Drunk??????

[Flyingdutchman]

WILMINGTON, N.C. — The Federal Aviation Administration is investigating whether a pilot for a regional carrier failed a breath test before boarding his Atlanta-bound flight.
Airline officials would not identify the Atlanta-based co-pilot or say how long he has worked for Atlanta Southeast Airlines.

The co-pilot, who has since returned to Georgia, was grounded with pay pending results of blood and urine tests, ASA airline spokesman Kent Landers said.

The 28 passengers were removed from the flight nearly a half-hour after their scheduled departure from the Wilmington International Airport, said Airport Director Jon Rosborough. They were placed on other flights.

Rosborough couldn't confirm whether the co-pilot of the twin-engine plane failed the test.

FAA guidelines say crew members may not have more than a 0.04 percent blood alcohol level and may not drink alcohol within eight hours before duty. Violations can lead to license revocation.

Rosborough said the co-pilot was stopped from boarding the plane at around 6 a.m. by a security officer with the Transportation Security Administration. It was not immediately clear why the co-pilot was stopped.

The investigation comes less than a month after two America West Pilots allegedly tried to fly a jetliner while they were drunk. They were arrested in Miami before the plane took off.

 

[cvsfly]

Watch your backs! The new battle between TSA and pilots or is the pilot population more subseptable(sp?) to alcoholism than we originally thought? Very disturbing if the findings do show positive results of his BAC. Even more disturbing is if an over zealous TSA screener is jumping the gun here and crying alcoholic whenever he makes a psycological assessment of pilots going through security who seam upset at the whole ridiculous process.

 

[skydiverdriver]

Yup. Just another group of people that we can't joke around with. Just be careful everywhere you are in public view. I hope they dont' take it too far, because if they single out too many pilots, we will never get to work!!

 

[ifly4food]

I have gone through security at Wilmington, NC many, many times at all hours of the day.
I can personally assure you that it is one of the worst checkpoints in the system. The CSS checkpoint managers hate pilots. They think we're all a bunch of prima donna jerks. The screeners are rude, obnoxious, and go out of their way to make a spectacle of uniformed crewmwmbers. I have had my company's station manager called no less than 4 times for "harassing a screener". Each time I have been vindicated.

My "offenses" include:
1. Insisting that my baggage remain in my view.
2. Asking for a private screening.
3. Asking the a very rude and conspicuous screener to treat me politely and with respect in front of passengers when a private screening "wasn't available".
4. Insisting that I am not required to remove my shoes or any other article of clothing prior to passing through the metal detector.
5. Apologizing to our passengers who have been delayed by my extra thouough screening.
6. "Unauthorized touching of personal articles" when my wallet, phone, and personal articles went flying out of the xray machine and the screener didn't bother to catch them for me. I had set off the metal detector and was on my way to the "penalty box".

Every time I opened my copy of FAA/ALPA's "Pilot's Guide to the Security Checkpoint" and showed the manager how the screeners weren't following the rules. The case was closed.

Long story short... I wouldn't be one bit surprised if these clowns smell scope and run with it from now on. Look for more occurances of this in the future if screeners aren't stripped of their current absolute power over crewmwmbers.

 

[ilinipilot]

If it comes out that this guy was not drunk that security screener better be FIRED on the spot. All you pilots out there dont stand for this stuff. If they call you out say fine, but make sure when they bet wrong they get whats ritfully coming to them, a pink slip.

 

[Anaconda]

so what's the word on this guy's BAC? .16 or .016? can anyone confirm it?

 

[Airline Pilot27]

Drunk

I'm pretty drunk now hehe

 

[AV8700]

The Atlanta Urinal says the results are due on Tuesday.

 

[Homer J simpson]

He FD,

effe controleren of je wel een echte "flying dutchman" bent.

oudoe

H.

 

[Flyingdutchman]

jaja de nederlanders veroveren de ..nk site! hahaha


spatterrrrrrr

 

[rumpletumbler]

Those free language translation sites work great don't they. Here is what I got:

jaja they the netherlands veroveren they. nk site! hahaha

Probably the same thing the CIA uses.

