Pilot arrested in EHAM.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is your reference for the .02 limit? As far as I know, US regulations only address the .04 limit.
§ 91.17 - Alcohol or drugs.
(a) No person may act or attempt to act as a crewmember of a civil aircraft --
(1) Within 8 hours after the consumption of any alcoholic beverage;
(2) While under the influence of alcohol;
(3) While using any drug that affects the person's faculties in any way contrary to safety; or
(4) While having .04 percent by weight or more alcohol in the blood.
(a) No person may act or attempt to act as a crewmember of a civil aircraft --
(1) Within 8 hours after the consumption of any alcoholic beverage;
(2) While under the influence of alcohol;
(3) While using any drug that affects the person's faculties in any way contrary to safety; or
(4) While having .04 percent by weight or more alcohol in the blood.
§ 120.37 Misuse of alcohol.
(a) General. This section applies to covered employees who perform a function listed in subpart F of this part for a certificate holder. For the purpose of this section, an individual who meets the definition of covered employee in subpart F of this part is considered to be performing the function for the certificate holder.
(b) Alcohol concentration. No covered employee shall report for duty or remain on duty requiring the performance of safety-sensitive functions while having an alcohol concentration of 0.04 or greater. No certificate holder having actual knowledge that an employee has an alcohol concentration of 0.04 or greater shall permit the employee to perform or continue to perform safety-sensitive functions.
(a) General. This section applies to covered employees who perform a function listed in subpart F of this part for a certificate holder. For the purpose of this section, an individual who meets the definition of covered employee in subpart F of this part is considered to be performing the function for the certificate holder.
(b) Alcohol concentration. No covered employee shall report for duty or remain on duty requiring the performance of safety-sensitive functions while having an alcohol concentration of 0.04 or greater. No certificate holder having actual knowledge that an employee has an alcohol concentration of 0.04 or greater shall permit the employee to perform or continue to perform safety-sensitive functions.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is your reference for the .02 limit? As far as I know, US regulations only address the .04 limit.
(ii) Notwithstanding the absence of a reasonable suspicion alcohol test under this section, no covered employee shall report for duty or remain on duty requiring the performance of safety-sensitive functions while the employee is under the influence of, or impaired by, alcohol, as shown by the behavioral, speech, or performance indicators of alcohol misuse, nor shall an employer permit the covered employee to perform or continue to perform safety-sensitive functions until:
(A) An alcohol test is administered and the employee's alcohol concentration measures less than 0.02 …
In other words, a pilot can be immediately removed from flying status if he has a BAC of 0.02 or more. He hasn't necessarily violated the FARs unless he has reached 0.04, but if he is above 0.02, his employer is obligated to relieve him and keep him off flying status until his BAC drops below 0.02, or until eight hours have elapsed.
Since being unable to fly costs the airline a fortune, it is perfectly justified in adopting a formal policy of imposing sanctions on pilots who are found to be at 0.02 or above, irrespective of impairment or FAR violations.
Note also that the text mentions impairment. If a pilot is found to be impaired, he must also be relieved of flying duties, even if his BAC is below 0.02.
Why is it so difficult? Anyone working in Aviation should know that he has to choose between the booze and his job. Period. Everyone knows it, still many think that one glass can't hurt... WRONG. 8 hours is the "limit" but that won't keep anyone safe. 24 hours is it for me ever since I started driving. Meaning that I usually have a few drinks during my holidays, if I stay someplace where I don't touch a car, let alone an airplane.
Anthony G is right, there is no excuse. Everyone knows it and far too many people are bs'ing themselfs into believing that they can dodge the system. In the end, they only cheat themselfs.
Anthony G is right, there is no excuse. Everyone knows it and far too many people are bs'ing themselfs into believing that they can dodge the system. In the end, they only cheat themselfs.
