BA Pilot arrested in ARN ???

[Pandora]

Alcohol is byproduct of normal metabolism. At the moment the Atkins diet, consisting of high protein content but no carbohydrate, and popularised by various Hollywood celebs including Jennifer Aniston, is very popular. If you remain on this diet for a long time you produce a higher amount of ketone bodies which result in smelly breath and the possibility that you may test positive on a breath test. If you have certain undiagnosed medical conditions you may test positive. I will investigate these further tomorrow since my degree was a while ago, but tonight will drink wine because I will not have the opportunity for another 2 weeks.

[Bengt Engel]

hello everyone!

no news on the blood test yet huh?

well, lets not judge him just yet....

regarding the alcohol level in your blood and fatigue...

lets say Mr Engel gets sh!te faced on saturday night, a few long island's under his belt....I might be legally fit to fly say, around 17.00 hours the next day and I might be able to drive my car to work but if some tricky situation arises will I be able to cope with it? we all know the way we feel the day after, so I might have a legal limit but I'm still fatigued...???

and yada yada yada.

BTW, good posts by Danny and FFF, DON'T DO IT...


and bumblebee, I feel so sorry for you not being able to go to the bank on the lunch hour, have you ever stopped to think about if that office guy might not feel so lucky...maybe you could change....

[Hotel Charlie]

Bengt Engel,

What are you trying to say?

[Flip Flop Flyer]

Bumblebee

In short, your post seemed to indicate that you feel entitled to enjoying the same possibilites as non-pilots working 9-to-5, i.e. go to the pub after work and finish off a few pints or 10.

In my opinion that is not an option if you have to work the next day, not as a pilot, train driver, ATCO, doctor etc. Some occupations leave you disadvantaged in some respects, being a pilot is one of them. However, as I posted earlier, there are other advantages that your regular 9-to-5 bloke doesn't have.

I may very well have misunderstood you, if so you have my apologies.

[Bumblebee]

FFF

In short, your post seemed to indicate that you feel entitled to enjoying the same possibilites as non-pilots working 9-to-5, i.e. go to the pub after work and finish off a few pints or 10.

Sorry i think you misinterpreted, or maybe I was a bit vague? I was just trying to illustrate that pilots' working lives are very far removed from the way 95% of other people live.

Personally, I certainly do not feel entitled to go out on the **** any night I want to....and that is not what i meant.......
As it stands, the 0.2promille limit prevents one from having even just one or two beers - (we are not talking about 10...) or glasses of wine with dinner the evening before, without putting one's licence and career at risk.

It's all very well having very restrictive regulations - (we are talking about a limitation that is 25% of the UK drink-drive limit). I am quite happy to accept them, but if we are to have them they have to be looked at in context. Issues such as proposed increases in duty hours limitations are far more serious. The first place those hours will come from are rest periods...I find that ironic.

What is needed is a sensible balance- something that we presently do not have.

rgds Bumblebee

Bengt Engel, errrr mate.......I think you totally missed the point. Hejdo

[M.Mouse]

lets say Mr Engel gets sh!te faced on saturday night, a few long island's under his belt

Not what anybody is advocating.

Absurd, puritanical limits are completely unnecessary.

The world is in the grip of faceless bureaucrats and self-serving politicians legislating to take more and more control of our lives, aided by the sensationalist gutter press and television quoting uninformed, ill-educated 'public opinion'.

I have no argument if a real issue is being addressed in a rational, sensible manner.

Like so many issues today that is not the case. We have absurd legislation that achieves nothing but does cause much disquiet and difficulty for the average law and rule abiding individual.

I am sick of it.

The pious, unverifiable and sweeping assertions evident on this thread are evidence of the malais afflicting today's society.

[Tevoro]

Was trolling for informed technical info on naturally occurring alcohol and found this which stopped me dead.
To me it seems to say that not only fruit but also aspartame used as a sugar replacement is a potential licence loser.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It has been shown that the ingestion of a moderate amount of fruit such as a 3-5 apples or oranges causes approximately 0.75 grams of methanol to be released into the body (Lindinger 1997). Such a daily intake throughout the day (or equivalent amount from juices) is approximately equivalent to the amount of methanol absorption seen in workplace exposure that has lead to the development of methanol toxicity symptoms (Frederick 1984, Kingsley 1954-55, Kavet 1990). In other words it is approximately equivalent to working five days per week in air with a methanol concentration of 260 mg/m3. This methanol air concentration is higher than found in a methanol-laden chemical plant (120 mg/m3) (Heinrich 1982) and a methanol-laden printing shop (~140 mg/m3) (Baumann 1979).
Absorbed Methanol From 1.5 kg Fruit (or juice equiv) During Day