RT

 

[Flyingdutchman]

Affirmative! haha

G'day

 

[GoingHot]

[]If it comes out that this guy was not drunk that security screener better be FIRED on the spot. All you pilots out there dont stand for this stuff. If they call you out say fine, but make sure when they bet wrong they get whats ritfully coming to them, a pink slip[/]

Haven't you heard? These guys are Government workers now. They can't be fired.

 

[publisher]

ASA

As the individual resigned, I think it would not be a stretch to think that he may have not done too well on the testing.

The dangers here are many. First, every screener and passenger will start smelling their flight crew. No more Bay Rum after shave. It is also interesting to note that as the individual did not get to the plane, he only faces license suspension and not a more severe penalty.

In effect, the screener saved him from jail.

 

[Typhoon1244]

Bad News

It is my understanding--after speaking to an exceptionally reliable source--that this individual has resigned. His situation is much more grim than I imagined as he (A) is only twenty-two years old, (B) just bought a house, because (C) his wife just had a baby this week. (In fact, they induced labor two weeks early since ASA agreed to let his benefits run for another two months. They didn't have to do it, and I guess it says a lot about the nature of this company that they did.)

I have made a couple of poor career decisions here-and-there, but this fellow's judgement is just...unfathomable. It's not my place to judge him, and even if it was...I can't understand what would cause someone to risk so much for a few drinks.

I am dissapointed about the further damage he did to all our reputations, though.

I still believe that there is a very small minority of commercial pilots that have a problem with alcohol. But, at the risk of sounding holier-than-thou, if you are in that minority, please, ask someone for help. We'll all do what we can as long as you don't wait until it's too late.

One last thing: this has the potential for causing security screeners to become wildly overzealous in their "duties." Everybody be very careful. Make sure you have witnesses at all times when passing through security! Crews, stick together: don't get caught alone with Barney Fife.

 

[Anaconda]

that's a sad story...

just curious...where were the other crewmembers when all this took place? why didn't they police this up before they even walked into the terminal?

 

[crxpilot]

Hey, I get paid .5 above guarantee for pee-pee tests. If thats what they want to do, fine by me. If you are not guilty, then there is nothing to worry about!

 

[Typhoon1244]

that's a sad story...just curious...where were the other crewmembers when all this took place? why didn't they police this up before they even walked into the terminal?

I'm a little fuzzy on this part of the story, but it sounded to me like the captain was not aware the F/O had alcohol on his breath until the security troops made an issue of it. (Possibly the F/O was not inebriated enough that his behavior was significantly out of whack.) After they cleared security--the security people decided they didn't have the authority to do anything but report the problem--the captain called a halt to the flight until the F/O could be dealt with.

Again, I'm not crystal clear on this part of the story. If anyone knows better, speak up. (Type up?)

 

[lionflyer]

What we as crewmembers need to do is soak our ties and shirts in a pint of vodka overnight. We will go through security as normal and of course those morons will accuse us of being drunk. When our breathalyzer comes up as .000 we can look them right in the eye and say "Let me talk to your supervisor BIYATCH", and then file a lawsuit. Of course that would take some serious balls (which I don't have). That would be a good experiment for the guys approaching age 60.

 

[Anaconda]

When our breathalyzer comes up as .000 we can look them right in the eye and say "Let me talk to your supervisor BIYATCH", and then file a lawsuit.

ROFLMAO!!!

I only wish I could say that!

 

[Flyingdutchman]

CHECK!!

 

[publisher]

posts

The last few posts are disturbing. In both the America West and ASA situations, the pilots clearly had been drinking. They allowed themselves to throw away the careers that everyone on this board seeks.

To blame the screeners or others for what one brings upon themselves is not the right reaction.

These people helped give the profession a black eye, put other pilots even more under the scope, and led to lack of confidence by the flying public.

We have only them to blame not those who noticed it.

 

[Rvrrat]

Study hard folks..... There's a whiz quiz in your immediate future.

 

[lionflyer]

Publisher,

I agree. My above post was just a joke. No proffessional pilot in their right mind would attempt that. The thing is, the security commandos are going to scrutinize pilots more than everyone else because of these incidents. Once they get proven wrong a few times, they'll back off.

Fly safe.

 

[Typhoon1244]

...the security commandos are going to scrutinize pilots more than everyone else because of these incidents. Once they get proven wrong a few times, they'll back off.

