Jail and 10-year ban for Thomson pilot!
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pinkman
You have misconstrude. An 'avarage' person (is there such a thing?) looses around one unit, or half a pint of 'normal' strength beer an hour. I used the words 'avarage' and 'about' to save people assuming it was a hard rule that applied to everyone. It can only ever been an approximate calculation, and should never be assumed to be set in stone.
You have misconstrude. An 'avarage' person (is there such a thing?) looses around one unit, or half a pint of 'normal' strength beer an hour. I used the words 'avarage' and 'about' to save people assuming it was a hard rule that applied to everyone. It can only ever been an approximate calculation, and should never be assumed to be set in stone.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One drink an hour
That is a rough estimate. So if you would have a 12 hour ban and had 10 beers before (which is really a whole lot) you would have 0 BAC at check-in. So the only explanation is that that the guy had a whole lot more beers or he did not respect the 12 hour ban.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Post #34 on this thread (page2) quotes:
'A breath test showed 45 micrograms of alcohol in 100ml of breath, five times the 9mcg limit for pilots. A blood test at 11.45am revealed 42 milligrams in 100ml of blood, twice the 20mg limit.'
The legal limit for drivers in the UK is 35 Microgrammes of alcohol in 100ml of breath, therefore the pilot was actually in excess of the drink drive limit and 5 x the Pilots limit when he was first breathalysed.
(35mcg/100ml breath = 80mg/100ml blood).
If it could have been proven that he had driven to the airport to commence his duty then he could have been banned from driving aswell!!
It is not clear form the infomation on this thread how long elapsed between the initial breath test and the blood test being taken. However it must have been long enough for his alcohol level to drop from five times the pilots limit to just over twice.
I see this sentance as not only a punishment for the pilot concerned but more so a deterrent for other pilots.
A lot of posts on this thread compare drink driving with this incident, the maximum number of deaths I have dealt with caused by drink driving in one incident is three, how many deaths could have been caused in this incident?
In my eyes it gives the sentence a bit more perspective.
'A breath test showed 45 micrograms of alcohol in 100ml of breath, five times the 9mcg limit for pilots. A blood test at 11.45am revealed 42 milligrams in 100ml of blood, twice the 20mg limit.'
The legal limit for drivers in the UK is 35 Microgrammes of alcohol in 100ml of breath, therefore the pilot was actually in excess of the drink drive limit and 5 x the Pilots limit when he was first breathalysed.
(35mcg/100ml breath = 80mg/100ml blood).
If it could have been proven that he had driven to the airport to commence his duty then he could have been banned from driving aswell!!
It is not clear form the infomation on this thread how long elapsed between the initial breath test and the blood test being taken. However it must have been long enough for his alcohol level to drop from five times the pilots limit to just over twice.
I see this sentance as not only a punishment for the pilot concerned but more so a deterrent for other pilots.
A lot of posts on this thread compare drink driving with this incident, the maximum number of deaths I have dealt with caused by drink driving in one incident is three, how many deaths could have been caused in this incident?
In my eyes it gives the sentence a bit more perspective.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: EGDN
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can someone tell me why it is only pilots who seem to fall foul of the law? No engineers, groundcrew, air traffic controllers or even train drivers seem to get caught, even though the law applies to them as well.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: in the hills
Age: 68
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was talking with a copper last night who was absolutely amazed at the fact that 6 months prison seems to be the going rate for being convicted of being over the alcohol limit. Professional drivers would not be expected to get a jail term for just being convicted of drunk driving. There are thousands of cases of accidents having been caused by drink driving. How many aviation accidents, involving commercial operations have had alcohol as as causal or even contributary factor?
Why is it that we have have allowed legislation to be enacted, or the courts to impose such sentences without protest?
I am not against the legislation, but surely there should be some justification for treating aircrew so severely! If there was some real evidence that there was a direct link between accidents / incidents and alcohol then there would be some justification. As these reported cases indicate, there is obviously some level of aircrew having alcohol in their blood whilst operating, but not causing accidents / incidents. I think we should be more supportive of those caught out, whether through a real problem or just a lapse of judgement, i.e. agreeing to come on duty early when requested by crewing. They should be offered the chance of some help and understanding, and rehabilitation if required.
