Funny how the metropolitan legend of AF pilots drinking wine on cockpits keeps being resurrected any time someone is caught over the limit. Funny it's never a French pilot though, huh? :hmm:

Breath Testing before flight
 

Sorry Danny,

I have to disagree. When I flew in Japan there was a company breathalyser ( a rather difficult word for our Japanese colleagues to pronounce incidentally) in the crew briefing and dispatch room.

It was not used a priori but was used if any crew member appeared to be in question of being under the influence.

The result was that nothing got as far as in any of the last public cases - the crewmember was dealt with (in an understanding way, I may add) by the company and lived, somewhat chastened to fly another day.

I much prefer that system to a suspicion of alcohol on the breath
by some airport employee and what that leads to.

As for the copilot's passive reaction - see my post on the last drunken pilot thread - or was it the one before last - or the one before that...

Take care, FC.

Just checked google.de news service and their are 45 German newspaper articles about this. :{

Ludo

Touché. :)

There but for the grace of god go a lot of us, and before some sanctimonious git starts jumping up and down, having been in aviation for a long time I have heard and seen most of the legends that are recounted on these threads. I'm not saying that what went on in the past was excusable let alone acceptable but the system we had and the rules worked fine and as someone mentioned earlier has there ever been an accident or incident recorded where the pime or only blame was a p1ssed Pilot, tired pilot I can recall a few accidents attributed to that, lets hope they don't find a way of measuring how tired we are when we arrive at the security gate.

One things for sure though, The rules have changed, the rules are well known and the result of breaking the rules are catastrophic. as much as I would like to show symathy for the young lady concerned, If it is proved that she broke the rules, then she has been very silly, and no doubt a promissing career well and truly down the pan. You don't, from my understanding of how it works, end up with that level of alcohol in the Blood system from having a social drink and then abstaining for 10 hours.

Despite what some people think we are well paid, our training costs a lot the equipment we fly is expensive and passenger lives ....... you can put own price on those. In return we should turn up fit to fly.

Ludo

Let me say categorically that I sat on the next table in the airport restaurant, next to the flight deck crew of a DC9 in Southern Europe (not AF) and watched them have one smallish glass of red wine each with lunch, which the waiter poured from a bottle.

We all then boarded the DC9 (me through the normal channels) and I subsequently saw both pilots in the "office" as I entered the aircraft.

I'm not going to name the airline nor the airport, since it could result in trouble for PPrune, but it did happen, in 1979.

So if the AF wine is an urban legend, this was a direct observation. I certainly did not intend to suggest that French pilots drink on duty these days or report over the limit, so apologies if this is the impression that I agve.

Maybe I was a little young and naive in those days, but it never crossed my mind that this could be a problem.

She was sneaked on by the hotel barman who saw her at the bar at 2 in the morning, 3 hours before pickup.
Her blood/alcohol level was 0.8/1000ml
Source: Berliner Zeitung 13th Jan

Without wishing to deflect the central argument..... if the reading reported in yesterday's Guardian was correct (about 25% over the UK drink/Drive limit) - I, personally, would be more concerned at her lack of rest than her alcohol level.

I know how I feel after the equivalent of four units of alcohol and I know how I feel after less than 3 hours sleep. In my opinion the lack of sleep is by far the more serious threat to safety.

Final 3 Greensthank you for the clarification.
I work for AF and happen to experience that "Twilight Zone" feeling every time someone mentions that metropolitan legend as if they had witnessed it themselves, while I know from experience it is indeed a legend.

As a pilot, I would never (now under the new law) turn up for work knowing that I was above the limit. However, I could not guarantee it due to the unrealistic low limit. This is why I am one for mandatory company testing. It will cost a company far more to replace a pilot than paying for a day off sick. Unfortunately because of the new legislation the employers will pay the price, the employees will face the disgrace, the passengers will not know any difference.
In the old days nothing would be mentioned if you had a tot of whisky and jumped in a meteor to defend queen and country. Nothing was thought when soldiers were given drugs (now illegal) to stay awake to serve the country.
Point is:
Limit too low
If you tested all the professions subject to this law I reckon at least 30% would be over the limit.
Companies will have to introduce mandatory testing to save themselves money.
Sickness will increase.
Company profits will decrease, some may even become bankrupt.
Many professionals under this new legislation will be punished far beyond what they should be.

