• This site moved from forums.flightinfo.com to flightinfo.com. Please update your bookmarks.

Pax suspected pilots drunk

cvsfly

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2002
Posts
723
Total Time
4600
Passenger comment delays flight

COLUMBIA, S.C. - A flight headed from Columbia to Cincinnati was delayed three hours on Wednesday after a passenger questioned the sobriety of the pilots.

The Delta Connections flight, which had 32 passengers and three crew members aboard, was scheduled to depart Columbia Metropolitan Airport at 10:30 a.m. It was about to take off when a passenger questioned whether pilots were required to take Breathalyzer tests, said Rick DeLisi, Atlantic Coast Airlines spokesman.

"Our airline's policy is to treat such questions as a question of public safety," DeLisi said. "We have to take them 100 percent seriously."

Pilots on the flight took blood-alcohol tests, which confirmed they were sober, DeLisi said.

The delay forced the airline to rebook passengers on other flights. Some passengers couldn't be rescheduled to reach their connections, DeLisi said.

"It caused a tremendous inconvenience for some passengers," he said. "This type of verbal comment is taken just as seriously as those made at security checkpoints."

Two America West pilots were charged Monday by Florida police with operating an aircraft under the influence of alcohol and operating a motor vehicle under the influence.

-----------------------------
Thanks to two more idiots, we will all be under more scrutiny and jump through more hoops. If we don't police our own others will.
Considering all that has happened, I can't blame the passenger too much. I haven't seen anything the airlines have done to instill much confidence in the general public.
 

trainerjet

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2002
Posts
507
Total Time
8000+
I say lgood for ACA. Every single time a passenger sticks their head into the cockpit or makes a comment as they're boarding the plane about alcohol, drunk pilots, Breathalyzer tests, etc., the flight will be delayed while we all get one.....every single time. Maybe then they won't think their jokes are so funny.
 

J41CA

Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
23
Total Time
3000
Which two idiots are you refering to?

Based on your ending comments, it appears you were suggesting the ACA pilots were at fault. I didn't interpret the situation as being caused by a crew member. Rather, it was a passenger comment, which was solely based on the America West fiasco. It is ACA's policy (as well as most other airlines) to return to the gate and test the crew members. The end result was the inconvienence of many pax because of one persons sensless comments.
 

tarp

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 24, 2002
Posts
539
Total Time
Lots
I wonder what happened when the announcement was made - "Well folks, thanks to the passenger in Row 7A, we are now cancelling this flight so that the crew can be tested for potential alcohol abuse. Please have a nice day and thank you for flying Delta Connection."

That, plus the fact that (from what I heard) the airlines "black list" anyone who falsely accuses a crew member. 31 other passengers inconvenienced, airplane and crew displaced, loss of revenue plus rebooking fees. Put a hurt on the profit picture due to somebody thinking they're funny.

The America West guys opened the door. Now we all suffer.
 

Tim47SIP

Serving for the USofA
Joined
Dec 5, 2001
Posts
1,157
Total Time
10,000
J41CA

It is very clear that he was not blaming the two DCI pilots at all. He was reffering to the two idiots at AW. As a DCI pilot, I fully agree with him. And if we all have to take breathalizer tests every time a pax complains, then so be it.:rolleyes:
 

Timebuilder

Entrepreneur
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
4,625
Total Time
1634
While the offeding passenger should not be identified to the other passengers, as a matter of liability on the part of the carrier, the action itself should certainly be announced:

"Ladies and gentlemen, a passenger has questioned the sobriety of our flight crew. Although they have not violated any policy, and do not apear to have any imairment of any kind, our Company policy dictates that this flight canot continue as scheduled. We regret that a passenger has seen fit to inconvenience you in this way. Thank you."

That should be more than enough to keep this from happening every day.
 

LAPD Airship

Active member
Joined
Apr 23, 2002
Posts
25
Total Time
3100
Timebuilder said:
While the offeding passenger should not be identified to the other passengers, as a matter of liability on the part of the carrier, the action itself should certainly be announced:

"Ladies and gentlemen, a passenger has questioned the sobriety of our flight crew. Although they have not violated any policy, and do not apear to have any imairment of any kind, our Company policy dictates that this flight canot continue as scheduled. We regret that a passenger has seen fit to inconvenience you in this way. Thank you."

