eliptic As a lawyer, I can spot a dishonest answer.

Link which started this thread: You (after several people had been critical of your melodramatic comments): No, of course you were not talking about a specific individual. :rolleyes:

"Innocent until proved guilty"
At least we agree about one thing.


remoak Nobody suggests that the rest should be allowed to do what they want.

Surely it's perfectly reasonable for people in the industry to counter the melodramatic, emotive and uninformed comments which always appear on the extremely rare occasions when a pilot is arrested on suspicion of being over the alcohol limit?


.

Remember that most mouthwashes contain a significant amount of alcohol, so if you've recently had a shower and dohbi, and swilled your mouth out with mouthwash you stand yourself into danger should someone decide to breathalise you for whatever reason, founded or unfounded. Could this have happened to this Air Canada Captain?

When you say rare,, do you mean compared to # of flights around the world or in time?

April 2009

The actual discussion

December 28 2008

prompted a passenger revolt that forced the airline to replace all three pilots on the Boeing 767 before it took off from Moscow to New York on 28 December last year.

August 16 2008
Two Russian pilots who were about to fly a Boeing 767 were arrested at Manchester Airport early today on suspicion they were drunk.

August 4 2008

PASSENGERS had to wait six hours for their flight to leave yesterday - after an air hostess turned up drunk and was arrested.

February 4 2008
A cargo plane has been blocked from taking off from Malmö Airport after two crew members were found to be under the influence of alcohol on Monday morning.


I will also call this rare in case of # flights:ugh: but even ONE is one to much in my
humble opinion!

Like:

Associated Press - February 10, 2009 1:05 PM ET MOSCOW (AP) - Russian officials say alcohol and pilot confusion over the instrument panel on a Boeing passenger jet were responsible for a crash…88 dead


I just looked at the Swedish regulations it says: NO drinking 24 hour before and max 0.2 at 12 hours and 0.0 at take of

Recently initially recorded positive at the roadside, but the next level of check showed nothing, as indeed I hadn't been drinking. The female Gestapo admitted that after shave could set off the first gadget, as did their own make-up, sometimes.

Not long ago left my wife's car behind because she had imbibed, stopped down the road and I was all clear, my wife then suggested that if she was also acceptable we could go back and collect her car, so turned around and went back through the same road block in the other direction, and was immediately re-tested by the same hofficer. My wife asked to be tested, and this was refused on the grounds that it wasn't their job to tell someone if they were over the limit, but only to arrest them if they were, and if my wife chose to collect her car and drive through they would advise her accordingly. Turned around to continue the original journey and was immediately tested again by the same clown. Road safety measure - don't make me laugh. It was Christmas Eve, too.

I suspect that any security officer taking this course of action has a very definite opinion of the state of the aircrew before subjecting them to testing and a possible extremely red face if wrong.

Will some security officer please give us their opinion?

Police State
 

What should scare you vovachan, is presidents drinking with their finger on the button. We all risk our lives daily with a nuclear holocaust because we do not alcohol test our presidents (neither do we test our senators, our doctors, our policemen, our CEO's our Admirals and Generals.... are these people not also custodians of public safety?)

The USAF had a study showing that mistakes flying in the simulator were actually reduced after one drink.... but nobody wants to reference THAT study.

Thanks to the drunk pilot witch hunt, security thinks their job now is to sniff crew member's breath instead of spot hijackers. No wonder 911 got through!

Exactly how many drunk airliner crashes have there been?

Few to my knowledge. How many cock-ups have their been to sober tired crews who could not get enough rest out on the road? Dozens. The NASA sleep study in the early 90's that showed these REM sleep disorders was swept under the carpet. It showed that most crews surveyed and med-wired on long haul, back-side of the clock flying (sober) were operating in a dangerously impaired fashion!

I'd rather have the crew be adequately rested and a bit "scotchy" in the A.M, than to be red-eyed sober and dopey from sleep deprivation. Sleep deprivation can be worse than drunkeness.