Why is it that we have have allowed legislation to be enacted, or the courts to impose such sentences without protest?
I am not against the legislation, but surely there should be some justification for treating aircrew so severely! If there was some real evidence that there was a direct link between accidents / incidents and alcohol then there would be some justification. As these reported cases indicate, there is obviously some level of aircrew having alcohol in their blood whilst operating, but not causing accidents / incidents. I think we should be more supportive of those caught out, whether through a real problem or just a lapse of judgement, i.e. agreeing to come on duty early when requested by crewing. They should be offered the chance of some help and understanding, and rehabilitation if required.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2dmoon - I agree with you there should be some consistency in the sentencing the UA pilot should have received the same. However I disagree that the breath result is not relevant as it must have been allowed to be brought up in court, so is therefore relevant. Had it not been relevant it wouldn't have appeared in the news reports because it would have been allowed to be used in the court case.
Unfortunately it is unlikely that an offender gets caught the first time, that's in all walks of life, we can't allow people (Professional Pilots) to even consider that it is acceptable to report for duty under the influence of alcohol. You are Professional Pilots and you have responsibilities.
It was the pilot who put himself in that position and I have no sympathy for him, I sympathise for his family, but he had the ultimate responsibility for his actions.
I also congratulate his co-workers or whoever it was that reported him to the authorities.
We all know what can happen when fellow workers turn a blind eye to such problems, it can end in catastrophe.
Unfortunately it is unlikely that an offender gets caught the first time, that's in all walks of life, we can't allow people (Professional Pilots) to even consider that it is acceptable to report for duty under the influence of alcohol. You are Professional Pilots and you have responsibilities.
It was the pilot who put himself in that position and I have no sympathy for him, I sympathise for his family, but he had the ultimate responsibility for his actions.
I also congratulate his co-workers or whoever it was that reported him to the authorities.
We all know what can happen when fellow workers turn a blind eye to such problems, it can end in catastrophe.
Last edited by Mr D's; 2nd Apr 2009 at 17:32.
I also congratulate his co-workers or whoever it was that reported him to the authorities.
We all know what can happen when fellow workers turn a blind eye to such problems, it can end in catastrophe.
We all know what can happen when fellow workers turn a blind eye to such problems, it can end in catastrophe.
I do NOT condone professional flight crew disobeying the regulations but there is, as they say, more than one way of "skinning a cat". That said throughout my nearly 40 years in commercial aviation I have yet to witness a colleague who has turned up for work who is not fit for duty with respect to alcohol. However I have seen quite a few cases of flight crew being tired or fatigued when signing on for duty due to the permissiveness of the flight time limitation rules.
Finally Mr D's can you please quote me an instance where a "catastrophe" has occurred where it has been proven that one or more of the flight crew were over the permittted alcohol limits?
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr D
The reading from the screening device is only relevent is that it provides evidence to arrest, which has to be lawful, in order for the blood test to be admissable. The evidence will also have also said it was required by a Police Officer in uniform, again for the same reasons, it has to be administered by a Constable in uniform, or again, the requirement will not be lawful. Again, it is admissable evidence, but only relevent in establishing the lawful requirement of blood.
Wheelbarrow
When you think about it, airline pilots have a status of professional, and being in a position of great responsibility. As such a breach of law, which is safety related is going to be taken seriously. Those are strong aggrivating factors. What is there mitigation wise? Not much really, again, your position acts against you. Same as a Police officer who abuses his position can expect prison if convicted, and certainly a higher sentence than a member pf the public.
The reading from the screening device is only relevent is that it provides evidence to arrest, which has to be lawful, in order for the blood test to be admissable. The evidence will also have also said it was required by a Police Officer in uniform, again for the same reasons, it has to be administered by a Constable in uniform, or again, the requirement will not be lawful. Again, it is admissable evidence, but only relevent in establishing the lawful requirement of blood.