That should be more than enough to keep this from happening every day.
Whatever! Identify the a$$hole, ban his a$$ from the airline, cancel the flight, and then make the announcement above ;)

Ill take the extra pay for testing...Im just waiting for the idiots at the security checkpoints to start sniffing me everytime I walk by.
 

LearLove

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 27, 2001
Posts
4,451
Total Time
12000+
Just wondering?

Any laywer types think that the pax can be held liable or the ACA cew could take him to court for def. of character / slander or something? I'm not a sue happy person or anything like that its just a thought.
 

Timebuilder

Entrepreneur
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
4,625
Total Time
1634
I don't think the pax could be held liable unless it could be shown that the action was deliberate, without merit, and with the intention of inflicting economic loss to the carrier.

Then again, the carrier could be held liable if the pax was injured by irate pax after being identified publicly.
 

LearLove

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 27, 2001
Posts
4,451
Total Time
12000+
I agree but..

What about Airtran sueing the guy who held up ATL last winter. I wonder if ACA could sue this guy?
 

Timebuilder

Entrepreneur
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
4,625
Total Time
1634
The carrier could always bring a suit to court, but they would have to meet the standard of evidence in existing case law, or demonstrate the intent without reasonable doubt.
 

LAPD Airship

Active member
Joined
Apr 23, 2002
Posts
25
Total Time
3100
You can sue for anything....one of our gate agents sued a guy who broke his neck in EWR after he was turned upside down by the guy trying to get back down the jet-way....not-guity was the verdict.

This is how it would work for my flight crew.

We would cancel the flight (cancelled flight pay)
Get tested (paid for that)
Deadhead most likely to next location (unscheduled flight pay at time and a half)

Since I dont really drink....Im more than happy for a pax to double my pay for the 4 day....hell i might turn myself in! :D
 
Last edited:

Timebuilder

Entrepreneur
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
4,625
Total Time
1634
Can you give me some details on the weapon in the picture? I'm unable to identify it from what I can see.

Thanks.
 

Ted Striker

Piece of the Portfolio
Joined
Dec 7, 2001
Posts
399
Total Time
3800
Screw these idiots, and screw taking a breath test everytime I sign in. They can kiss my a$$. Unless someone smells something on me or has some other reasonable problem, other than I am just a pilot (so I must be drunk) then I am not doing it. That is something I would fight forever. If I am correct, I am still innocent until proven guility, right? Not the other way around.
 

Timebuilder

Entrepreneur
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
4,625
Total Time
1634
Unfortunately, Ted, the supreme court has already affirmed the legality of driver sobriety checkpoints, and this idea would only be a terrible, yet legal, extension of that action.

Hopefully, such an idea will not be implemented.
 

Freight Dog

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
2,232
Total Time
7500+
Timebuilder said:
Can you give me some details on the weapon in the picture? I'm unable to identify it from what I can see.

Thanks.

I think that is Heckler & Koch MP5.
 

LAPD Airship

Active member
Joined
Apr 23, 2002
Posts
25
Total Time
3100
Freight Dog said:



I think that is Heckler & Koch MP5.
Correct your are ;)
 

Timebuilder

Entrepreneur
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
4,625
Total Time
1634
Any stats on capacity, muzzle velocity, weight, etc?
 

ATRCA

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
835
Total Time
tons
Many, very fast, heavy enough at that speed, etc.
 

cvsfly

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2002
Posts
723
Total Time
4600
No I certainly don't think ACA pilots did anything wrong. They did exactly what they should have done to insure there is no sign of impropriety. It is just an example how a few (AW pilots in MIA) acting irresponsibly can create a whole lot of s**t that the rest of us have to walk through. Was this deal with the AW pilots their first binge or break in the rules? Who else may have seen them first and stopped them? We all, especially the airlines, have to do it better every day.
 
Top