Person Of Interest
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Keystone Heights, Florida
Age: 68
Posts: 842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AnthonyGA...I guess the GA really gives you up...the .02 is normally the limit most Airlines go by in their Ops Manuals...been beaten to death on the Prune...
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
0 % Limit
Why not having a 0% then the problem would be clear. This chap really had bad luck being .oo3 above the limit, so small it cannot even be measured with a breathalyzer (the tolerance is about 15%). Its just like in the car, 0.5% in Europe, however this does not really say anything about your ability to drive. Let's say you blow 0.053% and your drivers license is gone.
Another strange thing. Why is it that always those American pilots from Legacy carriers get caught? Aren't there even more flights on all the lowcosts, never heard any of those getting caught. I don't think that the Yanks are the bigger boozers than the Brits.
Another strange thing. Why is it that always those American pilots from Legacy carriers get caught? Aren't there even more flights on all the lowcosts, never heard any of those getting caught. I don't think that the Yanks are the bigger boozers than the Brits.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: the twilight zone
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think local airport personnel would be less likely to report local crews as opposed to foreign crews. There should be some sort of penalization if someone reports a crewmember who in the end turns out to have been falsely accused.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sec
'There should be some sort of penalization if someone reports a crewmember who in the end turns out to have been falsely accused.'
It seems to be a case of finding the happy medium here. Your suggestion goes against the whole aviation ethos of telling someone if you think something is wrong.
I would suggest it is akin it to the sacking of any driver who strikes an aircraft on the ground, drivers stop saying 'I think I might of'.
That said, the jobsworths do need to understand, the smell of booze or the suspicion of drinking is not there to be used as revenge after crossed words at Security, Duty Free etc etc.
Bored
It seems to be a case of finding the happy medium here. Your suggestion goes against the whole aviation ethos of telling someone if you think something is wrong.
I would suggest it is akin it to the sacking of any driver who strikes an aircraft on the ground, drivers stop saying 'I think I might of'.
That said, the jobsworths do need to understand, the smell of booze or the suspicion of drinking is not there to be used as revenge after crossed words at Security, Duty Free etc etc.
Bored
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sec
Or the Bellhop, Hotel Receptionist, Barman, Manager or Waitress, Chambermaid, Taxi Driver will also have one up on you if you p#ss him/her off. They will all know your flight number......................... It happens mate.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Patty747400
Granted, mines not a big shiny747400 like yours, but a FR 737 where we work really hard. Maybe one day I will be a real pilot like you.
Flyburg
Like scrubby, didn't understand your point either.. Let me try to put my point across with respect to these endless discussions on whether we're allowed to deviate from doing the right thing when it comes to our profession (and endless these discussions will be). If I ever end up having having twelve pints the night before my next flight, I would consider myself a sad individual who's better of spending the rest of his life in the 'cafe op de hoek' rather than trying to fly innocent passengers anywhere. Your 777 captain/colleauge should be ashamed for even going to court with a sour excuse of not drinking his working life again. It's the same as saying I will never look at another women's ass again after you have cheated your whole career on your wife. Frikkin' B&*s*tt.
What's the point in defending these people that put other peoples lives at risk? Out. Go away. Bugger off. Preferably with a good hard kick up the arse. Go find a job somewhere else, preferebly one without responsibility for other people's lives. And if you have a problem. Deal with it before it is too late.
I understand that it's not easy for a non pilot to understand these matters. That's why professional pilots many times "defend" a pilot in a situation like this.
"according to the dutch papers it would seem that soullimbo has got his facts right. really an amazing feat isn't it. party all night, show up drunk for work and then receive a very generous sum for doing so! whats your problem flyburg? sounds like a common case of wooden shoes, wooden heads, wooden listen to me!"