But none of you "Weekend Weenies" or Playstation armchair pilots that post so authoritatively here on this subject will understand the validity of my post because you don't fly long haul.

Crunch - out

Where do so many people get this 'drunk pilot' idea????? Very very few pilots attempt to fly aware they are drunk. Most have followed the 'rules', and have had to assume they are legal.

IF I was to drink a reasonable amount prior to the BTT limit (12hrs), then get some sleep etc., before reporting to work, I have no idea what my blood alcohol concentration is at report. We 'assume' we are under the limit because of the 12hour rule (or 10/24!!). It is just pure luck that we dont get tested and found to have a miniscule amount of alcohol remaining.

If SLF want pilots who are free of blood alcohol, there is going to be a huge shortage of crew!! (imagine a world with no aircraft flying) As I unsderstand, it isnt humanly possible, to have zero alcohol in your bloodstream.

All this hysteria, just serves to force those who may suspect they are over the limit, to disguise the symptoms even better. :=

Not sure if it's been mentioned, and not that is would make being imparied acceptable, but the pilot was a relief pilot, not the Captain.

It is my understanding that an Air Canada Staff physician did a blood test within the required 4 hours, and the pilot has been cleared, and positioned home through YYZ. Don't expect to read that in the news. I also wouldn't expect to read that according to a source at AC, they have been told the breath test at LHR has a 7% false positive rate.

I posted this on another forum some time ago (and before anyone says anything, the discussion was very much tongue in cheek):

Now, tongue in cheek it may have been, but the arithmetic is pretty much correct and it does give an indication of the type of sesssion you need to have had if you are still over the limit after a decent nights sleep.

If you repeat the above experience, but behave "responsibly":= and call it a day when the pizza arrives, then under 'normal' circumstances you will be under the 20-limit at 08.00 the next morning.

So what on earth are people doing on the day before a flight if they are getting a decent nights sleep and are still over the 20-limit.

And I don't buy the mouthwash theory. Unless you are in the habit of swallowing fairly significant quantities of the stuff, it really is not going to make that much diference. Know your limits, know the rules and don't report for work if you suspect you may have have fallen foul of temptation.

But what are the terms of reference of BAA security guards? Is it part of their job spec to sniff breath, or do some of them just believe that they have a moral responsibility to keep us on the straight and narrow?

Flying Lawyer

Of course it is... as long as they stick to the facts, keep the red herrings out of the conversation, and stop trying to compare apples with oranges.

I do rather wonder if you have been involved in defending a few of the people accused of excess blood alcohol while flying (or while attempting to go flying), as you seem a little more emotionally connected to this issue than normal.

I would also have to say, that over the last 20 years of airline flying I have seen plenty of cases of over-indulgence of alcohol followed shortly thereafter by flying activity. The range of participants ranges from experienced ex-military captains to green F/Os. The industry has been in denial about this for years. The only reason that folk getting caught is rare is that they are not routinely checked, and there is no concerted campaign to investigate the problem.

Security people dobbing in pilots is relatively rare, and when it happens it is always treated as a jobsworth trying to "get even" with a pilot for some assumed insult in the past. Maybe, just maybe, the security guy was being diligent and honestly feared that the pilot in question was impaired? Or do we not accept such possibilities here on PPRuNe?

Has anyone even considered the direct relationship between the massive increase in recent mishaps, moments of poor judgement or decision making.......... and the overall decline in our Terms and Conditions as pilots? Most of us who still have a job are fatigued most of the time and almost all other pilots are at least concerned about their jobs, pensions, or the continual decline in our Terms and Conditions.

Human beings are human beings and as such, we all make mistakes. I am in no way defending any pilot who knowingly breaks the ''bottle to throttle'' rule, or someone who shows up to fly an aircraft when they are not fit to fly. But these times are difficult for many people on the planet and particularly for pilots, who are not allowed to have moments of indiscretion.

