to alcohol = Zero
Pilots tested over the limit = a few
Pilots who are responsible and safe = 99.999% of us.
Pilots who worry about and are affected by the media hype = Crossbar and maybe a few others.
You seem to be more worried about the image the public have of you. You are prepared to sacrifice your civil liberties so that your image isn't tarnished by the miniscule proportion of pilots who break the rules.
Someone mentioned the two LH pilots who were tested over the limit on the same aircraft. Well, doesn't that just go to prove once again that the system as it stands works. The two were tested and removed from duty before taking control of the aircraft which is again one of the reasons we haven't had any accidents where alcohol is a contributory factor.
If we're going to go into the statistics of accidents where alcohol was a contributory factor then lets look at UK or even EU registered a/c over 5700kg within the last 20 years. Once again, I challenge Crossbar to provide the total number of accidents where alcohol was a factor. You can claim that there are probably many more incidents where pilots who were over the legal limit 'got away with it' but you can't provide any hard facts. If there really were so many actually turning up for work over the limit then we would have the statistics to prove it on record.
Can anyone give me an idea how many departures of UK registered aircraft of over 5700kg there have been in the last 20 years? How many accidents involving UK registered aircraft where alcohol was a contributory factor? Until those of you who are so worried about your image because the media is highlighting a single incident where the pilot has tested positive get over it you should not have to force the rest of us who have enough confidence in our own abilities and professionalism to subject ourselves to knee-jerk solutions that are just extra chips in the block of civil liberties.
I would rather we had the occasional rip roaring headline when the system works and a pilot who has turned up for work is tested positive rather than to be presumed guilty until proven innocent by being forced to take a mandatory breath test before every flight. Statistics speak for themselves:
UK/EU Flights over last 20 years = millions
Accidents due to alcohol = Zero
Pilots tested over the limit = a few
Pilots who are responsible and safe = 99.999% of us.
Pilots who worry about and are affected by the media hype = Crossbar and maybe a few others.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crossbars
You may be right that "every time something like this shows up in the newspapers the trust for pilots degrade a bit."
It's an assumption. Even if it's correct, I believe (as a member of the public) that the degradation miniscule.
"The statistical fact is that there actually are a lot more than the system reveals."
It may be a reasonable assumption, but is it a statistical fact? Where do we find the stats?
"Let me get this strait. You're not worried that the general public is influenced of what's printed in the paper but you are actually worried about what's said here??? Get real!"
I'm not worried - it's not my industry.
Yes, I do think what's said on PPRuNe could be more damaging than the occasional newspaper report if enough members of the public read some of the comments - or the press quotes from posts here - because it's a website on which people from inside the industry post and outsiders are likely to be influenced by what they read. The same danger arises in relation to many aspects of the industry, not just the issue being discussed here. eg I think it's a good thing the press don't publish the attitude of some FAs towards customers which is regularly displayed in the CC forum. (The attitude of FAs who work for UK carriers seems to be the worst by far.) I might pause to wonder if such an attitude is actually widespread in 'real life' because I've never had a bad experience myself, but the press wouldn't.
Re your response to jammydonut:
Scary?
Do you really think he's an airline pilot?
If he is, which I strongly doubt, do you think he was being serious?
Are you claiming there's a serious problem?
What are the statistics for alcohol having been a cause or contributing factor in airline accidents?
In what percentage of fatal accidents has alcohol been found in a deceased pilot's blood?
In what percentage of cases where alcohol was found (if any) was it sufficient to be reasonably inferred that the pilot's ability was or might have been impaired?
PS: Your command of English is very impressive. Why not use it to argue courteously instead of being so aggressive and rude to people with whom you disagree?
You may be right that "every time something like this shows up in the newspapers the trust for pilots degrade a bit."
It's an assumption. Even if it's correct, I believe (as a member of the public) that the degradation miniscule.
"The statistical fact is that there actually are a lot more than the system reveals."
It may be a reasonable assumption, but is it a statistical fact? Where do we find the stats?
"Let me get this strait. You're not worried that the general public is influenced of what's printed in the paper but you are actually worried about what's said here??? Get real!"
I'm not worried - it's not my industry.
