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

Southwest Airline pilot arrested! Drunk in cockpit!!!

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
big_al said:
maybe some people mistake being drunk for being extremely tired

The blowanator never seems to.
 
kevdog said:
Are you suggeting the fine folks in SLC discriminated against this pilot because he is not a mormon?
More like a lot of Mormons don't know what a drunk looks like, just a lack of experience, but they've heard stories, and this guy fit the description. LOL
 
time builder said:
More like a lot of Mormons don't know what a drunk looks like, just a lack of experience, but they've heard stories, and this guy fit the description. LOL
Once again, what makes you think the pilot was drunk?

If you are someone who becomes "drunk" at .04, you and my wife can go do "girl friend" things together, because you definitely are flaming or sit down to pee.
 
frog_flyer said:
is an A/L-300 type rating a herk?

so hes a mil dude, eh?

An L-300 is a C-141




Fugawe said:
Third -- show TSA folks common respects due other humans. Do you abuse the order-taker at McDonald's?

Uhhhh, not that I abuse TSA people, nor advocate that, but that respect thingy goes both ways. I don't abuse the order taker at mcDonalds, but if that order taker acted like many TSA idiots do, I would d@mn sure complain to the manager, and a McDonalds order taker that acted like a TSA person wouldn't last long, even at McDonalds.
 
July 10th, 2006 @ 7:39am
(KSL News) A Southwest Airlines co-pilot will be arraigned today, after what was nearly a case of flying drunk.
Flight 135 was scheduled to leave Salt Lake International Airport for Phoenix eary yesterday morning. Instead, the flight was delayed while the FBI arrested co-pilot Carl Fulton of Texas.
Security screeners say they smelled alcohol on Fulton's breath and alerted the FBI.
When Fulton entered the cockpit, agents arrested him and gave him a breathalizer test. Authorities wouldn't reveal exact test results, but they did say Fulton's blood alcohol level exceeded the federal limit of .04. Fulton will be charged with operating a common carrier under the influece of alcohol or drugs. If convicted, he could spend up to 15 years in jail.


And PLEASE don't use this as another excuse for a bash Mormons thread....Irrelevant!
 
Gobi Gred said:
12 hour bottle to throttle rule for 121 operators is coming sooner rather than later I think.

Perhaps, but will it do any good? Pure speculation here, but I think it's likely that this guy was in violation of the laws that already exist. In the case of the America West pilots in Florida, it's pretty clear that they were in violation of the 8 hour rule. So how would making the rule stricter help?

It's sort of like lowering the legal BAC level for driving to 0.08%. (and before any of you get started, I am not advocating or excusing drunken driving) It just seems to be taken on faith that lowering it is a good thing, and will make our world safer. Me, I'm skeptical, and I am of the mind that we should have good reasons backed up by fact before we make any laws more restrictive. So my question is: How many accidents are caused by drivers with a 0.08% or 0.09% BAC? I know this isn't scientific, but I don't *ever* recall reading about a fatal accident where the driver had a 0.09% BAC. Seems to me like they are generally .185 or .231 or some number a long way from 0.08%

If the drivers that are causing the problems are .15% or more, then how does lowering it from .10% to .08% make things safer?

Getting back to the topic at hand, if the problem pilots are already drinking within the current 8 hour time limit, then how will extending the time limit solve the problem?
 
A Squared said:
Perhaps, but will it do any good? Pure speculation here, but I think it's likely that this guy was in violation of the laws that already exist. In the case of the America West pilots in Florida, it's pretty clear that they were in violation of the 8 hour rule. So how would making the rule stricter help?

It's sort of like lowering the legal BAC level for driving to 0.08%. (and before any of you get started, I am not advocating or excusing drunken driving) It just seems to be taken on faith that lowering it is a good thing, and will make our world safer. Me, I'm skeptical, and I am of the mind that we should have good reasons backed up by fact before we make any laws more restrictive. So my question is: How many accidents are caused by drivers with a 0.08% or 0.09% BAC? I know this isn't scientific, but I don't *ever* recall reading about a fatal accident where the driver had a 0.09% BAC. Seems to me like they are generally .185 or .231 or some number a long way from 0.08%

If the drivers that are causing the problems are .15% or more, then how does lowering it from .10% to .08% make things safer?

Getting back to the topic at hand, if the problem pilots are already drinking within the current 8 hour time limit, then how will extending the time limit solve the problem?

Eliminate crime, raise the Federal BAC to .08. It seems kind of funny that you can drive your car to work on the instrumentalities of interstate commerce, pump import/export regulated fuel in your car and drive your NHTSA/EPA regulated car to work with a .079 BAC, but if you jump in a plane, you go to prison if you're more than .039999 BAC.
 
Until the Northwest crew got caught in, what '97-'98?, the reported incidence of flight crews drinking on duty was almost non-existant(not that they didn't, it was usually taken care of in house). After the Northwest crew got caught, any and everybody that has been caught or even suspected of drinking, since then is a complete moron. I would not want them flying the airplane I am riding on. If they don't have enough sense to CYA, much less not even drink in the aviation enviroment,and, under the kind of scrutiny that was brought upon flight crews by that incident, how do they have enough sense to fly an airplane? There has been several pilots that have been caught and deservedly so. But, everybody should be given the benefit of the doubt until proved guilty.
 
Last edited:
FN FAL said:
Eliminate crime, raise the Federal BAC to .08. It seems kind of funny that you can drive your car to work on the instrumentalities of interstate commerce, pump import/export regulated fuel in your car and drive your NHTSA/EPA regulated car to work with a .079 BAC, but if you jump in a plane, you go to prison if you're more than .039999 BAC.

I guess they busted him at .02. Is that something new? I thought .04 was the limit? According to the news, he blew a .039 and a lower number on the second try.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top