If the critics on this forum were to witness firsthand what is going on at my airline, (Emirates), even the most despicable kiss-ass, management wannabe pilot, would admit that the limit of human tolerance has been surpassed. We have recently lost at least 7 pilots in the past 2 weeks (fired !) for indiscretions or less than ideal judgements. (no one really knows the true number due to the management style here). But most of these instances would not have happened in the first place if not for the extra stress put on pilots, and secondly our draconian masters would not have made the decision to fire these guys, even if they did mess something up.

Then again, I have to admit we have particularly incompetent and self-serving middle management, who are under the watchful eye of even worse senior management..... but I suspect my particular situation is similar to many other airline jobs.

There is a point beyond which......... stress is harmful. A certain amount of stress can actually help a person perform better, but long-term and abnormally high stress is detrimental. I don't mean to divert this thread, nor do I want to make excuses for anyone, but this profession has sunk to such a low level, that similar or worse occurences will increase.

There will be more instances such as the LHR one, and more accidents and incidents until this messed up industry gets it sh1t together! If there is stupidity going on at supposedly respectable airlines, just imagine what is being covered up at some airlines.

Pilots should be aware of the drink limits and stick to them - if they dont, they get what they deserve.

If (as seems likely judging by the post on here) pilots have a real issue feeling that flying hours/rostas leave them more impaired/fatigued/unsafe, then I would have thought that pilots have a moral duty to say so publicly, and refuse to fly the aircraft.

The feeling I get from reading these posts is that there are numerous pilots out there who feel that they are not "awake" enough to be in proper comand of the aircraft...scary!

If this is the wrong impression, then I apologise, but if its right, why dont pilots make a stand?

remoak

You're mistaking exasperation for emotion. I'm not in the slightest emotionally connected to this issue.
I admit I do sometimes find it exasperating when people jump to conclusions without finding out and considering the facts, or make sweeping (and often absurd) generalisations, but there's not much I can do about that - I've been a lawyer for almost 39 years so 'Facts first, opinion second' is very deeply ingrained.
I'll try to be more patient. ;)
(I'll start by not responding to the ridiculous post just made by eliptic.)

I had no interest in the issue until the 2003 Act was announced. I then explained in quite a lot of detail how the new law would operate when it came into force, drew attention to the very significant changes, and warned pilots about how those changes might affect them. I was concerned that pilots used to the 'old' law might be at risk of inadvertently breaking the new law, with dire consequences.
I'd learnt a lot from professional pilots on PPRuNe over the years (and still do) and saw contributing my expertise as a way of putting something back into the pot.
If you're interested, the thread is here: http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/1...g-new-law.html


I've only been involved in one case, and that was way back in 2004. The 2003 Act came into force in 2004 and I represented the first pilot to appear in the Crown Court under what was then the new law.
The Captain concerned gave me permission to post the facts of his case on PPRuNe in the hope that his experience would prevent other pilots from making the same mistakes as he had, and from suffering the same consequences.
If you're interested, see post #32 in this thread: http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/1...in-jailed.html


And no, I'm not a heavy (or even regular) drinker, and never have been. Just in case you're wondering. :)

.

GroundedSLF
Huh?
If I have to work in the morning, I have the common sense to stop drinking at a reasonable time prior, and 300 pax haven't placed their lives in my hands.
12 hours bottle to throttle. It's not rocket science. And I don't know a single professional pilot who doesn't respect that limit--and when I say respect that limit, I mean they aren't falling down drunk at 12:01:00.

Even if you go by the 8 hours required by CARS, if you don't have the judgment to know 8 hours after you quit drinking that you are in no shape to fly, you're probably in the wrong profession.

I have a question for professional aircrew: do you think that the random breathalyser checks the police can now conduct on flight crew in the UK are a good thing? What about random checks that your company performs?

I have three children under the age of 3 and a half and unfortunately I often get less than the optimum amount of sleep. In fact I only get it on nightstops whilst our littlest is night feeding. It's very likely that I have operated in a state less fit than someone who had a blood alcohol content above that allowed by the law. For those who think they should live in a perfect world welcome to the real world. If I reported unfit every time I thought I might be due to lack of sleep I'd be on our companys absence management program which is fairly punitive. I could check into a hotel whenever I have to work, put my kids in care or buy a bigger house but guess what? They don't pay me enough! Sorry if it's a surprise to some that real people with real lives and not gods fly planes around but get used to it.