Enough said, I hope you get my drift.
Rgds
ILS 119.5

I don't really get you Danny!?
 

What do you mean? Should we not post our reflections on this if it's something you don't agree with? Do you really think that if someone here talks about breath testing every pilot that's gona give the reporters ammunition. I surely think they possess enough brain cells to figure that one out by them selves. Newsflash: demands of breath testing every pilot has probably been around since the first one got caught over the limit.

I totally respect your opinion on this matter... so I would expect the same from you. And exactly what is so wrong with this idea? Sure this would have to be looked on and evaluated before implementing and sure there are downsides, but I think it's pretty arrogant to just put your foot down and say it's wrong.

Where I'm from there will soon be alcohol looks on all government cars. Probably pretty soon after that the busses and taxis will have them as well. Meaning you can't start the car if you are above the limit. And I don't hear anyone complain about that. As a matter of fact I think that most of us would feel a bit safer knowing that the taxi driver isn't drunk, oh sorry "above the limit". So why should we as pilots sit on our high horses and refuse this. I don't see it as a symbol of misturst but as a safety measure putting an end to all this bad publicity. Because two things are for sure, this isn't the last case and some pilots undeniably can't be trusted with a can of beer.

It's pretty naive to think that it's only those who get caught that brake the rules. If there is one caught every year you can be certain that there is a whole lot more that dosen't get caught. And this is exactly how the general public sees this. That's why it gets so much press, not because they are jealouse (get back on earth). This has gone to the extent that I often get to hear semi jokes about how all pilots are drunks, and I'm getting pretty tired of it.

I don't know about you but in my opinion ONE pilot over the limit is ONE to much regardless of the total amount of flights. Would you agree if that ONE pilot put a 747 into the ground? I thought that we should try to make it as safe as possible to fly, and this problem seems pretty possible to eliminate if people could overcome their egos.

Being wrongfully accused is not a possibility if this is handled in the right way. Where I'm from and as I understand, in Germany, every breath test has to be followed up with a blood test to guarantee a valid result.

What comes first, safety or your integrity?

In the Exxon - Valdez disaster, I believe Captain Hazelwood was drunk, and admitted as much.

Do ship captains now have to pass a breathalyser before a voyage on the high seas?

Food for thought, gentlemen.

"If there is one caught every year you can be certain that there is a whole lot more that dosen't get caught. And this is exactly how the general public sees this."
That's not true of the general public in the UK. They might think it's a widespread problem if they read Pprune and believe some of the claims made - such as yours. I'm not in a position to know if it's serious problem but, based on what my pilot friends say, it isn't.
"That's why it gets so much press etc."
No, it isn't. It gets Press coverage because it's easy to create a 'Shock horror! Hundreds might have been killed' story by claiming any pilot found over the legal limit was 'drunk'. There have been only two pilots prosecuted in the UK to date, and neither was 'drunk'.
"This has gone to the extent that I often get to hear semi jokes about how all pilots are drunks, and I'm getting pretty tired of it."
See above.
(If it continues, you'll get used to it. If jokes and ill-informed comments bother you, just be grateful you're not a lawyer. ;) )

_______________

bjcc
” I arrested a pilot, turned out to be just over the drink drive limit, on his way into LHR one afternoon” and ” It is, Mr Mach79, evidence that there are pilot’s who were happy to fly when frankly they shouldn't have been.”
That’s quite a jump from one pilot to “there are pilots”.

No-one suggested you apologise for arresting a pilot. Mach’s suggestion was that you “appear to write with such relish, that you seem to have issues re pilots”. I’m not convinced it’s limited only to pilots but, with respect, you do tend to come across as someone who relished nicking people and miss it.

