Like RoyHudd, i would expect the police to be disinterested, which of course means impartial or unbiased.

I agree.

Curious how these arrests get leaked to the Press within hours of them happening. :rolleyes: :mad:

For example here .

Heliport

Leaked as such may not be the right expression. The Police Press bearu often inform the Press about incidents or arrests, it happens to all sorts of case, and I would guess is part of the 'keep the press happy and they will help us theory'. Before you leap down my throat I am not defending it, its just the way it is.

There are other routes it can get there of course, the airline itself, ground staff...you have to remember that the major airports have thier own resident press who have contacts everywhere.

Report on BBC at 12.00 GMT says Finnair Captain jailed for 6 months

Details on the BBC website:

BBC news

Only 6 months... Good God.

Loss of Profession, humilation, financial loss, devastation to his life all after 25 spotless years at Finnair.

I'd say he's already paid big time.

Don't forget that you are talking about a 51 year old man, who I think knows the results and implications of it's acts. He is responsable, and I'm not sorry for him. Neather thinking that he have more than 20 years flying, family, etc.... no excuses.
Good job to the police and also congratulations to the guy who detect him and report him.

If he had got just "One Day's Jail" its still a personal disaster .....

I've said it before, "24 hours drinks free" before every trip ..... its the only way :(

At last and at least the BBC put the word 'drunken' in quotes.

He was still under the drink drive limit, and probably felt fine.

I'm not defending the man, but I find others' glee at his fate distasteful.

Prison will help no-one, he'll suffer enough from his loss of job.

Just a small point....
If the plod had carried out a breath test on the pilot, then presumably they were using the standard pass / warn/ fail handheld unit, which, again presumably, was calibrated for the UK driving limit (80mg/l from memory) If this was the case, the pilot would have passed this test - so why was he arrested?
No conspiracy theory - just a thought...
Cheers,
10forcash

Obviously not - did you really think they did?

Having 'hopped over' from a link in another forum, there was 'nothing obvious' I apologise for not reading all nine pages first but theres no need to be snotty....
So I can now safely assume that airport plod have different equipment to 'rest of UK' plod - thanks for the info - I think...

Cheers,
10forcash

Arkroyal

No one is full of 'glee' over it. Yes its very sad, but he was a preffessional, he knew the rules and he broke them. Same as any other criminal offence he has been caught and is due punishment, which he is now getting. I will say that 6 months is a bit harsh, but then its a new law and an example has to be set.

10forcash

breath test machines are available that give a read out rather then the traffic light readings.

BJCC,
Thanks for the info, as I said - just a question
Cheers,
10forcash

Ark

Well said. the guy was under the DD limit and hardly pissed out of his mind.

I hope his life isn't ruined for ever. He made a mistake and now has to reside with society's finest for 4 months or so. God help him.

Heathrow Director.

If you think that's a light sentence you are misguided IMHO

If you ever make a mistake and end up in court I hope the judge that you get the judge you obviosly wish for him.



NN

Hi Normal(?) Nigel.. You sound too much of an incomparably ignorant, foul-mouthed individual to be a pilot, but I guess it takes all sorts.

I have suffered from having a near relative killed and 4 relatives severely injured by drunken drivers. I hope to God that neither you, nor anyone else with your stupid views, has to suffer similarly.

I have NO sympathy with anyone who drives ANY vehicle whilst over the limit... I don't care if he's a train driver, bus driver or airline captain. It could be YOUR wife or YOUR kids behind someone like that......

Heathrow Director, as someone who has had to deal with the mess and heartache caused by stupid, selfish, drunken idiots I wholeheartedly agree with you. One death at the hands of one of these alcohol-fuelled people is one too many. The same also applies to those who drive under the influence of drugs. There is no excuse. It's not as though this was some little known regulation sneaked in thriugh the back door, it is well known and well publicised. Anyone who drinks and drives, flies, sails etc is a menace. How much more evidence to people need that alcohol, even in small quantities, affects judgement? I am well aware that people get away with this on a daily basis but that in no way justifies their actions.
Nigel, you owe HD an apology for your offensive name calling which was hardly professional behaviour.

