America West crew arrested @ MIA (Update - Sentences)
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alpha Leader,
Promise me you'll stay in China.
This snitching has got to stop.I dont condone what these two pilots did and they'll pay big time.If a report hadnt been made by the security personnel,it was really up to the lead FA to diffuse the situation,as both pilots were equally intoxicated.The accepted rule is to offer an escape clause to the offender(s) along the lines of "I am taking my crew back to the terminal.I will report both of you as no-shows so I suggest you both make yourself scarce.Next time I wont hesitate in making a report.Good day Captain."
Instead we live in a world where everybody is busy filing reports on everybody else.FA's on flt deck..ramp rats on flt deck..security personnel(if thats the right word for some of these guys) on flt deck...and flt deck too..on each other(worst case of all).If you have a problem,work the problem face to face like a man.
This kind of bs never used to happen..I never had to file a report on anybody in 35 years of flying.
Promise me you'll stay in China.
This snitching has got to stop.I dont condone what these two pilots did and they'll pay big time.If a report hadnt been made by the security personnel,it was really up to the lead FA to diffuse the situation,as both pilots were equally intoxicated.The accepted rule is to offer an escape clause to the offender(s) along the lines of "I am taking my crew back to the terminal.I will report both of you as no-shows so I suggest you both make yourself scarce.Next time I wont hesitate in making a report.Good day Captain."
Instead we live in a world where everybody is busy filing reports on everybody else.FA's on flt deck..ramp rats on flt deck..security personnel(if thats the right word for some of these guys) on flt deck...and flt deck too..on each other(worst case of all).If you have a problem,work the problem face to face like a man.
This kind of bs never used to happen..I never had to file a report on anybody in 35 years of flying.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Montreal
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I obviously see a big difference between having a ciggie on the flight deck and showing up plowed. For the record, I flew a fuel tanker for over a year with a captain whom I sincerely respect, and who also managed to smoke two in a 36min leg. I had no problem with it, and there was just the two of us (and 9200L of unleaded). I was more interested in making a statement on the whole mentality that defends a clear violation (don't fire him for the first offence, and hang the FA for reporting him) on one hand and advocates rectal violation as a punishment for the other.
To me, if you cross the line and decide to take the chance, you must face the consequences. My Capt could have been fired for smoking (probably could have blown us sky high too) but he asked first, and then trusted me to shut up about it. Yes I would have been a royal @ss to report him after saying "go ahead" but that is the chance he took.
Many suggest that the crew should have been kindly nudged into taking a sick day after showing up wasted. That would have been nice for sure. However, an awful lot of people would see the very act of showing up as being intent enough to commit reckless endangerment of life. A lot of those people would be the old blue haired Jesus freak types that call themselves "the moral majority" down in the South. They would suggest jail terms and some serious remedial Bible schoolin' as punishment for those fine young citizens even touching a bottle of Lucifer's brew in the first place. Look at life from their (sanitized and puritan) way of thinking--even if you don't like it. To many the choice is clear--fry those guys. Or maybe the rent-a-cop watched somebody get squished by a pickup truck full of drunk rednecks and had a nasty flashback, who knows?
I would have given them the nudge towards a little extra rest myself, but because they didn't breathe on me before somebody else, they are going to have to pay for their actions.
To me, if you cross the line and decide to take the chance, you must face the consequences. My Capt could have been fired for smoking (probably could have blown us sky high too) but he asked first, and then trusted me to shut up about it. Yes I would have been a royal @ss to report him after saying "go ahead" but that is the chance he took.
Many suggest that the crew should have been kindly nudged into taking a sick day after showing up wasted. That would have been nice for sure. However, an awful lot of people would see the very act of showing up as being intent enough to commit reckless endangerment of life. A lot of those people would be the old blue haired Jesus freak types that call themselves "the moral majority" down in the South. They would suggest jail terms and some serious remedial Bible schoolin' as punishment for those fine young citizens even touching a bottle of Lucifer's brew in the first place. Look at life from their (sanitized and puritan) way of thinking--even if you don't like it. To many the choice is clear--fry those guys. Or maybe the rent-a-cop watched somebody get squished by a pickup truck full of drunk rednecks and had a nasty flashback, who knows?
I would have given them the nudge towards a little extra rest myself, but because they didn't breathe on me before somebody else, they are going to have to pay for their actions.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Kagerplassen
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Constable... My guess is your post is more based on personal frustration than on the actual affair with the two AW-pilots.
I most sincerely hope, granted they indeed were under influence, they will be convicted, but I don't wish anyone to be (and I quote) <<getting @ss-slammed and throat-f*cked by every "Crip", "Blood", "Bandito" and and "La Eme" member drug-dealer/outlaw/scumbag type the Florida prison system has to offer as potential cell-mate material>> against their own will.
What strikes me in this case, is that most alcohol-prevention-programs usually are based on 1 of the two being under influence; both pilots at the same time is surprising to me and to my best knowledge, unheard of before.