Why are you so reluctant to reveal how long ago you left the police force?
You frequently reminisce about events which occurred, and repeat (rather rigid, IMHO) opinions you formed when you were a policeman. You also frequently post what you understand to be the law. Since you choose to mention you were once a policeman in support of the opinions you express, surely it’s reasonable for people to ask when you were on the beat and when you left the police?
You’ve said it’s not relevant. Surely when the incidents which form your opinions occurred is relevant? ie Were they recently, or a decade ago? Or more?
The fact you were in the job when Z Cars was on television isn't much of a clue. The series finished about 26 years ago.

Since all journalists and the whole of the press seem regularly to be slated on this website on the basis of individual examples of incompetent tabloid reporting*, I trust that the members of the pilot community will acknowledge that - owing to this, the latest in a string of similar incidents - they are just irresponsible idiots who shouldn't be anywhere near an aircraft?

Or do the rules of prejudiced stereotyping change when it's one of your own involved?



*With apologies to those contributors to this forum who aren't that narrow-minded.

If we have many more incidents like this, with the resultant publicity, how long will it be before the public/politicians demand preflight testing?

Flying Lawyer
 

oh, so you seriously think that the ones that have been caught so far are the only ones ever to show up for work above the limit? Well that's got to be the only 100% system in the world. That's just ridiculous! Or you don't believe that but you think that the general public is stupid enough to believe that and now you are worried that I have given them the truth?? Please! Remember a little documentary about BA pilots, do we???

You're kind of stepping on my point there with your "shock and horror!" That's exactly what they do and that's exactly what we should stop! But if, according to you, the general public believes that all pilots get caught before they can create a mess, why should anyone worry? I mean if anyone is stupid enough to show up above the limit then they will positively get caught, right? Now that's a superb story for the tabloids! "everyone, listen to this: the airline industry is 100% safe"!

You seem to have a talent to turn your own words against you. Good career choice! ;)

The only thing that is frightening is the X-files feel over this whole discussion. Cover-up, cover-up! Come on everyone if we all close our eyes then this might go away!

Yeah, well that's something that shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near an airplane!!!!

I remember a certain documentary about BA pilots, the one that employed selecetive editing, voice dubbing, clocks that went backwards and led to most of the pilots involved having no case to answer? Sure we'll go along with all manner of measures because the TV demands it. Right now I'm off to wrap my head in aluminium foil to stop the alien mind benders taking over my brain. I saw that on TV too.

If you'd care to read my post properly, and I'll give you the benefit of the doubt in case English isn't your first language, you can post your opinion exactly as I did. Your apparent contempt at my opinion leads me to assume that you have not quite grasped the concept of "opinion".

I am against mandatory breath testing before every flight because as far as I'm aware, I'm not a heavy drinker, I stick to the rules and add my own personal buffer to them and in the knowledge that I have no intention of arriving at work having consumed anything near the amounts that would cause residuals to give a positive test. However, I am not against companies having kit available for those that feel they should test themselves voluntarily should they not have the same personal regime as I do when it comes to alcohol consumption.

So, just because all government cars in Germany are to be fitted with alcohol keys is irrelevant as I am fairly sure that most government drivers haven't put in as much effort, training and on-going training and testing as I or my fellow colleagues have. I'm sure you'll be able to dig out statistics that will show a record of accidents caused to government cars in Germany because their drivers were over the limit. I challenge you to show any statistics that even one public transport, scheduled flight that has been involved in an accident and attributable to alcohol consumption by the crew.

Also, your assumption that because one person has been caught and two others already convicted after being caught before they even took control of the aircraft in some way proves that therefore there must be some that slip through doesn't stand. There may have been but all that proves that those that may have slipped through were obviously not drunk even if they were possibly over the extremely low limit. I would point out that the fact that because this pilot was caught and as were the other recently publicised ones that the current system is adequate. After all, those tested positive did not fly and there have been no airliner accidents related to alcohol that you can point me to.

Of course if you are so insecure in your own ability to judge your own alcohol intake then feel free to demand kit that can be used to test yourself. Personally, I like to believe that I don't live in a nanny state and that I can be trusted to behave properly. It may sound chaotic to you if you hail from a much more ordered society in your part of the world.

Just to challenge CrossBars conspiracy fears, the documentary that you refer to was proved here on PPRuNe to have been selectively edited to make it appear that the pilots involved had consumed alcohol within the bottle to throttle period. It was shown that it was impossible to have taken place as was suggested because the makers of the programme forgot to edit out the various clocks that appeared in the background.

