UK pilot breathalysed after go arounds

[Human Factor]

Just out of interest if it had been you and the copper pitched up, listened to your story and said he was satisifed this was all a bit silly and no breath test was required, would any of you insist he carried out one anyway.

You can't insist. It's up to the copper to make his own decision.

[christn]

Does the law regarding not being drunk on board an aircraft still apply to passengers?

If so, then if a passenger makes an accusation against a crew member then why not insist that they also have a breath test?

The chances are pretty good that they will fail!

[max nightstop]

I'm a bit confused as to the timing of all this.

I can't see any way in which the pax could have invoked the full force of the law until the aircraft was at the very least on stand, more probably disembarked. It would require a truly remarkable performance from plod to get to the aircraft before the crew got off, in my experience of calling for them, it takes a goodly while for them to put down their tea and meander to the gate.

Surely once off the plane, isn't breath-testing a bit irrelevant. I regularly have a drink at the earliest opportunity after getting off, and so, i imagine, do my pax. Wouldn't that screw up any subsequent breath-test?

[olympus]

Slightly off-topic but....a couple of years ago I had to go-around at MRS due to not getting three greens (146-300, 100+ in the back); flew perfect missed approach procedure, went to the hold to sort the problem out then normal approach and landing. All in a day's work you might think. We got on stand to be greeted by three members of France's finest (not sure which branch of the various heavily-armed quasi-military police organisations they were members of) who wanted chapter and verse of the go-around and gave me a grilling in order to get it! Nothing else happened-certainly no breathalyzer-and we departed none the worse for the experience shortly after.

I was slightly unsettled by the encounter with the police and wondered if anyone else had had a similar experience and if this is normal in France (if anything is normal in France) after something as routine as a go-around.

[Tartan Giant]

Mostly for BJCC

Some of your answers/ideas in this thread sounded a bit strange, and not knowing you from Adam, I had a look at some of your other posts.

You certainly have a strange slant on things - to my way of thinking anyway.

Here's just a few that might help explain your overt support for the idiot passenger in this Manchester go-around case.

Crime and punishment : Mark Winters, 42. Drunk driving (nearly 4 times over the limit), no insurance, driving whilst disqualified, and failing to stop after an accident. "Given one last chance by Magistrates". Will not go to jail, despite having 71 previous convictions, including a 5 year ban and time in jail for drink driving.

You said, "The magistrate or Judge make thioer (sic) decision based on many things as Unwell_Raptor says.
Police are often as frustrated as anyone else that those sentences appear lax."

In your post you called this guy "Mr" - he was a drunken bloody criminal rat bag............

You said, "those sentences APPEAR lax".... the bugger should have been slung in jail, there was NOTHING lax about it BJCC - why did you defend such a weak 'rap'? Why did you not say the guy should have been jailed?

You said, "Sadly its a fact of life, like many offences, if no one saw (or will admit to seeing) the suspect, or he can't be identified by some other method, then thats (sic) it..."

So the crime for this Manchester Commander starts with some dummy 'down the back' thinking a few go-arounds makes for a drunk pilot? Maybe these clowns should demand to smell the exhaled breath of the pilots before doors closed?

-----------------------

breath testing STN 11/12/04 : posted 12th December 2004 23:10

Its not legal to random stop for breath testing, however there are ways round it ... [get some prat passenger to spring a lie]

There are 3 reasons for requring (sic) a breath test.

1. Involved in an accident
2. committed a moving traffic offence
3 Constable has reasonable grounds to suspect a driver has a blood alcohol concentration above the prescribed limit.

1 is obviously not the reason, 2 is probably not, which leaves 3. The way round it is to stop the driver for other 'reasons', eg to check driving documents, and if they smell of drink then breath test. the smell being the reasonable grounds.

BJCC: So, it seems this Captain was illegally forced to have a breath test, right?
For it seems to most of us here BJCC (not having been present of course) reading about the event there was,

a) No accident

b) No moving traffic offence (albeit we are considering an aircraft and crew carrying out their lawful duties, which in this case, the aircraft Commander considered it necessary to go-around several times)

c) The constable in question would NOT have reasonable grounds to suspect - in the first instance - the pilot HAS a blood alcohol concentration above the prescribed limit, which I bet you the said constable would not have a clue what the aviation limit is, never mind "reasonable grounds" for suspecting the chap was above that (flying) limit.
He takes the lead from some loony down the back, and does not have the balls to say - sorry Captain but I have been wasting your time, and it is obvious to me, no offence has taken place. I will now go and interview the passenger about wasting police time.

--------------

posted 26th January 2005 19:52


Krystal n chips

The lady in question opted for it to go to court. Not Police & CPS. She was given a fixed penelty (sic) notice, which she declined to pay and she disputed the offence. The result was her decision no one elses (sic).