NN

Thanks for your well constructed and logical points. Like DX Wombat, I think you owe HD an apology.
The sentence of 6 months is 1/4 of the maximum, so it could be said that this pilot was sentenced heavily. Would you be quite so venomous had it been a bus driver? He has probably got 6 months because he is supposed to be inteligent, well versed in safety, and in a responsible position in society, in other words, he should have known better.
He is a forgien national, so as I understand it he will serve 6 months, not 4.
One mistake? Do you know that it was one mistake? Or has he made a few others? You don't know, nor do I.
Yes, he was under the drink drive limit, however he was not convicted of drinking and driving.
HD is entitled to his opinon, just as you are....

Fraid I see NN's point. What are we trying to prove here?

1. Yep, no excuse for drinking and flying.

2. Yep, anyone having personal involvement with DUI drivers is bound to have a strong opinion.

3. That doesn't mean this guy may have made a mistake, once, which is now in all probability going to ruin the rest of his life.

I remember all too well when Drinking / Driving was not as frowned upon as in today's 'Save the Whales' 'Support Gay Marriage', 'Don't smack Children', world. When it was 'There but for the grace of God go I....'. I'm neither excusing nor supporting, merely stating facts. The world changes, opinion changes, and no-one will know for years whether it was for the better. In the meantime, out come the soapboxes, outcome the Blairlike quivering lips, portentious comments, 'holier than thou' comments.

It could be you next time, it could be you dragged away because you used an inappropriate mouthwash in Scandinavia - would you like to think your motives, character, life history, were all going to be pilloried on some internet chat pages by people who daren't even admit their real identities?

As Andy Warhol said, we'll all get our 5 minutes of fame - remember, it could be YOU next time, I wonder if you would be quite so aggressively critical then?

I wish the guy all the best in the world, and hope he returns to flying a sadder and wiser man. Sadder - he may just find out how much support he got from his fellow pilots who must know at least the headlines of the case (in the papers - it must be true! The police said......" well that means it's beyond doubt eh?
Wiser - hopefully he'll discover polo mints to ensure the next know-it-all cabby doesn't phone the police.

I shall make a point of sniffing the breath of MT drivers, taxi drivers, and anyone else I accompany in the future, what comes around - goes around!

Normal.... I'm with you mate !..... Wherein might I suggest that some of the folks who post on these threads need to put this into perspective, i.e. there's a whole world of difference between being 'p!ssed & incapable’ versus being 'over the limit' ( imho ). Rules or no rules.

By way of example… I know a good many airline pilots who I wouldn't fly behind when they’re sober; just as I know a good many airline pilots whom I'd be quite happy to fly behind after they had a couple of pints of Adnam’s Broadside, or some such ( not that they would do both, of course - but I'm sure you get my point ).

And fer gawds sake please don't give us that old chestnut about kith and kin who’ve been killed by drunk drivers because what you’re really talking about in nearly all of those cases are drivers who’re usually absolutely bladdered, i.e. often many times over the driving limit, and / or who were in any case driving like a complete knobs – and which is how they normally drive ( regardless of how much they might have imbibed ) !
I.e. the fact that these drivers happened to be over the limit often has little or no relevance to the fact that doing 70, 80 or 90mph down a windy country lane, etc ( it being their normal 'white van man' driving style ) is an accident waiting to happen !

Indeed, for the ‘common sense nimbys’ out there, if you’re so sure of your position then please name the last time an airliner fell out of the sky, crashed, etc, as a result of the pilots being inebriated; and whilst you’re at it please tell us how many passengers have been injured or died as a result of pilot who’ve, apparently, been p!ssed ?!

All in all it’s a akin to the argument to ban mobile phone use in cars – that is unless you’re a police officer and / or member of the ‘emergency services’ when it’s ok to use one whilst on the move ( often at high speed ) - duh !
Wherein to put that into perspective, could somebody remind us just how many innocent bystanders did HM Police kill last year whilst conducting high speed car chases ? ( perhaps they were they on the phone ? :E ).
We’d also be interested to know how many people died as a result of somebody using a mobile phone whilst driving – and we’d love to know the difference between the two sets of figures ?!

Now I’ll accept that there’s a risk in whatever we do and how we live our lives but wherein life is risky.... indeed, come to think of it, I could get piles from wiping my arse with tissue paper.... so maybe I’d better stop doing it ?!

In closure, would somebody please wrap me up cotton wool and save me from all the bleedin’ do-gooders, nimby’s, nanny-state, and life-without-risk merchants !!!

