What was the guy thinking?
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
What was the guy thinking?
LONDON, England (CNN) -- British police said they stopped a United Airlines pilot from flying while intoxicated earlier this week, pulling him from a Boeing 767 aircraft at London's Heathrow airport and charging him with being on duty while his blood-alcohol level was over the limit.
Scotland Yard said that Erwin Vermont Washington, 51, was taken off the plane just before take-off Monday. Washington, of Lakewood, Colorado, has since been released on bail.
United spokeswoman Megan McCarthy said that "the pilot has been removed from service" during an investigation.
"United's alcohol policy is among the strictest in the industry, and we have no tolerance for violation of this well-established policy," she said.
Washington remains in the United Kingdom, Scotland Yard said.
Scotland Yard said that Erwin Vermont Washington, 51, was taken off the plane just before take-off Monday. Washington, of Lakewood, Colorado, has since been released on bail.
United spokeswoman Megan McCarthy said that "the pilot has been removed from service" during an investigation.
"United's alcohol policy is among the strictest in the industry, and we have no tolerance for violation of this well-established policy," she said.
Washington remains in the United Kingdom, Scotland Yard said.
Putting money into aviation is like wiping before you poop....it just don't make sense!
Re: What was the guy thinking?
Is she telling the public that there are airlines who aren't as strict with alcohol policy? So she's suggesting that there are levels of strictness towards pilot intoxication amongst our industry?United's alcohol policy is among the strictest in the industry...
Maybe in comparison to some airline in the desert...
Re: What was the guy thinking?
Hasn't London Police falsely arrested pilots two other times for being drunk?
Re: What was the guy thinking?
Erwin Vermont Washington... interesting name, must have been patriotic parents or something.
No trees were harmed in the transmission of this message. However, a rather large number of electrons were temporarily inconvenienced.
Re: What was the guy thinking?
The FARs state a BAC of .04% or higher is considered intoxicated. What UAL's policy is, I have no idea. Hopefully 0% but thats just wishful thinking.
Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
Semper Fidelis
“De inimico non loquaris male, sed cogites"-
Do not wish death for your enemy, plan it.
Semper Fidelis
“De inimico non loquaris male, sed cogites"-
Do not wish death for your enemy, plan it.
Re: What was the guy thinking?
"What was the guy thinking?"
Come on now.
Are you so naive as to think that most pilots 50+ have not done the same thing before, somewhere along the line? Only difference is they (we) got away with it.
I haven't met too many in this industry who haven't made the same mistake, and I'm no exception.
So keep your holierthanthou comments to yourself and learn from his mistake, so you don't end up in the same boat someday.
Come on now.
Are you so naive as to think that most pilots 50+ have not done the same thing before, somewhere along the line? Only difference is they (we) got away with it.
I haven't met too many in this industry who haven't made the same mistake, and I'm no exception.
So keep your holierthanthou comments to yourself and learn from his mistake, so you don't end up in the same boat someday.
Re: What was the guy thinking?
??crankedup wrote: Are you so naive as to think that most pilots 50+ have not done the same thing before, somewhere along the line? Only difference is they (we) got away with it.
I haven't met too many in this industry who haven't made the same mistake, and I'm no exception.
'We have all done it before so it's okay'? I don't think so bud.
Re: What was the guy thinking?
quote="Fotoflyer"]
'We have all done it before so it's okay'? I don't think so bud.[/quote]
I said most. That means "not all".
So fear not, you're not included in my post.
New to flying? Ever been out of Canada? How's Mum?
You do still live at home. Correct?
??crankedup wrote: Are you so naive as to think that most pilots 50+ have not done the same thing before, somewhere along the line? Only difference is they (we) got away with it.
I haven't met too many in this industry who haven't made the same mistake, and I'm no exception.
'We have all done it before so it's okay'? I don't think so bud.[/quote]
I said most. That means "not all".
So fear not, you're not included in my post.
New to flying? Ever been out of Canada? How's Mum?
You do still live at home. Correct?
Re: What was the guy thinking?
Back when I was growing up drinking and driving was not as socially unacceptable as it is now. Sure, it was still illegal, but the penalties weren't that severe. Pretty much "most" people did it to varying degrees.
Going out for beers on a layover has a history decades long and we are now going through our own adjustment period courtesy of the good folks at Heathrow. It's probably overdue. But we can't deny (and shouldn't) that most of us have flown under the weather at some point or other. If the new batch view it as so unacceptable they never do it then that's good.
Going out for beers on a layover has a history decades long and we are now going through our own adjustment period courtesy of the good folks at Heathrow. It's probably overdue. But we can't deny (and shouldn't) that most of us have flown under the weather at some point or other. If the new batch view it as so unacceptable they never do it then that's good.
Re: What was the guy thinking?
Yes, I'm sure that she is saying some aren't as strict as United.loopa wrote:Is she telling the public that there are airlines who aren't as strict with alcohol policy? So she's suggesting that there are levels of strictness towards pilot intoxication amongst our industry?United's alcohol policy is among the strictest in the industry...