Even more importantly, not one of those pilots was tested and any allegations made were hypothetical with no substantive evidence. Of course, if you wish to refer to that programme that is your choice but I would be very wary of trying to make a point with fellow colleagues when your regard for them is so contemptible. You have not offered one iota of evidence except to relate to German government cars. That is pathetic.

The argument here is either accidents caused due to alcohol (none) or pilots tested positive for alcohol before getting airborne, which as far as I can remember is the case being discussed here, the two recently convicted in the UK and a few in the US. The total number of departures made annually just by European and US carriers and the number of convictions is the point. The ratio is miniscule and therefore just goes to prove that you are so easily led by gutter press and media luvvies who will sensationalise a story and eat their own babies.

Crossbars

It might help if you read what I actually said. You seem to believe that press comment and public opinion are the same. I don't - although press comment/allegations, if repeated often enough, can of course influence public opinion.

BTW, I've managed to achieve a reasonable degree of success in my chosen career, but thank you for your concern.

Well maybe it's because English is not my mother tongue, but it sounds a lot like a recommendation from "capt pprune".

And I'm not from Germany nor have I ever lived there. I live in a little place called Sweden where we are all woken up 7 in the morning and put to sleep at 10.30 in the evening by our nanny. It feels safer that way. I can't really cope with personal responsibility. ;)

So that's the reason why we shouldn’t be tested. We have all gone through so much. Poor us. Well shame on the public for not trusting us. Personally I can't blame them after what the media have accomplished. And to be honest, thanks to all the screw-ups who have created this mess.

If a simple breath test would mean that these kind of stories wouldn’t pop-up time and again, well then that seems to be a pretty cheep price to pay.

That's just a splendid way of approaching this! Well nothing has happened so far so nothing will probably happen in the future either. Better safe than sorry, right? Well obviously there actually is a problem because they keep slapping us in the face.... ALL THE TIME!

I have no problems with alcohol and I don't doubt my judgment, thank you very much! Can't really understand why you would assume that. FYI I exercise zero alcohol when driving my car as well. But I hear that you don't know much about people with such problems. They are masters at disguise. You would probably find them acting in a strange way if they where sober.

And do you really mean that if someone slips through with, lets say 0.3-0.5 promille (limit is 0.2), then that's OK? I wouldn’t expect much understanding from the yanks since they think it's perfectly fine to drive a car with 0.8 in your blood but I thought that we all had pretty similar views on this in Europe. Especially amongst pilots.

Just to answer Dannys challenge. Who's got conspiracy fears?? "Various clocks that appeared in the background". First of all I don't take stand on whether the BA documentary was real or just edited crap. But the fact is that a lot of people saw it and I'm pretty sure that you didn't explain to them what you where able to expose on pprune. I used it as an argument to simply state that the publics view might not correspond to flying lawyers view. Or as you superiorly like to put it: If you would have read the post....

And I take serious offence when you accuse me for disrespecting my fellow colleges. I did no such thing! If those pilots in that film where wrongfully accused I would stand by them any day.

The cars, which by the way isn't German, isn't "evidence" it's an "example". Maybe Flying lawyer can help you sort this stuff out

When it comes to people slipping through or not, this is an impossible thing to prove.... hence the expression "slipping through". It's just a statistical fact in a random and reporting testing system.

We simply have a difference in opinion on what the facts are in this case. You choose to "see" number of convictions as number of pilots working under influence. I believe that there probably is a larger number which haven't been caught by the system. Sure I believe that everyone is innocent until prove guilty but I'm not singling out people here. I’m simply admitting that there might be a problem here and discussing possible solutions. But according to you there is no problem - so no need for a solution.

Finally, I would gladly take a breath test before every flight if it would improve the publics respect and trust in us as pilots regardless if there is a problem or not. But obviously a breath of air per day is too much to ask for. They can’t just come and walk all over us in such a respect less way, after all we are pilots. Who are they to question our morale - they are just trusting us with their lives.

Keep the head in the sand; I'll stay on the lookout!