Old King Coal

No one has said he was p***ed. The offence is working while being oer a prescribed limit. The papers may have made that suggestion, however the courts don't judge on waht the papers report. He pleaded guilty, something which is to his credit (although really there was not much option). But at the end of the day he knew the rules, he was in a position of responibilty and he broke them. End of story!

I think if you asked passengers if they would rather fly with a pilot who has drink nothing and one who's had a couple of pints you may find thier opinons differ from yours.

Deaths caused by drivers who have been drinking? I am sorry but your information is wrong. Most deaths caused by drivers who have been drinking are not the result of drivers been bladdered, more those that are above the driving prescribed limit. And on that subject I speak from dealing with them, not being related to the victim.

I have no idea bow many people were killed in high speed car chases, nor do I know how many would have died if a Police car hadn't been present. In relation to the number of chases and the number of miles driven by Police in any year I think you will find the number to be very very very low. However I am at a loss as to the relevence of your question.

Police drivers are subject the the same law as you are, and when they screw it up and are convicted they suffer much harsher penelties than mr avarage. That is probably right and proper afterall they are in a position of resposibility and should know better, like pilots really

Drunk Finnish pilot jailed
 

Drunk passenger jet pilot jailed
Thursday, December 2, 2004 Posted: 1618 GMT (0018 HKT)



Pilot was arrested in the cockpit of Finnair Boeing 757 (file photo).

YOUR E-MAIL ALERTS
Great Britain

Finland

Airlines

or Create your own

Manage alerts | What is this?


LONDON, England (AP) -- A pilot with the Finnish national airline Finnair was jailed for six months on Thursday for trying to fly a packed passenger jet while drunk.

Heikki Tallila, 51, a Finn, is the first person to be sentenced under legislation introduced in March that gives police powers to breathalyze pilots and cabin crew suspected of attempting to fly under the influence of alcohol.

The prosecution told Minchsull Street Crown Court in Manchester, northwest England that Tallila had almost 2 1/2 times the legal limit of alcohol in his blood when he was arrested in the cockpit of a Boeing 757 at Manchester Airport on August 23.

Tallila was completing pre-flight checks for the journey to Turkey when authorities -- who had been tipped off by the taxi driver who brought Tallila to the airport -- boarded the plane, which was carrying 225 passengers.

Passing sentence, Justice John Burke said Tallila was responsible for ensuring passenger safety.

"If you had been a mere passenger causing problems and interfering with your fellow passengers and crew and misbehaving you would have gone to prison," he said.

"In your case the passengers did not even appreciate their safety was in jeopardy. They assumed their safety was in good hands."

The prosecution said Tallila had drunk up to seven glasses of wine and a glass of beer on the afternoon before he was arrested.

A breathalyzer test showed he had 49 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood, well above the legal limit for pilots of 20 milligrams of alcohol for every 100 millilitres of blood.

Tallila's lawyer said his client had since been sacked from his £100,000 pounds ($180,000) a year job with Finnair, where he had worked for 25 years.

He and his wife, who still works as a stewardess for the airline, had suffered a "great deal" of public humiliation following his arrest, Gerard McDermott said.

"This has been a very public humiliation. This has impacted very highly on this individual. The financial consequences have been hard," McDermott added.

He said his client now attends Alcoholics Anonymous course and is receiving counseling for substance abuse.



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

Copyright 2004 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/eu....ap/index.html

Road Traffic AccidentsAir Traffic AccidentsSo lets just have a look at these numbers.

I.e. reading between the lines, one can see that 13 people in 100 who are killed on the UK’s roads died with some level of ‘excess’ of alcohol in their veins – but wherein it’s not stated if those who died did so as a result of their own actions, or of somebody else’s.

However, on the flip side, 87 people in 100 died on the UK’s roads as a result of some other reason ( one that is not drink related - so go figure ! ) and hence my earlier point, i.e the remaining 87% of people who die on the UK’s roads do so NOT as a result of anything to do with D&D !.

Please don’t get me wrong, I’m not promoting D&D ( indeed I’m just about teetotal in that respect myself ) but lets at least separate hysteria & hype from the facts.

Ok, they guy in this instance screwed-up and will pay the price of his actions - but let's not get to high and mighty about it all, shall we - to err, is human after all, is it not ?!

Old King Coal
I think this statement in incorrect.

"the remaining 87% of people who die on the UK’s roads do so NOT as a result of anything to do with D&D !."

If a drunk driver hits a sober driver and both die there will be 2 fatalities, only one of which will be over the limit but both of which will be due to drunk driving.