She was found guilty of course.

As to the orginal (sic) offence being petty, yes it is. However, her attitude and manner of driving would have been factors in the officers decision to issue a ticket. There is much made on here of inaccurate press reporting, which applies equaly (sic) court hearings as to everything else.

BJCC: Why would you want to say, "she was found guilty of course"? Of COURSE? Why?

Tell me where in Law there is an alleged crime been constructed around, "her attitude"?

BJCC: You admit the offence (how silly to even call it an offence) was petty, so why do you bother defending stupid, petty things?

BJCC: Since you were obviously not there when this young lady was pulled over, how can you say for sure, "... manner of driving WOULD have been factors".
You talk about me jumping to conclusions? Jeezzus H!!

Like I've said before, I think the police do a very difficult job, but when I read some of the PC tripe you come out with I have to wonder who they are fighting for.


Like Human Factors, I would be after somebody's guts for garters if they tried the same on me as the Captain in question.

As for volunteering for a breath test to satisfy some inadequate down the back - don't be absolutely stupid.

Sleeve
This country, under the present clowns in Noo Labour, have with lying stealth taken us beyond the point where common sense and fair play rules.
The dumb age of the PC brigade has been injected into most and like stupified rabbits caught in the headlamps most go along with the crap that is being preached - such as a headmaster now scrapping "homework" for all his pupils.

The likes of Blunkett remains in his accomodation after being found out to be using tax-payers money for his girlfriend's rail fares, and of course the VISA scam. With people like that in power, honest decent folk have no chance.
I would put the onus on BALPA and the IPA to make serious waves to disuade passengers making serious allegations, unless they are cast iron, for the full weight of the law will be on their ass if all their cards are not aces!


TG

PS: For our resident ex-copper BJCC, like you, I will exercise the right to sit on the fence (something I never normally do till now) - I refer to my question 6 asked some time ago! A bit like the Peter Sellars sketch and, "that is not my dog".

[andyloynes]

Story at: http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/ne...ro_pilots.html

[sammy shamal]

B-test fury over hero pilots
John Scheerhout

TWO pilots who struggled to land their plane when a warning light came on ended up being breathalysed.

The pair took three attempts to bring the aircraft down after they noticed the cockpit light.

But a passenger complained about the aborted landings and said the crew were "too relaxed".

Both the captain and co-pilot were in the clear after giving negative samples of breath when they were met by police in Terminal 3, following the flight from Lyon in France.

The incident has prompted BA to complain formally to Manchester Airport police while the pilots’ union Balpa has also hit out at the officers and the passenger.

BA spokeswoman Sue Redmond confirmed flight BA1952, coming into Manchester on January 16, twice aborted landings because of a warning light in the cockpit indicating problems with the landing gear.

It later emerged there was nothing wrong with the undercarriage – the warning light was faulty.

The captain aborted the first landing and carried out a so-called “go-round” so air traffic controllers could confirm visually that the landing gear had come down as normal.

He decided to carry out a second “go round” to make doubly sure there were no problems, said Ms Redmond.

Landed

The RJ100 aircraft, with 100 passengers on board, landed safely at the third attempt.

“It’s very disappointing that a passenger would assume just because a pilot was carrying out a normal safety procedure that he had been drinking when he had not been drinking at all,” added Ms Redmond.

“Apparently the female passenger had remarked while on board that the crew had seemed very relaxed.”

It is understood that BA will be writing a formal letter of complaint to the airport police.

Captain Mervyn Granshaw, chairman of Balpa, said: “We are appalled that the police seem to have acted inappropriately on the comments of a passenger who has obviously no knowledge of aviation.”

However, sources in GMP confirmed to the M.E.N. that two pilots had provided negative breath tests following a complaint from a passenger.

A spokesman for Greater Manchester Police said:

“On Sunday, January 16, 2005, police officers at Manchester Airport breathalysed a pilot and co-pilot after a female passenger on an inbound flight expressed concern about their conduct.
Both tests proved negative and no further action was taken.
Neither member of the flight crew was arrested.
All incidents reported to GMP are treated seriously and investigated thoroughly.”

Everyday is a schoolday to how stupid some folk really are!

[MaximumPete]

Perhaps the "lady" in question should have been breathalised as well.

She could have been under the influence to the extent that she could not exercise proper judgement and thus committing an offence.

I can't remember the going rate for being a p****d passenger.

MP

[pprecious]

Its a good job that the passenger concerned doesn't hang around your local GA training airfield.

The local police would be busy all with all those go-arounds!

I suspect that the passenger has some strange axe to grind here, I wonder if the flight was running late for example, or she was refused another drink herself during the flight?

Either way I hope she gets a life at somepoint, before she drops herself right in it.

I hope the two pilots involved are Ok and don't receive any adverse affects from this silly woman.