Like scrubby, didn't understand your point either.. Let me try to put my point across with respect to these endless discussions on whether we're allowed to deviate from doing the right thing when it comes to our profession (and endless these discussions will be). If I ever end up having having twelve pints the night before my next flight, I would consider myself a sad individual who's better of spending the rest of his life in the 'cafe op de hoek' rather than trying to fly innocent passengers anywhere. Your 777 captain/colleauge should be ashamed for even going to court with a sour excuse of not drinking his working life again. It's the same as saying I will never look at another women's ass again after you have cheated your whole career on your wife. Frikkin' B&*s*tt.
What's the point in defending these people that put other peoples lives at risk? Out. Go away. Bugger off. Preferably with a good hard kick up the arse. Go find a job somewhere else, preferebly one without responsibility for other people's lives. And if you have a problem. Deal with it before it is too late.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A lot of blabla about blood alcohol levels while every professional in this industry knows the real problem is fatigue, which after a still legal schedule induces effects amounting to 8 times the amount of alcohol we are talking about here.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
soullimbo
Congratulations on finding your first flying job.
I'm pleased for you, especially after reading not long ago that you had given up hope of ever finding a job and had abandoned your ambition to become a professional pilot.
I'm surprised you didn't understand Flyburg's post. You made a gratuitously provocative post which contained a number of allegations concerning KLM (post #24) and Flyburg corrected you (post #32). His response was very clear.
He also appeared to be suggesting that you have a chip on your shoulder about KLM. You may deny that, but it's certainly an impression I've gained from your various references to KLM in previous posts in other threads.
I can, of course, understand that you would like to have got a position with your national carrier but, for whatever reason, that wasn't to be. Now that you've found a job with Ryanair perhaps it's time to put previous disappointments behind you and concentrate on making a success of what you've got.
You might also want to guard against replacing one chip with another:
Congratulations on finding your first flying job.
I'm pleased for you, especially after reading not long ago that you had given up hope of ever finding a job and had abandoned your ambition to become a professional pilot.I'm surprised you didn't understand Flyburg's post. You made a gratuitously provocative post which contained a number of allegations concerning KLM (post #24) and Flyburg corrected you (post #32). His response was very clear.
He also appeared to be suggesting that you have a chip on your shoulder about KLM. You may deny that, but it's certainly an impression I've gained from your various references to KLM in previous posts in other threads.
I can, of course, understand that you would like to have got a position with your national carrier but, for whatever reason, that wasn't to be. Now that you've found a job with Ryanair perhaps it's time to put previous disappointments behind you and concentrate on making a success of what you've got.
You might also want to guard against replacing one chip with another:
Granted, mines not a big shiny747400 like yours, but a FR 737 where we work really hard. Maybe one day I will be a real pilot like you.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<< As soon as you die and decomposition sets in, one byproduct is alcohol. So I wonder if it's even possible to determine whether alcohol in a body has come from drinking or decomposition. >>
Apparently it is possible.
On December 17, 1977, United Airlines cargo flight 2860 (DC-8F) flew from San Francisco, California to Salt Lake City, Utah (KSLC). Approaching KSLC they experienced electrical problems, were given holding instructions at their request and crashed into some local area mountains. It took some time (several days?) before rescuers reached the site.
Alcohol was found in the S/O's (flight engineer) remains and it looked rather bad. Some time later it was determined that the alcohol was from decomposition.
Apparently it is possible.
On December 17, 1977, United Airlines cargo flight 2860 (DC-8F) flew from San Francisco, California to Salt Lake City, Utah (KSLC). Approaching KSLC they experienced electrical problems, were given holding instructions at their request and crashed into some local area mountains. It took some time (several days?) before rescuers reached the site.
Alcohol was found in the S/O's (flight engineer) remains and it looked rather bad. Some time later it was determined that the alcohol was from decomposition.
Looking through this thread I find that a pilot was breathalysed and found to be microscopically over the JAR limit.
I would be interested to know if there was a standard check in EHAM, at the report point, to check alcohol levels of flight crew passing through. I have never been subjected to such a check at any European departure point, as foreign operator crew.This only ever happened at my point of departure from home base, otherwise it was reliance on self regulation.