... ah but there's the vice versa of that of course. I.e. should a sober driver just happen to crash into another driver, where the latter just happens to be at 81 mg ( when the legal limit is 80 mg ), and both get killed.... then whose fault is that and / or would this be but down as a D&D fatality statistic ?

Now, so that we can assess the true enormity of this problem, would somebody be so kind as to remind us all of how many passengers have been killed in commercial airline accidents in, say, the last 10, 20, 50 years or more, as a result of (apparently) inebriated pilots ?

Old King Coal

Yes the numbers of drivers killed in accidents related to drink is low. But then one is too many.

You ask how many passengers are killed by pilots who have been drinking, no idea, but again one is too many. Which is the point of this legislation, to stop it happening not nesseserily to reduce the number.

I could ask how many people have been committed Treason in the last 30 years? I can think of one, does that mean there should not be legilsation to prevent it? Of course not.

At the end of the day, whether you like it or not, the public don't want to be flown round by people who have been drinking. Aircrew/ATCO's and engineers are all professionals, and in positions of responsibility for which they are well rewarded finacialy. If you want to drink don't fly and if you want to fly don't drink. The final choice is if you do both then expect the penelties.

Before March this guy was half the drink driving limit, after he was double the new limit for aircrew. The guy had drunk a fair amount the day before and had misjudged his recovery rate. This Captain has paid a high price for his mistake.
There but for the grace of God etc.

These statistics are completely flawed since a drunk person is much more likely to survive a crash (compared with a sober person).

bjcc - you say 'Which is the point of this legislation, to stop it happening not necessarily to reduce the number'.

But that is the point, it doesn't stop it happening - just as similarly that D&D laws don't stop that happening either - albeit it might reduce it, but is does not stop it happening !

... and wr.t. 'treason', is it not the case that one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter ?!.... and again, laws to prevent that do not stop it happening, do they ?!

Yeah, so let's have some more laws shall we. Heck lets have loads of laws, indeed more laws than you can shake a stick at :rolleyes: but wherein what we seem to be losing, in our highly regulated legally controlled lives, is common sense !

lead zeppelin,

Where was your article copied from?

Drunk?

just over 60% of the drink drive limit for most of Europe. Sober as a judge.

Someone tell me how this kind of reporting helps anyone?

In the Old Days, Aviation and Drinking often went hand in hand ...... Aircrew ...... security .... Customs ..... APO's .... ATC ..... etc ..... I've seen them all involved big time

Today its another world ..... one thing still worries me .... have a look at the "Profiles" and see the constant emphasis on "Drinking" ...... you will be surprised :confused:


ps. EDIT .... "constant" is too strong a word! ..... "Frequent" is more appropriate

6 months is no where near harsh.i think its disgraceful that he even contemplated flying a 757 with 220 or so people on board. I find it shocking that a pilot would even let alcohol past his lips knowing that he was flying the next morning. I hate to think that a realtive of mine would be boarding a plane and placing their lives in the hands of someone that has had (quote) 7 glasses of wine and a beer before hand and is over twice the legal limit for a pilot. If you do the crime, do the time. :8

p.s is that documentary available anywhere of the (not naming) crew that had several pitchers to drink the night before they were to fly, i think it was about 4 years ago.BBC1 or BBC2, not sure.

old king coal,
maybe its down to sheer luck that there hasnt been any fatalities, although there was the risk.the aim now is to alleviate this risk.it nearly sounds like you are commending it.there is no way to justify the action of flying under the influence, its just not right.:8

No apology.

Glad to see there are some other people on here who are realists and that don't indulge in the PPrune art of trying to out pomp each other.

HD is acting like a Sun reporter and its sickening to read. Grow up.

The guy wasn't pissed but as said misjudged his revovery rate and at worst would have had a bit of a hangover. Not condoning it but now that gets you six months in a scum filled prison.

You get less for burglary.

But we shouldn't spoil the fun of the Hang em brigade I suppose.

To argue that the guy might have been legal elsewhere, or on some other day, doesn't hold water. Try driving down the M1 at 120mph.... and then explain to the traffic cop that it's legal in Germany.. If you're caught driving over the limit try explaining that it was perfectly legal 50 years ago.