Maybe in comparison to some airline in the desert...
Nark quoted a FAR, the legal minimum, but any airline can impose stricter requirements on their crews by means of their Ops manual, a legal document in most countries.
Just so you're clear on it: (examples)
FAR's say BAC .04% (thanks Nark)
All other major carriers say BAC .03%
United say BAC .02%
There you have varying degrees of strictness among air carriers yet all more strict than the FAR's, welcome to the real world. Most carriers in Canada have the bottle to throttle limition in excess of the minimum required in the CAR's some don't again varying amount of strictness.
Tolerence for abuse of policy and regulation is different than strictness.
Re: What was the guy thinking?
I would wait and see what happens as there have been false accusations and scandals from this very airport in the recent past.
Nowadays, if one were to liberally coat their hands with Purelle, then go by a security person, that could raise suspicion.
Nowadays, if one were to liberally coat their hands with Purelle, then go by a security person, that could raise suspicion.
-
- Top Poster
- Posts: 6745
- Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2005 8:54 pm
- Location: I'm a CPL trapped in a PPL's Body.
- Contact:
Re: What was the guy thinking?
So why is the rest of the world more trustworthy with a drink than we are?Alcohol or Drugs - Crew Members
602.03 No person shall act as a crew member of an aircraft
(a) within eight hours after consuming an alcoholic beverage;
(b) while under the influence of alcohol; or
(c) while using any drug that impairs the person's faculties to the extent that the safety of the aircraft or of persons on board the aircraft is endangered in any way.
She’s built like a Steakhouse, but she handles like a Bistro.
Let's kick the tires, and light the fires.... SHIT! FIRE! EMERGENCY CHECKLIST!
Let's kick the tires, and light the fires.... SHIT! FIRE! EMERGENCY CHECKLIST!
Re: What was the guy thinking?
This case illustrates something very important to pilots...and something that I think we all need to be more aware of.
TC's guidelines, or your company guidelines, could land you in jail. Everybody needs to be aware that reporting for duty with any alcohol left in your system from the night before could cost you your job...at a minimum. I'm confident that hangovers are responsible for the majority of this press...
Ever since these cases started gaining more momentum I've adopted a 1 beer limit if I'm reporting for duty within 24 hours. I think it's conservative enough to save me any hassle in the future but also allows me to have a brew on the odd layover. Drinking is just not important enough to risk all that I've worked for.
TC's guidelines, or your company guidelines, could land you in jail. Everybody needs to be aware that reporting for duty with any alcohol left in your system from the night before could cost you your job...at a minimum. I'm confident that hangovers are responsible for the majority of this press...
Ever since these cases started gaining more momentum I've adopted a 1 beer limit if I'm reporting for duty within 24 hours. I think it's conservative enough to save me any hassle in the future but also allows me to have a brew on the odd layover. Drinking is just not important enough to risk all that I've worked for.
-
- Rank Moderator
- Posts: 5602
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 3:47 pm
- Location: Straight outta Dundarave...
Re: What was the guy thinking?
Nark wrote:The FARs state a BAC of .04% or higher is considered intoxicated. What UAL's policy is, I have no idea. Hopefully 0% but thats just wishful thinking.
Nark, IIRC, there is always some residual BAC due to natural processes (can't remember the actual figure - it was in one of those interminable PPRUNE threads on this subject the last time Heathrow busted a drinking pilot), so a 0% threshold will capture just about everyone. That's why there's tolerance up to a certain limit...
Say, what's that mountain goat doing up here in the mist?
Happiness is V1 at Thompson!
Ass, Licence, Job. In that order.
Happiness is V1 at Thompson!
Ass, Licence, Job. In that order.
Re: What was the guy thinking?
No - I'm probably older than you. I've been around for quite some time thankscrankedup wrote:
New to flying? Ever been out of Canada? How's Mum?
You do still live at home. Correct?
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1502
- Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 8:36 am
Re: What was the guy thinking?
north shore,
apparently the equipment can only be calibrated or is only accurate to 0.02
apparently the equipment can only be calibrated or is only accurate to 0.02
Re: What was the guy thinking?
I believe the limit in LHR is .02.. The equivalent of half a beer. I think we should reserve judgement until he is actually convicted. As someone else mentioned, Heathrow is becoming notorious for falsly accusing pilots of being intoxicated...
Re: What was the guy thinking?
]
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 6:46 am
Posts: 633 crankedup wrote:
New to flying? Ever been out of Canada? How's Mum?
You do still live at home. Correct?
No - I'm probably older than you. I've been around for quite some time thanks [/b
Good. Now try to act like it.
Re: What was the guy thinking?
I´d say no. They were arrested on suspicion of being over the limit. That means they failed the breathalyzer but were cleared later.Flybaby wrote:Hasn't London Police falsely arrested pilots two other times for being drunk?
Simple advice to all who want to keep their jobs:
When in Britain, and scheduled to fly in the morning, do not drink anything the night before. Right?