Exactly right. Okay, I agree, the two America West guys and the ASA guy in ILM brought this on themselves and, by extension, all of us. Extraordinarily bad decision making. But that doesn't mean I have to lie down and take the s___ the security troops are doling out.

Am I the only guy pissed off that there are 3,000+ pilots out of work, while these clowns in security still have their jobs? Two weeks after 9-11, the directors of the FBI and CIA and every single privately-employed individual connected with airport security should have been looking for jobs.

Seeing inept, uneducated security screeners gleefully pointing fingers at intoxicated pilots is like seeing drug pushers narcing on petty thieves. I'm not impressed by either bunch. Personally, I wish the screeners were as good at spotting terrorists as they are at spotting drunk pilots.

 

[enigma]

Two weeks after 9-11, the directors of the FBI and CIA and every single privately-employed individual connected with airport security should have been looking for jobs.

And Especially the top brass at the FAA and the airline managers who choose to ignore the warnings.

Why is it that the FAA has avoided any blame for the tragedy these past 11 months?

regards ;
8N

 

[CatYaaak]

Hold on a second...

Even though many current critisizms of overzealous, incompetent, and power-tripping screeners are legitimate, it's COMPLETELY unfair to hang the events of 9-11 on them, even in part. The implements used by the homicide hijackers (box cutters with < 4" blade) were LEGAL to carry aboard at the time.

But even if they had been illegal (like they are now) and confiscated at the security checkpoint, the hijackers still would have posessed the two critical weapons they used that day. The first was THE WILL to carry out their plan, killing individuals (flight crew)at close-quarters in order to commit suicide/homicide on a massive scale. In fact, this could even be accomplished with nothing more than bare hands and/or pens by a team of commited individuals.

But that willingness alone would not have worked had it not been for the REAL key to their success, which was OUR OWN policy of "passive-resistance". The hijackers KNEW this policy, developed as a response to the "Take me to Havana" scenario of the 1970s, would play into their hands because ultimately, it DICTATED COMPLIANCE WITH THEIR DEMANDS, so therefore afforded them the window of opportunity they needed. That policy DID NOT FACTOR IN commited, planned suicide.

Even the attempted-murder/suicide by using a FedEx DC-10 as a weapon a few years ago, and 20 yrs of suicide-bombings did nothingto change the arrogant attitude of the supposed, self-proclaimed "experts" who set policy and mandated compliance to it. Their self-blinding "insight" into the realm of terrorism and what makes those people tick ASSUMED that hijackers were too stupid to learn how to fly an airplane, even at the most rudimentary level needed for the PURPOSE of crashing it. The security "experts" in government and airline training departments (usually ex-fed law enforcement agents safe on the ground) REFUSED to address this possiblity because it didn't fit into their neat, little box of scenarios.

Pointing out that responding to that mandated, ultimately-compliant policy in response to those commited to real-world, planned murder (such as with FedEx) was tantamount to a "lambs-to-the-slaughter" approach, threw a big wrench into the theororetical world they live in where their policies always met with success. They didn't want to hear any argument, and those expressing doubts were met with condesceding answers.

It took 9-11 to change that idiotic, smug policy throughout the industry, and therefore took away any would-be terrorist's greatest weapon. We now consider the cockpit to be a castle keep that WILL be defended under any circumstance and with all available means. Pax realize this and they too are willing to stand in defense. This is OUR most effective tool against another 9-11-style attack....the deterrence created by the terrorist's awareness that their chances of real-world success have been dramatically reduced because of OUR WILL (pax included), and the days of lambs-to-the-slaughter are GONE. In fact, those days ended on 9-11 also, aboard the United flight that crashed in PA.

 

[enigma]

Come on

Catyaak,

The common strategy was FAA. Information came out several months after 9/11 that the FAA and airlines had been warned of the possibilty of suicide hijackings. They choose to do nothing.
I expect the airline managers to have their head in the sand. I don't expect the peoples representatives (FAA) to have the same outlook. Just one confidential memo from the FAA about the possibility of a terrorist hijacking might have saved lives on 9/11. Just one paragraph in a GOM stating that it might be prudent to lock the door and head for the deck if someone started murdering people in the back.........What if?..........I might be wrong in my recollection, if I am I'll correct it; but in the meantime, I blame the FAA as much or more than anyone else.

regards
8N