Mmmmm ..... sort of.
Actually, physical height and sex (gender that is) plays a part too.

A 200 lb male at 165 cm probably has about 500 ml less blood than a person of the same weight but 180 cm tall.
Refer - Nadler method of calculation.

True dat. I should have made clearer that I was grossly approximating.

Uplinker, being as the whistle was blown here by the F/O, I don't see how it backs up your assertion on "protection".

No, I agree, but I am confused by the line of reasoning some use that says: we should not randomly or routinely test pilots, such things should be managed by peer intervention.

Perhaps because this incident WAS safely resolved by peer intervention? Not to say that's the only safeguard. Pilots face "with cause" testing which already goes way beyond other safety-critical personnel. There's no testing whatever, random or otherwise, for surgeons, doctors or medical staff -even if they made an error resulting in a patient death. Nor would a UK police officer face mandatory testing even if he'd just accidentally shot someone.

A lot of people in engineering jobs in the UK face "without cause" & "random" testing and they aren't in anything like as critical safety jobs

Yep. Try being a train driver. Prohibition (bottle to throttle as you would say) times of days, not hours prior to working, when on-call total sobriety - can be for up to a week, employer "must exercise due diligence" to ensure train drivers are not impaired through drink or drugs - which is why testing is quite common.

Doesnt help the trains run on time tho' :{

A drunk surgeon might kill a patient. But a drunk pilot might kill hundreds of passengers in a single mass casualty incident. Hence there are special rules for transportation industry professionals and others in similar positions.

Although this kind of incident has occurred a few times over the years, this is the worst I have heard of...
Pilot allegedly passed out prior to flight 'the worst I have heard of:' aviation expert | CP24.com

Pinkman pointed out that your colleagues are not always going to be able to call out a drunken pilot as they may be drunk also.

Obviously, that is true but no matter what provisions are put in place somebody will always find a way around whatever system is in place unless we start being tested at sign on and every half hour thereafter.

As far as being infallible, the human race sucks!

In Oz, we have a pretty good system where those that know they have a problem and act, can get help without losing their livelihood or trying to hide the problem (which is where the real problems start)

It does occur to me that in my 17.5 years of flying, I've been tested, for alcohol only, on two occasions both of which were at outports, up to 4 hours after sign on.

I'd like to see a bit more random testing, I don't think it would be too burdensome on the industry or the regulator.

Can we rethink this from first principles here?
 

Our institutional treatment of the issue is hung up on a moral / legalistic framework when it should be looking at a systems performance and safety framework.

Consider our reaction to the video of a pilot staggering through the security checkpoint, which can in many cases be summed up as, "whoa! that guy needs to be sanctioned .... unless it was due to a medical condition."

The objective here is to avoid the situation in which someone who is not at the top of his or her game takes control of an aircraft full of passengers. If we get confused, and think that it's about stopping bad behavior, then we lose the plot.

If a pilot is not in top condition, why do we even care the reason? That person should not be flying an airplane that day. Period. In the case of pilot error resulting in a crash, everyone's equally dead, regardless of whether the pilot's performance was impaired because of substance abuse, the flu, diabetic crisis, a fight with his wife, fatigue from overwork, or a crappy night's sleep because of the teenagers partying until 4:00 AM in the next hotel room.

We seem to be confused here. Yes, there is a moral, ethical, or contractual difference between, on the one hand, being unfit to fly because you contracted flu and are running a high fever and, on the other hand, being unfit to fly because of something you did to yourself. But that's really between you and your employer; as a co-worker or a passenger I don't care. I'd much rather that the procedures around detecting impairment focus 100% on the safety of the aircraft and 0% on enforcing any legal or contractual obligations.

All About Ignition Interlocks

All about Ignition Interlocks - how they work - costs - BAIID - breathalyzer


one of these on every 'plane?

I'd be more interested in something that tests some combination of visual acuity, dynamic vision, reaction time, ability to cope with task saturation, etc.

"Before leaving the crew room, score over 76 on this video game or go home, no questions asked unless it starts happening regularly...."

Which shouldn't be a problem for the gelled and spiky-hair generation who've grown up with X-boxes. Some of us haven't played video games since the days of Pac-Man and Space Invaders:rolleyes:


There are people in every profession who, sadly, hit the bottle too hard... And by too hard meaning that no threat of random testing, peer assistance etc etc will make a blind bit of difference - until they're caught out such as in this case!

And to add. I'm damn sure I could fly better after a couple of pints of beer than after a restless night, say in Shanghai during Chinese New year, and then looking at the stars for 8 hours before shooting a Cat3 into Dubai after an hour of holding.

FATIGUE is far more of an issue in aviation than booze:ooh:

well, yeah, the value of the approach depends entirely on whether or not the test is a realistic measure of "being on top of one's piloting game" I meant "video game" rather loosely.

White Knight, your post doesn't make any sense at all.

Putting aside the question of whether a "a couple of pints", or about a litre, of a decent full strength brew would leave you fit to fly, surely, both fatigue and booze are problems?

Sure, a very fatigued pilot may be a bigger risk than a pilot who has imbibed a quiet light beer (and less than 2 pints) some hours before take-off. However, a pilot who has had several drinks prior to a flight will probably be a bigger risk than a a pilot who happened to have a less-than-perfect night's sleep.

Further, let's consider a fatigued pilot whose condition is exacerbated by having a few drinks. That is, one who is both fatigued and drunk. He would be considerably more dangerous than a pilot who is "merely" fatigued.

It's true that fatigue is a major issue, and a more prevalent problem than alcohol consumption by professional pilots. But to trivialize the severe effect of alcohol consumption on a pilot's aptitude is just plain silly.

I'm actually not trivialising it; but if you choose to read it that way...

As you point out both booze and fatigue are problems amongst the pilot masses, I do feel however that fatigue is actually a far greater issue...

There are quite a few studies out there showing that small amounts of alcohol may actually improve performance. I say may. Take a look at them... Fatigue on the other hand NEVER improves performance. Been there and done that many times!

Not that I would condone flying after small amounts of booze of course. Just making a point!

It depends how one defines "performance". There are studies showing that small amounts of alcohol may improve creative problem solving, but at the expense of focus and alertness. Not a good thing when you're shooting that Cat 3 approach!

Plus alcohol is also a sedative: it increases fatigue levels and may also interfere with sleep. So it's silly to say fatigue is better than alcohol, since alcohol leads to fatigue.

The Sunwing Captain passing out in the cockpit is a good clue about the relationship between alcohol and fatigue...

Their must be more to this story. "Passing Out" some how he got himself to the cockpit which would seem to me to be impossible for someone so drunk he was about to pass out. Whilst he was allegedly over the aviation limit, I wonder if he just fell asleep due to other reasons. Like fatigue.

Those of us who are old enough to remember it was almost a right of passage to be able to have a skin full the night before & still operate the next day. Even have a " sharpener" on the last leg. Be what it may I never saw or heard of anyone passing out at the controls but I did hear of a pilot turning up to work in only his underpants. (Not a recomended procedure)

However I am not condoning drinking & flying as modern aircraft are much more complex & sheer flying skills are no longer second nature.