Wheelbarrow
When you think about it, airline pilots have a status of professional, and being in a position of great responsibility. As such a breach of law, which is safety related is going to be taken seriously. Those are strong aggrivating factors. What is there mitigation wise? Not much really, again, your position acts against you. Same as a Police officer who abuses his position can expect prison if convicted, and certainly a higher sentence than a member pf the public.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BusyB No that is not what I wrote at all, what I am saying is that two non-impaired pilots can, and do, make mistakes, without bringing alcohol into the equation.
bjcc The officer uses a breath test to assist him form the suspicion that the subject is over the prescribed limit, therefore providing him with his power to arrest. The defense would object to the amount being read out in court if it wasn't relevent as it shows how high the alcohol was at the time and not some time later when blood was taken, don't forget that the offence occured when he was at the controls of the aircraft not sometime later at a Police station when the blood sample was taken. I don't know if it was the case in this example but the home office can provide a back count to establish the alcohol level at the time of the offence.
fireflybob 1. In your world where 'we are all adults' why was there a need for the legislation to be introduced then?
2. I think you mistook 'can' for 'has', I wasn't suggesting that the results of any particular catastrophe were caused by excess alcohol (although a Russian one springs to mind), my point was that there are plenty of examples of poor CRM were the pilot in control makes mistakes and is not corrected by the other pilot, which can lead to them and alot of others dying.
bjcc The officer uses a breath test to assist him form the suspicion that the subject is over the prescribed limit, therefore providing him with his power to arrest. The defense would object to the amount being read out in court if it wasn't relevent as it shows how high the alcohol was at the time and not some time later when blood was taken, don't forget that the offence occured when he was at the controls of the aircraft not sometime later at a Police station when the blood sample was taken. I don't know if it was the case in this example but the home office can provide a back count to establish the alcohol level at the time of the offence.
fireflybob 1. In your world where 'we are all adults' why was there a need for the legislation to be introduced then?
2. I think you mistook 'can' for 'has', I wasn't suggesting that the results of any particular catastrophe were caused by excess alcohol (although a Russian one springs to mind), my point was that there are plenty of examples of poor CRM were the pilot in control makes mistakes and is not corrected by the other pilot, which can lead to them and alot of others dying.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Planet Earth for a short visit
Posts: 614
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surgeons, Judges, MPs and Magistrates, can these be added to the list ?
Because I know of individuals that have 'reported for work' above the drive limit, never mind the 'fly limit', in every one of these occupations. Never mind the journalists and politicians, who are the most prevalent offenders.
There are NO, ZERO incidents recorded of the Commercial flight crew causing an accident by being over the alcohol limit.
There is NO, ZERO way of recording how many people have died due to a Surgeon being piss3d in theatre. The BMA would not allow that sort of intensive observasion.
Re the Legal system and politicians, well what do you think? How many crap decisions get overturned in later years are there? What about the Judge who falls asleep in court? Does he/she get charged with contempt?
Of course not! A few days off to 'recover'
It's not just double standards, it's quadruple standards and more.
Because I know of individuals that have 'reported for work' above the drive limit, never mind the 'fly limit', in every one of these occupations. Never mind the journalists and politicians, who are the most prevalent offenders.
There are NO, ZERO incidents recorded of the Commercial flight crew causing an accident by being over the alcohol limit.
There is NO, ZERO way of recording how many people have died due to a Surgeon being piss3d in theatre. The BMA would not allow that sort of intensive observasion.
Re the Legal system and politicians, well what do you think? How many crap decisions get overturned in later years are there? What about the Judge who falls asleep in court? Does he/she get charged with contempt?
Of course not! A few days off to 'recover'
It's not just double standards, it's quadruple standards and more.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Geldrop
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I
I agree that our legal system's treatment of this chap was too harsh, especially as he didn't actually cause any harm to anyone. Compare this with the bankers who have brought our country to it's knees by their criminal negligence. What has the Government done to them? Nothing - except allow them to keep their obscene bonuses and pensions. Too easy to bash a pilot when he's down.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The 3 Valleys
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Professional pilots ' prerogative
I'm not sure if any others see it the same way but i feel that a number of people identifable as professional pilots are posting under the sub-heading..
" WTF, we're professional and know what we are doing, what the hell are the hoi-polloi doing daring to question us ? "
If you are so professional, why are you so upset when you ( generically) are punished within existing laws for a proven offence ?