750 mg of methanol (from fruit) * 7 days / 70 kg
= 75 mg/kg/week of methanol absorption.
Absorbed Methanol From 260 mg/m3 Air Exposure During Workweek

The formula used to calculate methanol inhaled in the
Baumann (1979) study was discussed by Kavet (1990):
(260 mg/m3 * 6.67 m3/workday * 5 workdays * 60 absorption
rate) / 70 kg
= 74 mg/kg/week of methanol absorption.
0.75 grams (750 mg) of methanol obtained from fruit is equivalent to the amount of methanol obtained from drinking 0.45 liters of brandy (40% ethanol) containing 0.5% methanol (Lindinger 1997). This amount of methanol without a protective factor such as ethanol would qualify as a "significantly methanol-contaminated beverage" (Lindinger 1997).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The article goes on in detail but if 5 apples equals .45 litres of brandy and the most common sweetner has the same affect we need to know more.
Hope this link works
http://www.kats-korner.com/health/aspartame.html

[Captain Airclues]

Just for the record, this guy was within both the JAR limit (JAR-OPS 1.085) and the FAA limit (FAR 91.17). Both of these limits have been established by medical experts after many months of debate and after having reviewed all of the research documents on the subject.

Airclues

[NigelOnDraft]

<<As it stands, the 0.2promille limit prevents one from having even just one or two beers - (we are not talking about 10...) or glasses of wine with dinner the evening before, without putting one's licence and career at risk.>>

Not sure about this?

"Old Language" I appreciate, but
1 Pint = 2 units
1 Glass of Wine = 1 Unit
UK Drink Drive Limit about 5 units.

Body expends ~1 unit / hour.

So given no drinking in 8 hours prior report, in theory you could have 8 units (=4 Pints), and still be clear under any ruling i.e. nothing left from the beers. What's there due to other factors seems to be of legitmate concern however...

Add in some safety factor, 2 pints still seems fine... (for blood levels - individual legislation might specify otherwise)

Where has my maths gone wrong??

NoD

[Flip Flop Flyer]

Bumble

Fair enough. By the way, English was never my first, or even second, language so it's more than likely I missed your point to some extent. As the previous poster pointed out, having a beer or two early in the previous evening should not leave you over the limit. Any man, or woman, should be entitled to a landing beer. It just seems that some, though not necessarily the Nigel who sparked this thread, has a problem limiting themselves to just one or two drinks, or to call it quits in time.

M.Mouse

Don't know who rained on your parade mate, but it sure sounds as if you got an axe to grind. I will agree that 0.02% is not a lot, in fact it's very little. However, if the rules says 0.02% then that's what you got to relate to. By all means, fight the rules anyway you can, but until such time that you have sucessfully turned the rules around you'd better live by them.

[Scando]

0.2 Promille

So, what exactly are we talking about?

Let say you report for duty at 0600. Last drink at 2200, using the 8 hour rule (regulations regarding alcohol and flying differs from company to company, where I work, the rule says 12 hours).
The average man burns 0.15 Promille pr hour, so to be absolute sober, your promille at 2200 must be 1.2 or less. For you to be at 0.2 or less (this seems to be the industry standard in Europe), your promille must be 1.4 or less 8 hours before. 1.4, and NOT on the rise.
Now, 1.4 promille is not something you get after 2 glasses of wine or 2 pints of beer. At 1.4 promille you are fairly drunk.

I know there are exceptions to the rule, some burn faster, some burn less (like me). Your body mass, sex, amount of food eaten, etc, will affect how drunk you get. It's up to US to take these factors into account, and to be on the safe side.

Fatigue is very real, and very dangerous. Drunk the night before flying will not improve your fitness, even at 0 promille

Mouth rinse may trigger a breath test, but not a blood test.

The Swedish rule, with max 0.2 promille 8 hours BEFORE duty, means, in most cases, no drinking during layovers in Sweden. I don't like this rule, I think it's way over the top, but it's there. It's real. Beware!

As to alcohol being a booster for your performance, yes, it's true. Small amounts may calm your nerves and enhance performance with regards to certain precision sports, such as shooting, etc. If you need to calm your nerves before flying, maybe it's time to find another job?

And to you journos out there, it's not illegal to get your facts right before you start the press. People’s lives, careers, and reputations are at stake. Printing a microscopic apology at page 22, 4 weeks after you crucified someone on the front page, is simply not the way to go.

[M.Mouse]

However, if the rules says 0.02% then that's what you got to relate to. By all means, fight the rules anyway you can, but until such time that you have sucessfully turned the rules around you'd better live by them.