Sure, I can recall drinking with pilots until 3am when they've been flying at 7.... I've seen a captain "walked" across the tarmac with an F/O under one arm and a steward under the other and I've visited flight decks which stank pubs.... but that was half a lifetime ago and things have changed - for much the better for us all. Hopefully we are all more safety concious now?
To the pilots who see no problem.... the guy was breaking the law. Full stop. If you argue that it was OK do you blatantly disregard other rules applicable to your position? When it's low vis do you gaily descend below DH? Aviation is strictly controlled by rules which apply to pilots, engineers, controllers, etc. The purpose of those rules is to enhance safety and prevent people from being killed and as professionals we should strive to follow them.

Alcohol means nothing to me - I could go for a year without a drop. For those who can't then I feel very, very sorry for you but implore you to consider those in the seats behind you before you break the rules.... (At my last but one medical before I retired AME poked around and said: "You're a controller, right?" When I agreed he said "I can tell from your liver - in most pilot's of your age their livers are down to their knees". Sad, eh?

Old King Cole

Yes it does reduce the instances of an offence by making an act illegal. In some cases it can stop it. Look at the publicity surrounding this case, any pilot/ATCO/Engineer reading about this is going to have a little think before drinking near to the time they fly/Control/Use a spanner. If they don't? Well more fool them.
Regarding Treason, you are talking about terrorism, a different subject, which I am not going to debate on this thread. The point being that Treason is illegal. One person (to the best of my knowladge) has been convicted of an offence under the Treason Acts in the last 30 years. As far as I recall he is also the only person who has been charged. In other words there is vertualy no treason, therefore, by your standards there is no need for law against it. Alternattivly you could say that because the penelties for treason are so high, then that deters people from committing it. The same could be said of this law.


I-FORD

Unfortuatly ignorance is no defence. It is mitigation, and does not seem to have been used by this chap. As far as I am aware there is an equivilent offence now in many countries, including Finland. In fact there must have been if he was arrested on the aircraft( I wont go intot he civil aviation ammendments act and its effect on juristiction on offences on non UK registered aircraft)Your suggestion is therefore flawed. As indeed is your suggestion that this law is for the gratification of law makers/enforcers and the courts.

NN

You have summed it up, yes for that offence you get 6 months in a 'scum filled' prison. Odd thing about prisons they are full of people who have been convicted of criminal offences....As this pilot has been.

If the 'flying finn'has been found guilty and dealt with in surely a reasonable manner why do so many feel that his actions must be justified. Quote ' Tallia who is married to a Finnair CC has attended trauma therapy and alcoholics annonymous'. Why did BALPA offer references testifying to his caperbilitys. Surely he should have been dealt with long before this if he had a drink problem.

Firstly whilst I stick to my opinions I have edited the post to HD and apologised for the "strength" of post.

Now

Can someone please tell me the last incient/accident attributed to drink in the UK? I won't wait up for the answer.

If truth be known the culture has changed only fairly recently mostly after C4. The new laws are draconian and using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

The real problem lies with airlines working their pilots to death. Long night there and backs, 2 crew 8 hour Atlantics, 6 earlies 4 sectors a day etc.

Now if you have been up all night and are landning in the morning it is said that your reactions and concentration is the eqivalant to having drunk 2-3 pints.

But that's OK?

Guess we all should be locked up.

BJ

Get a life. This guy is no criminal. I very much doubt you've ever met proper "hard" criminal but I can tell you it aint pleasant.

I hope he's got the strength to get through this OK.

NN

NN

I have some bad news for you....he was convicted of a criminal offence, earning him a prison sentence. He is therefore a criminal.

I have a life thank you, I have also met many 'hard criminals'. Actualy it does not suprise me you think they are unpleasent, possibly your attitude has something to do with it???

As for incidents concerning alcohol? No idea, ask the CAA, afterall the idea for this legislation apparently came from them.

I can kind of see both sides of the argument here. I think the point that NN is (imho) trying to make is that it would be nice if the CAA devoted as much time, effort and zealous rewriting of the FTL rules to address the severe flight safety issues caused by fatigue (which affects all crews) as they have recently devoted to rewriting the alcohol rules to address the flight safety issues associated with alcohol, which I would suggest has affected a far smaller %age of crews.

I do think that safety would be improved far more, far quicker if fatigue was seriously and maturely recognised as the potential killer that it is and legislation enacted accordingly.... but that would affect profitability and will therefore never get past the "Old Boy Network" of resistance. As far as fatigue is concerned, I fear we are going backwards and letting commercial pressure drive safety standards...which must be wrong.