This affair is not only damaging for America West, it damages all of us. I hope we won't get the same breathalizer-madness as we have security-madness now as pilots, where we have to give of our nailclipper to get it shredded, but remain with our two hands, which both are very able of crashing an airplane. I don't like to be treated as under criminal investigation just for going to work.
BTW wouldn't a breathalizer not be a good idea in the OR in an hospital? In an ATC-unit? etc.
P77
I most sincerely hope, granted they indeed were under influence, they will be convicted, but I don't wish anyone to be (and I quote) <<getting @ss-slammed and throat-f*cked by every "Crip", "Blood", "Bandito" and and "La Eme" member drug-dealer/outlaw/scumbag type the Florida prison system has to offer as potential cell-mate material>> against their own will.
What strikes me in this case, is that most alcohol-prevention-programs usually are based on 1 of the two being under influence; both pilots at the same time is surprising to me and to my best knowledge, unheard of before.
This affair is not only damaging for America West, it damages all of us. I hope we won't get the same breathalizer-madness as we have security-madness now as pilots, where we have to give of our nailclipper to get it shredded, but remain with our two hands, which both are very able of crashing an airplane. I don't like to be treated as under criminal investigation just for going to work.
BTW wouldn't a breathalizer not be a good idea in the OR in an hospital? In an ATC-unit? etc.
P77
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Breathalyser/Breathaliser - Question.
If I were asked to take a roadside test I understand that they fit a totally clean mouthpiece, BUT, what if the previous "Blower" was way over the limit, would this not leave a deposit on the sensors inside that would contaminate my breath sample?
Tower Dog: Many US pilots might remember this from several years ago. While boarding a jet at Detroit, MI, a lady either suspected alcohol consumption by smelling something on the Captain's breath, or suspected such by his appearance or even possibly bloodshot eyes-possibly a combination of these. She claimed to have had experience in either alcohol treatment or a related job. This "expert" insisted in a clear voice that the Captain was 'under the influence' in front of other passengers, either at the gate, on the jetway or on the plane.
The lady was so adament that the pilot decided to find airport personnel who were qualified to give him a breathalyser or blood test. This only caused a one or two-hour departure delay. Her name and her Detroit suburb were immediately published in the Detroit "Free Press" newspaper.
Yesterday the other pilot told me that if a passenger walks by us on the plane or during boarding and makes a wise crack about drinking, that he will offer to prove his innocence, which would probably result in a serious delay. I won't hesitate to respond in the same way.
Maybe this is why no passengers brought up the subject to us in the last two days. Such comments often come from nervous fliers. Two well-known tv comedians (Jay Leno is reportedly one) who have been known to beat this topic to death are known to be very nervous fliers.
"Go ahead, make my day".
The lady was so adament that the pilot decided to find airport personnel who were qualified to give him a breathalyser or blood test. This only caused a one or two-hour departure delay. Her name and her Detroit suburb were immediately published in the Detroit "Free Press" newspaper.
Yesterday the other pilot told me that if a passenger walks by us on the plane or during boarding and makes a wise crack about drinking, that he will offer to prove his innocence, which would probably result in a serious delay. I won't hesitate to respond in the same way.
Maybe this is why no passengers brought up the subject to us in the last two days. Such comments often come from nervous fliers. Two well-known tv comedians (Jay Leno is reportedly one) who have been known to beat this topic to death are known to be very nervous fliers.
"Go ahead, make my day".
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: 38N
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blue Eagle - The portable breath analyzer technology I loosely described earlier - using tin-oxide sensor technology - actually has the sensor running at a fairly high temperature when in use. The heat has the effect of reversing - at a known rate - the chemical combination of sensed molecules which may have accumulated on the sensor surface... those organic molecules are being continuously boiled off, in effect. So the sensors cleanse themselves after a period of operation in neutral air.
Any reasonably designed instrument will start by 'normalizing' the sensor to a baseline value before the new sample gasses are introduced. This should, in principle, erase the effects of any and all prior tests, so each new test should be fair, no matter how flammable the previous customer may have been..
Notwithstanding that, portable instruments of any sort are much more likely to be out of calibration due to handling damage, temperature extremes when stored in unshaded vehicles, etcetera. Sensors can also be 'poisoned' - like catalytic converters on cars - by exposure to certain substances which might be encountered in the highway environment.
If one's career is on the line, it is likely worth the effort to note the id or serial number of the testing instrument at the time of test, and then have the authorities dig up the maintenance and calibration history. Paying for recalibration or calibration test by an independent lab might be a good investment also. With highest quality devices, 5 or ten percent might be out of calibration at any point in time. With cheaper, older ones, perhaps as much as 50 percent of them could be.
My impression is that most authorities appreciate these fallibilities. They use the instruments as a means to quantify violations by clearly over the limit 'clients', but might well be reluctant to fight over the small points of a test that reports a value right at the lower statutory limit. With some tact and alertness to detail, this result might be accomplished even at roadside.
I hope I never personally have to put this theory to the test.