Unfortunately, it IS rocket science....

I too often layover in LHR, and I always consume a few pints. And I always stop drinking at least 12 hours prior to my flight.

The problem is the legal limit in the UK is .010 percent blood alcohol. That is very close to ZERO. How can you be sure that you are below the limit 12 hours later? I always assumed that I was under .010 12 hours later, but now it's got me wondering. :rolleyes:

TDK mk2;
Absolutely; BTDT just as any professional airman contributing to this thread has, which is why I compared the two, (as others did).

While the specific issue here is, "Why would anyone jeopardize their career?" and "no sympathy if they're arrested", that doesn't solve the larger flight safety issues at hand. The number of pilots who undertake this risk is miniscule compared to the number of departures each day the world over. I stated that I am not "comparing" the two to determine which is worse, but to state that the industry must deal with both issues and it is only dealing with one because it is high profile and an easy target with the certainty of a public reaction while the issue of crew fatigue is not.

remoak, you stated that this comparison was "peurile", which means "juvenile", "childish" and "lacking in maturity". From your posts I don't think that's the way you think of flight safety but all the same I'm left wondering what was meant, given the issues at hand. Tying the two issues together, as I said in my post, was not the intent. One does not change/improve flight safety by piggy-backing on another issue - I believe we both understand that; it is to draw attention to two equally risky issues, one of which is extremely rare, the other of which is swept under the carpet at every mention of it. The point is, one issue is serious and is widely experienced but ignored, the other is serious, has extremely high public currency but is equally extremely rare. It is clear which issue must be dealt with more effectively.

Arresting crew members under suspicion of drinking wins points as much as it may prevent the odd incident. While fear and power work in the short term, it is my view that no flight safety initiative ought to be advanced in this manner. I hope I'm a bit more clear.
Cheers,
PJ2

Flying Lawyer

Exasperation is an emotion, as it happens... and you are quite right to be exasperated (ie irritated intensely or infuriated).

I do remember the thread you started, and remember thinking it was timely and useful. I remember the story of the chap you defended as well - thought maybe there were more.

I also seem to recall that you are/were part of the PPRuNe "inner circle". It might interest you to know that the worst exhibitions of drinking to excess within 24 hours of flying that I have ever witnessed, have occurred at the two PPRuNe "bashes" that I attended - the first and second, I think. I well recall sitting around a table at a pub near Stansted with a bunch of other PPRuNers, when one of them asked in a very slurred voice who was flying the next morning. Half a dozen hands went up and trust me, they were all very drunk (the people, not the hands). Everybody seemed highly amused by this. There was more than one "mod" amongst them...

That's why I never went to another one after the second. I thought the first might have been an aberration - it wasn't.

As I said, drinking is deeply embedded in the British psyche and that includes pilots. It also includes doctors, police superintendents, and others who should know better. There is a significant problem in a number of professions, but the default position in the UK is one of denial.

PJ2

I absolutely agree with your comments regarding fatigue and the correlation between performance while impaired by either alcohol or fatigue. My point was that the two differ in one fundamental way; excess alcohol can be easily tested for and is illegal, whereas fatigue is not. It SHOULD be, but it isn't. And we all know what happens to any pilot who claims they are "fatigued" under current FTLs - it is a one-way ticket to a short career unless you can prove chronic fatigue medically. THAT should be illegal too, but it isn't. Another quirk of British culture.

So with fatigue you absolutely can't win, whereas with alcohol the rules are simple and easily obeyed.

The fact that fatigue is far more likely to be the cause of an accident than alcohol, is quietly ignored...

So yes, you are clear and I do agree. It wasn't you I was responding to.

Would it be too mischievous to suggest that arresting someone for being one third of the driving limit is free, but that ensuring aircrew are properly rested would cost money.