You do make some assumptions. Nowhere have I claimed that I don't abide by the rules.

In fact I hardly drink anyway!

[Arkroyal]

FFF

Merely bringing one in a situation that may be suspect is stupidity made large in this business. But you already know that don't you?

So, not only am I rightly expected to ensure my fitness to fly, but also to second guess the vagaries of the local test kit and enforcers. Come on.... I’d better shave before going out for fear of resembling a burglar!

witch

but here we have contributors who think alcohol levels above the legal minimum are not only unavoidable but acceptable

And your evidence for this statement?

No one here is advocating flying whilst under the influence. The industry has no history of a problem with this, and is now faced with being criminalized, not because pilots are attempting to do that, but because the clever instrument makers have managed to detect ever lower levels of alcohol.

It’s the goalposts which are moving, not us. I find it particularly sad that it is the younger of our contributors (a guess, I know, but I think I’m right) who seem more likely to accept the rule rather than standing up for common sense.

Yes we must obey the rules, but that doesn’t mean that challenging them is wrong.

[Bengt Engel]

Bumble ,

this must be ironic, I missed your whole point, during late nite post, with a few beers under my belt....I'm deeply sorry if I was out of line....

Bengan.

[Hotel Charlie]

Arkroyal, M.Mouse and the likes,

Excellent posts! Nice to see there still are people how are able to think without the goverment telling them what to think!
There is still hope for human kind!

[Ludo]

I am utterly disgusted by the paradox of people complaining of journalist's shabbiness and then doing exactly the same. Three times I have read here that in France pilots drink at meals while on duty etc.
I do work in a French airline and NEVER I have witnessed such an act nor anything similar.
It is true that the French know how to enjoy a good wine or cognac, but the secret who allows them to do it (along with enjoying fatty food like cheese and stay slim) is that they
taste more than gobble down. A glass of good wine instead of 6 pints of lager per night.
Watch for the beam in your eye, folks...

[Max Angle]

No one here is advocating flying whilst under the influence. The industry has no history of a problem with this, and is now faced with being criminalized, not because pilots are attempting to do that, but because the clever instrument makers have managed to detect ever lower levels of alcohol.

Well said sir.

[Horatio]

Agreed Maxangle

Airclues; whilst I agree with what you say about UK limits etc, it boils down to a case of law. If said pilot was over the limits in the country concerned AND those limits are enforceable, then he is guilty of a crime. It seems like BA have tried to warn their pilots about this country's laws and if he (a big IF, until proved guilty) chose to disregard them, then he doesn't have a leg to stand on. We might sympathise, but that won't stop a conviction or the right of a conviction!

Example: You smuggle drugs in many countries, you get the death penalty. It may not be humane and it isn't what would happen in the UK, but the warnings are there and if you choose to ignore them, you do so at your own peril. A defense consisting of, 'well, I'll get 10 years jail at home', won't wash! It's a harsh example, but so is life in many countries.

Edited for spellos that were obvious; there might be more!

[Captain Airclues]

Horatio

The JAR 0.02 limit is not intended to allow a few beers the night before. The figure was decided after allowing for any endogenous alcohol and any instrument error in the breathalyser. It is for these same reasons that the Swedes, who have a zero tolerence policy to drink driving, have a 0.02 limit on the roads.
It would be most unlikely for even the most abstinate person to produce a reading of 0.00.

Airclues

[Airbubba]

>>It would be most unlikely for even the most abstinate person to produce a reading of 0.00<<

I'm not exactly abstinent and that's what I've blown each time I've been tested over the past several years. I realize that alcohol testing and locked cockpit doors are novelties in the UK but we've lived with both for quite a while in the States.

All the arguments about mouthwash and ripe fruit have been tried without much success in pilot hearings in the U.S. Usually the best defense has been to hope for a paperwork irregularity like a missing signature or wrong date on a form. A couple of pilots where I work have beat the rap due to faulty technical procedures in the testing. If that doesn't work, check into rehab and demand your job back since as an alcoholic you have a disability that the employer must accomodate under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Here's a recent example of the "hop into rehab" maneuver:

"Two America West pilots accused of being drunk when they tried to fly a jetliner have been in alcohol rehabilitation, prosecutors said. Lawyers for the pilots, Thomas Porter Cloyd and Christopher Hughes, requested a hearing to ask a judge to delay their Aug. 1 [2002] court appearance because the pilots will be in rehabilitation until Aug. 2, said Ronald Ramsingh, an assistant state prosecutor. The pilots entered the 28-day program in Arizona after they were arrested July 1 in Miami, Mr. Ramsingh said." - from the New York Times July 23, 2002