Any reasonably designed instrument will start by 'normalizing' the sensor to a baseline value before the new sample gasses are introduced. This should, in principle, erase the effects of any and all prior tests, so each new test should be fair, no matter how flammable the previous customer may have been..
Notwithstanding that, portable instruments of any sort are much more likely to be out of calibration due to handling damage, temperature extremes when stored in unshaded vehicles, etcetera. Sensors can also be 'poisoned' - like catalytic converters on cars - by exposure to certain substances which might be encountered in the highway environment.
If one's career is on the line, it is likely worth the effort to note the id or serial number of the testing instrument at the time of test, and then have the authorities dig up the maintenance and calibration history. Paying for recalibration or calibration test by an independent lab might be a good investment also. With highest quality devices, 5 or ten percent might be out of calibration at any point in time. With cheaper, older ones, perhaps as much as 50 percent of them could be.
My impression is that most authorities appreciate these fallibilities. They use the instruments as a means to quantify violations by clearly over the limit 'clients', but might well be reluctant to fight over the small points of a test that reports a value right at the lower statutory limit. With some tact and alertness to detail, this result might be accomplished even at roadside.
I hope I never personally have to put this theory to the test.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Out West
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good argument about no-smoking vs no-drinking.
ARCNIZ
America West crew arrested @ MIA
whatever happen'd to innocent until proven guilty?? don't believe
everything you hear via the media .Just remember it could be any one of us in the limelight next time.until such time as they are proven guilty they deserve our support or at least our silence!!!
everything you hear via the media .Just remember it could be any one of us in the limelight next time.until such time as they are proven guilty they deserve our support or at least our silence!!!
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Montreal
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I never said that I would ever LET these guys go flying while bombed! I just said that the first course of action I would take would be to make a strong "suggestion" that they take a 24hr sabbatical. If they insisted--I would be at the front of the line to go to a higher authority.
I've been forced into this situation before. As a supervisor, I saw a serious transgression taking place. I kindly suggested that the action be stopped as I felt it was seriously out of the area of "discussable issues" (not booze, but serious threat to flight safety and the company's O.C.). When I was told to go and fornicate myself for the third time, I said "Fine" and went to MY boss and told the story. I even offered to apologize if I was out of line in my judgement. The result was obvious. The flight was stopped. The offender took two weeks off and didn't speak to me for about a year, but in the end he calmed down and pulled in his horns.
Like I said before; it have been NICE if the rent-a-cop had made a friendly suggestion, but considering the fact that the Capt involved had given him a whole lot of grief over the coffee, and the possibility that he had problem with drinking and driving, I can certainly see why he just didn't bother.
I've been forced into this situation before. As a supervisor, I saw a serious transgression taking place. I kindly suggested that the action be stopped as I felt it was seriously out of the area of "discussable issues" (not booze, but serious threat to flight safety and the company's O.C.). When I was told to go and fornicate myself for the third time, I said "Fine" and went to MY boss and told the story. I even offered to apologize if I was out of line in my judgement. The result was obvious. The flight was stopped. The offender took two weeks off and didn't speak to me for about a year, but in the end he calmed down and pulled in his horns.
Like I said before; it have been NICE if the rent-a-cop had made a friendly suggestion, but considering the fact that the Capt involved had given him a whole lot of grief over the coffee, and the possibility that he had problem with drinking and driving, I can certainly see why he just didn't bother.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EM has a valid point IMHO (as in "back to the hotac guys, come back later) BUT...to have engaged in an argument with the "security screeners" was a BAD idea... and the story is now known by all.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: US
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bi focal:
Let's assume that a lot of information reported by media is either fabricated or exaggerated, such the argument over coffee, alcoholic breath smelt by the security guard, etc. There are, however, elements in this story that are beyond doubt.
1) The 2 pilots were arrested by police. They were shown in handcuffs on TV. No fabrication there. "Renta-cops" don't have arrest power.
2) The police would not have arrested them unless the pilots blew above a legally mandated limit on the breathlyzer test and the said test was administered by police.
That exactly such a sequence of event occurred at MIA is irrefutable. The 2 guys drank and did not allow enough time to let alcohol pass through the body. They exercised poor judgement, period. They do not deserve any leniency. They deserve to be treated guilty until proven innocent, just as all the drunk drivers who got pulled over and failed the sobriety test.
Let's assume that a lot of information reported by media is either fabricated or exaggerated, such the argument over coffee, alcoholic breath smelt by the security guard, etc. There are, however, elements in this story that are beyond doubt.
1) The 2 pilots were arrested by police. They were shown in handcuffs on TV. No fabrication there. "Renta-cops" don't have arrest power.
2) The police would not have arrested them unless the pilots blew above a legally mandated limit on the breathlyzer test and the said test was administered by police.
That exactly such a sequence of event occurred at MIA is irrefutable. The 2 guys drank and did not allow enough time to let alcohol pass through the body. They exercised poor judgement, period. They do not deserve any leniency. They deserve to be treated guilty until proven innocent, just as all the drunk drivers who got pulled over and failed the sobriety test.