Yes, I do think what's said on PPRuNe could be more damaging than the occasional newspaper report if enough members of the public read some of the comments - or the press quotes from posts here - because it's a website on which people from inside the industry post and outsiders are likely to be influenced by what they read. The same danger arises in relation to many aspects of the industry, not just the issue being discussed here. eg I think it's a good thing the press don't publish the attitude of some FAs towards customers which is regularly displayed in the CC forum. (The attitude of FAs who work for UK carriers seems to be the worst by far.) I might pause to wonder if such an attitude is actually widespread in 'real life' because I've never had a bad experience myself, but the press wouldn't.
Re your response to jammydonut:
Scary?
Do you really think he's an airline pilot?
If he is, which I strongly doubt, do you think he was being serious?
Are you claiming there's a serious problem?
What are the statistics for alcohol having been a cause or contributing factor in airline accidents?
In what percentage of fatal accidents has alcohol been found in a deceased pilot's blood?
In what percentage of cases where alcohol was found (if any) was it sufficient to be reasonably inferred that the pilot's ability was or might have been impaired?
PS: Your command of English is very impressive. Why not use it to argue courteously instead of being so aggressive and rude to people with whom you disagree?
Last edited by Flying Lawyer; 14th Jan 2005 at 13:40.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: The Dole Queue
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crossbar,
I totaly agree with you. I think you have to be increadibly narrow minded to think that the only people to arrive for duty over the legal limit are those that get caught. I have personally sat with a group of pilots in a hotel bar the night prior to them all flying, and watched them all drink like fish until the early hours.
Flying Lawyer/Danny - While you may be right in saying that there have be no aircraft accidents directly attributed to pilot alcohol consumption, are you prepared to wait until a pilot who has been drinking crashes an A380 with all 550 pax on board into the ground? Is that what it will take?
Give me one good reason why pilots should not have to take a breath test before taking control of countless peoples lives (and Danny, smudging your lipstick does not count!) And don't start giving me the 'civil liberties' rubbish. If you are that against it what are your true motivations?
I totaly agree with you. I think you have to be increadibly narrow minded to think that the only people to arrive for duty over the legal limit are those that get caught. I have personally sat with a group of pilots in a hotel bar the night prior to them all flying, and watched them all drink like fish until the early hours.
Flying Lawyer/Danny - While you may be right in saying that there have be no aircraft accidents directly attributed to pilot alcohol consumption, are you prepared to wait until a pilot who has been drinking crashes an A380 with all 550 pax on board into the ground? Is that what it will take?
Give me one good reason why pilots should not have to take a breath test before taking control of countless peoples lives (and Danny, smudging your lipstick does not count!) And don't start giving me the 'civil liberties' rubbish. If you are that against it what are your true motivations?
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: I wish I knew
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cpt.Unemployed - I really don't mind what you do with your civil liberties, but please leave mine alone.
We all know that at some time in the future an A380 will probably crash taking 550-odd souls with it. However, following your line of reasoning, we might have to provide psychological profiles before each flight too.
In the end, if a company wants to address a problem, let it do so internally. Subjecting company "A" to regulations designed to cure a problem in company "B" is more than a bit silly.
Cheers,
LP
We all know that at some time in the future an A380 will probably crash taking 550-odd souls with it. However, following your line of reasoning, we might have to provide psychological profiles before each flight too.
In the end, if a company wants to address a problem, let it do so internally. Subjecting company "A" to regulations designed to cure a problem in company "B" is more than a bit silly.
Cheers,
LP
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: The Dole Queue
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I honestly don't see the problem.
What about jobs that require employees to clock in before commencing duty. Is this a violation of civil liberties?
Low-pass - what I was trying to get across is will it take an incident caused by alcohol consumption and resulting in deaths of passengers to put a simple (and inevitable) system in place.
Low-pass - may I also ask if you would challenge a police officer if you were stopped in your car and asked to provide a breath test. Would you tell him no, because it violates your civil liberties?
What about jobs that require employees to clock in before commencing duty. Is this a violation of civil liberties?
Low-pass - what I was trying to get across is will it take an incident caused by alcohol consumption and resulting in deaths of passengers to put a simple (and inevitable) system in place.
Low-pass - may I also ask if you would challenge a police officer if you were stopped in your car and asked to provide a breath test. Would you tell him no, because it violates your civil liberties?