There is some suggestion that the pilot, subject of this thread, was reported by a third party. I would believe that anyone with a blood alcohol level up to 0.04 would appear, in all respects, to be perfectly competent and sober to any observer. That would include behaviour, response, smell, etc. I suspect an ulterior motive at work here and feel sorry for the pilot implicated.
In my country there is a tolerance level for speeding offences in a vehicle. If the limit is 30, there is a tolerance to 33, a 'warning' to 36 and a fine above that. A plus or minus tolerance on any limit is a practical thing and a complete cut-off above that ( lets say 36 for speeding and 0.04 for alcohol) entirely sensible.
No-one at 0.02 - 0.04 is 'drunk' by any standard, but any violation of the 0.02 limit ensures, in the eyes of the voracious Press, that you are a 'drunk pilot'
I would be interested to know if there was a standard check in EHAM, at the report point, to check alcohol levels of flight crew passing through. I have never been subjected to such a check at any European departure point, as foreign operator crew.This only ever happened at my point of departure from home base, otherwise it was reliance on self regulation.
There is some suggestion that the pilot, subject of this thread, was reported by a third party. I would believe that anyone with a blood alcohol level up to 0.04 would appear, in all respects, to be perfectly competent and sober to any observer. That would include behaviour, response, smell, etc. I suspect an ulterior motive at work here and feel sorry for the pilot implicated.
In my country there is a tolerance level for speeding offences in a vehicle. If the limit is 30, there is a tolerance to 33, a 'warning' to 36 and a fine above that. A plus or minus tolerance on any limit is a practical thing and a complete cut-off above that ( lets say 36 for speeding and 0.04 for alcohol) entirely sensible.
No-one at 0.02 - 0.04 is 'drunk' by any standard, but any violation of the 0.02 limit ensures, in the eyes of the voracious Press, that you are a 'drunk pilot'
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: EU
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
777fly,
What should Police do when someone is reported to have been drinking? Just let him fly?
He was also found to be above the limit, period.
But he is not treated as a drunk pilot by the authorities; he is "only" fined, and not arrested and prosecuted for endangering lives as would be expected for a really drunk pilot.
I think you could consider the fine a warning. The most he will worry about is how his company will act.
Checks are random and rare, but there was one a few weeks ago at the crewcenter for home- and foreign pilots alike (result: no offenders).
What should Police do when someone is reported to have been drinking? Just let him fly?
He was also found to be above the limit, period.
But he is not treated as a drunk pilot by the authorities; he is "only" fined, and not arrested and prosecuted for endangering lives as would be expected for a really drunk pilot.
I think you could consider the fine a warning. The most he will worry about is how his company will act.
I would be interested to know if there was a standard check in EHAM
Last edited by golfyankeesierra; 18th Sep 2010 at 16:40.
Why not having a 0% then the problem would be clear. This chap really had bad luck being .oo3 above the limit, so small it cannot even be measured with a breathalyzer (the tolerance is about 15%).
As to if the pilot had used mouthwash, the US testing protocols require if there is a positive test, the test is repeated in 15 minutes for the record. Meanwhile the unit is checked. The idea is if the positive test value was caused by the use of mouthwash, the alcohol will be exhausted in 15 minutes however if the alcohol is in the bloodstream it will continue to be exhaled. I have no idea how the Dutch do their testing.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Asia
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mouth Wash / Alcohol
A neighbor back home, who is in law enforcement breathalyze himself while being bored on duty. He was shocked to discover he was over the limit. The only alcohol that was close to his lips the preceding 48 hours was a big dose of mouth wash. Can the alcohol in mouth wash show up in a breathalyzer?
The mouth wash was used 30 minutes before he conducted the test on himself.
The mouth wash was used 30 minutes before he conducted the test on himself.
Last edited by Beta Light; 18th Sep 2010 at 18:39.