Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Pax suspected pilots drunk

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

cvsfly

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2002
Posts
723
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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:
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
I agree but..

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

Latest posts

Latest resources

Back
Top