The laws are there so why don't you obey them instead of bitching manically afterwards ( it seems that a PhD in this is awarded with every ATPL )
" WTF, we're professional and know what we are doing, what the hell are the hoi-polloi doing daring to question us ? "
If you are so professional, why are you so upset when you ( generically) are punished within existing laws for a proven offence ?
The laws are there so why don't you obey them instead of bitching manically afterwards ( it seems that a PhD in this is awarded with every ATPL )
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Maun, Botswana
Age: 37
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dont know if it has been said or not, I got bored of reading the same arguements over and over.
But the simple question is.
Why drink and fly in the first place? Why not just have a Coke? or Juice before you go flying? Booze isnt the be all and end all of life.
Pilots are meant to be intelligent people, so why put years of hard work at risk for a drink?
But the simple question is.
Why drink and fly in the first place? Why not just have a Coke? or Juice before you go flying? Booze isnt the be all and end all of life.
Pilots are meant to be intelligent people, so why put years of hard work at risk for a drink?
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alpine Skier
Spot On!
If you think that the moaning is excessive concerning the unfit to fly pilot in this case, look at what happens when a serviceable, virtually new aircraft is crashed by pilots whom flew it, full of passengers, into the sea!
By sheer luck, no one was killed, the aircraft was a write off, yet the main opinion of the pilots whom post is that it is not the fault of the pilots that they flew into the sea!
AAIB Bulletin
The notion of professional responsibility and accountability appears to be unknown!
If you think that the moaning is excessive concerning the unfit to fly pilot in this case, look at what happens when a serviceable, virtually new aircraft is crashed by pilots whom flew it, full of passengers, into the sea!
By sheer luck, no one was killed, the aircraft was a write off, yet the main opinion of the pilots whom post is that it is not the fault of the pilots that they flew into the sea!
AAIB Bulletin
The notion of professional responsibility and accountability appears to be unknown!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Southern Turkey
Age: 82
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lilflyboy262
Precisely. Anyone who does has a drinking problem, a serious problem if they do it repeatedly. Anyone who allows someone do do it is enabling their destructive behaviour and not doing them any favours. Well meaning people like that enabled me to practice my alcoholism as a pilot for almost 30 years until things got bad enough for me to do something about my problem. I did, and managed to enjoy 12 sober years until my retirement, in which time I regained the management position I'd had to resign through an admin error I made 'sober' between drinking bouts.
Alcohol, like many other drugs (e.g. pain-killers), affects judgement - a pilot may be able to sit down and fly very well with a fair amount on board, but a very small amount will always affect his judgement. I'd like to know how many CFIT or fuel related accidents, for example, could have been attributed to a captain's impaired judgement - I don't suppose we'll ever know, it's not easy to blood test a charred corpse.
Why drink and fly in the first place? Why not just have a Coke? or Juice before you go flying? Booze isnt the be all and end all of life.
Pilots are meant to be intelligent people, so why put years of hard work at risk for a drink?
Pilots are meant to be intelligent people, so why put years of hard work at risk for a drink?
Alcohol, like many other drugs (e.g. pain-killers), affects judgement - a pilot may be able to sit down and fly very well with a fair amount on board, but a very small amount will always affect his judgement. I'd like to know how many CFIT or fuel related accidents, for example, could have been attributed to a captain's impaired judgement - I don't suppose we'll ever know, it's not easy to blood test a charred corpse.
Last edited by rodthesod; 4th Apr 2009 at 10:22. Reason: typo
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: pluto
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The Department has introduced a requirement for a criminal record check for holders of permanent restricted zone (RZ) passes. The purpose of these checks is to increase security at UK airports, so hindering terrorist activity and discouraging links between airport employees and crime."
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Valley Where the Thames Runs Softly
Age: 77
Posts: 556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the record, the six month sentence will mean in practice 90 days (after automatic 50% remission) less 18 days early release (because the prisons are full) making 72 days at most. Then there could be a Home Detention Curfew on a tag (Prisons full again) or the Governor can exercise discretion to let him out before the end of the sentence. It's such a short stretch that he may not be transferred to an open prison, where the locks are to keep intruders out rather then the prisoners in.