[WHBM]

Passengers who make themselves a gross nuisance through drunkenness, false hijack claims, etc, are normally banned by the airline from further travel with them.

It would be good if BA/BACX would show a little support for all their crews against such wild accusations and do the same to this woman.

[RAT 5]

The female passenger had remarked "the crew seemed very relaxed".

Thank god! I'd hate to hear her reaction if the crew had seemed uptight and stressed out, hystreical and close to panic. Perhaps she would have assessed that as "being on top of the job."

In any case, how did she assess this? Cockpit door was locked, I assume. You no longer see the crew. Could she have made her judgement from their calm voices over the P.A.?

When did she make thee alligations? As she left the a/c to a handling agent; as she waited for her baggage; as she happened to pass a copper in the terminal?

It says the crew were met by police in T.3. Did she call them from the a/c on her mobile? 112 and they came running?

It really does sound a farce and once again opens the possibility if gratutitous vindictivnous.

[behind_the_second_midland]

Runway 31 wrote

If this had been anywhere near true it would have been all over the media. I don't believe a word of it.

Congratulations on your level of pomposity however you called me a liar.

Feel free to apologise at any time.

BTSM

[Lost_luggage34]

Perhaps the Lady passenger would benefit from a stern word from our colleagues in blue ?

Breathalysed herself so she can be educated about the process.

Then be invited to explain her actions, before being charged with wasting Police time.

[Runway 31]

BTSM,

Heartfelt apology offered, I still think that it is crazy and still cannot not believe that because the crew carried out their job in a professional manner, they should be treated in this way. I suppose that the next time this happens the crew should scream,shout and panic.

I would have thought the Manchester police would have better things to do.

[hobie]

The more I read about this incident, the more disgusted I feel about the way this Crew were treated

[zed3]

Summed up , this seems to be the way things are going . We are sliding ..... no , plunging , into a society with no understanding/respect for life and it's aspects , no respect for the professions . It's so sad , what the UK had as a country (fair play etc.) seemingly has been lost - seems to be going the way of the rest of Europe . I'm not going to start on politics , if that has anything to do with it . INFURIATING .

[BEagle]

"Ladies and Gentlemen, we apologise for having had to climb away again, but we have a small technical difficulty with a cockpit indication which we need to resolve. This will merely require us to make another approach so that our colleagues on the ground can confirm that all is well. After that we will climb away, circle back and land normally. Nothing to worry about, but your safety is our prime concern. Should there be any rancorous old sows in the cabin with an axe to grind, kindly SHUT THE F*** UP, sit down and don't piss off our cabin crew. Thank you for your attention"


Good for ba and BALPA - take Munchesterr Sickurriteh to the cleaners and ban this stupid woman from any further flights.

[behind_the_second_midland]

31

ta! and I agree.

Someone has posted the following on the BA BALPA forum with regard to refusing to take the test.

I hope he won't mind if I repeat it here.

I agree, the argument I would take would revolve around reasonable grounds
Policeman enters flightdeck
pilot asks what the matter is
Policeman says: pax alleges he must be drunk due three attempts to land
Pilot:states two G/A due tech problem and tower informed by radio and can conifrm.
If the policeman then says he still wants to breath test, then you have to stand your ground and ask what his "reasonable grounds" for the test are?
IMHO refusing now is not an offence as there are no reasonable grounds merely an unfounded accusation from layperson in cabin.

Hussien V Chong Fook Cam 1970 The house of lords held that "reasonable suspicion had to be based on some evidence and not a mere hunch".
Look forward to a positive protocol being drawn up by all concerned

BTSM

[View From The Ground]

Incredible, in this day and age not too suprising unfortunately that the lady felt it was her place to report her suspicions....maybe she was hoping to sue BA for emotional distress if she turned out to be correct...However surely when the police turned up they would get a fair idea of what had happened before taking the complaint seriously...no wonder our taxes are so high if the police have to take everything at face value. Seems like a lack of judgement on the part of the Officers involved unless they were following some ill conceived police procedure/protocol for such incidents.
At least the press played the story the right way...although whether the pilots were heroes or just doing their job is open to question. Makes a change for such a story to get a positive spin for the pilot/airline. Seems like a pat on the back for a job well done and a round of applause from the pax is what these guys should have got.....

[Tartan Giant]

Spot On guys

BTSM

I am delighted to read your 'post' on this affair

I also am very pleased to see the fight against this lunacy has started in earnest.

I hope every pilot stands his ground and does NOT offer himself/herself up to a breath-test just because some PC (pun intended) copper has been approached, second-hand, by a passenger on a trumped up charge and then tries his luck.

We have read what BJCC reckons is the test for asking for a breath-test, and it does not involve some dummy down the back complaining, "the crew seemed very relaxed".

Fight it Ladies and Gentlemen.

TG