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

Update on SWA f/o arrested for intoxication.

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
Frontier1 said:
Hmmmm, half the legal limit to drive a car. Legally he was not drunk.
.08 isn't "drunk" for a lot of people either. Check the modern phrasology, they call "drunk" drivers "drinking" drivers now. It's all about level of impairment.

Just think, when you have to drive your mom or dad around because age 60 has been legally defined as "impaired" driving, you'll see where it's all heading.

I think the next logical step will be to ban cell phones from the passenger compartment of motor vehicles. They have already done studies that prove that cell phone talkers are more impaired than a .08% drinking driver. If I can't have an open bottle of Jack Daniels laying on the back seat of my car, you shouldn't be able to have an operating cell phone in the passenger compartment of a car either.
 
http://www.tigerweekly.com/story.php?iidart=3326

Get plastered for science and talk on your phone

[Comment Below]
By Danielle Bachan
A recent study conducted by the University of Utah Psychology Department claims that driving while talking on your cell phone is as dangerous as driving under the influence of alcohol. The goal of the study was to understand what makes people assume they are driving safely while talking on their cell phones. Startling evidence from the study showed that “while some of the participants crashed in a virtual vehicle while sober and chatting, none of them crashed while drunk.” Volunteers were given alcoholic drinks until the legal blood alcohol limit (.08) was reached. The participants were then instructed to drive. Other volunteers were instructed to talk on their phones and drive. All tests were performed on a virtual driving course.

The test showed that the talking drivers drove slower, failed to maintain a safe driving distance and were, on average, slower to hit the brakes. The drunk drivers also drove slower but were much more aggressive than the talking drivers. Throughout all findings, none of the drunk drivers crashed.

These results may seem a little off beat, but according to University of Utah Psychology Department member Frank Dews, “This study does not mean people should start driving drunk … It means talking on your cell phone is as bad as, or maybe worse than, driving drunk.”

Many drivers who talk on their cell phones are unaware of the risks they cause, just as drunk drivers believe that the problem is not them. The cell phone talkers are very likely to miss out on potentially dangerous situations on the road due to being engaged in a conversation, thus posing a greater risk to those around them.

The use of a hands-free device seemed to be the answer, but new laws are making just about any form of yapping illegal when behind the wheel. Many areas throughout the United States are beginning to make the roads safer by regulating drivers’ cell phone use. New York was the first state to ban drivers from using hand-held cells.

Other recent reports and studies have declared hands-free devices just as distracting as a hand-held model. Anne McCartt, VP for research and author of the cell phone study stated that either phone type increased the risk.

The Baton Rouge Sheriff’s Office stated that there are currently no laws in place in Louisiana regarding cell phone usage in vehicles.

“I can assure you that the sheriff’s office does not have this as one of our top priorities,” declared Fred Raiford III, Administrative Assistant at the East Baton Rouge Sheriff’s Office.

Talking on a cell phone while driving is considered by many as “multi-tasking” rather than a possible driving hazard. However, while this may be public perception, the national Highway Traffic Safety Administration determined that a driver’s risk of getting into an accident is three times higher when the driver is on a cell phone.
 
Captain Overs said:
Maybe you shouldn't drink on overnights. This wouldn't be an issue. The only time I drink is on my days off. Too much to lose otherwise.

Drinking on a day off is the same as drinking on an overnight.
 
Terrain Terrain said:
What an A$$, this DeAngeFAG will end up in a smoking hole someday, I just home my family does not follow him in.

He would have to actually be a pilot to cause an accident. The only smoking hole he now leaves is after rolling off his boyfriend.
 
Publishers said:
Let there be no doubt, in many companies you blow a .39 during duty hours, you are gone..... period.

Let there be no doubt you have no attention to detail....period. He was .039 not .39, back to microsoft flight sim for you.
 
habitual pilot said:
I wonder if we could stop this witch hunt by the poorly untrained individuals if we all showed up with a little Jack Daniels smell with absolutely NO alcohol in our systems? If a couple hundred of us blew a .000, they might just look like the idiots they usually seem to be....
Brother, we think alike on this:D. I started out thinking that we should all just dip our ties in cheap rye whiskey, but that isn't real professional and I don't want to scare the pax. I've recently thought about wadding up a kleenex and dipping it in Jack, wearing it through security, and then tossing it into the trash after clearing security. Both of those plans actually require that we have some Jack somewhere in our possession, which could be trouble, so they're out of consideration. '

Lately, I've been wondering if the security screeners might also be on the lookout for bad breath and strong mouthwash. My latest idea is to eat Italian, heavy on the garlic, and gargle with cheap-no-alcohol mouthwash just before entering security. The only drawback is that the FO better follow the same plan or my breath might run him/her out of the cockpit.

Or maybe, I could just do the cheap mouthwash thing. Once the mouthwash wears off, I'm back to normal. It could work, maybe we should start a movement.

Another idea just popped up, Does anyone know if the listerine pocket pacs contain any amount of alcohol? They are certainly strong in the smell department. Maybe we should all start popping a double dose of listerine pocket strips before every time we enter security.

I'm doing it. Who's with me?

:-)

BTW, why is it that the TSA smelled booze, but the other crew members did not? We all should really start doing the self police deal. If I ever manage to run out of brains and tie one on, I'd certainly appreciate it if my co-worker started the day off with, "dude, you smell like a bloody brewery. CALL IN SICK"
 
:-) said:
BTW, why is it that the TSA smelled booze, but the other crew members did not?

How many of us can actually identify the smell of Ripple, Boones Farm or Old English 40oz? Takes one to know one.
 
What is SWA's drinking policy, 8 or 12 hours? Does SWA have a blood alcohol level that is allowed?

If this pilot only had two beers and a vodka 12 hours prior shouldn't he have had a level near zero?

Thanks!
 
Our company limit is .02.... I hope for his sake southwest doesnt have the same.
 
AA717driver said:
This guy will beat the rap. It will cost him a bunch of money and take forever since it's the Feds and they basically have no budget to worry about but he will beat it.

Won't SWAPA provide him with legal council free of charge? For all the bashers out there, that's what ALPA would do.

I've heard that they actually have a clause in their contract that demands that the hotels provide them with discounted beer, wine, and cocktails on overnights, I think it's called 1-2-3. Any truth to this? Talk about a recipe for disaster.
 
From the report I read it sounds like he went to Brewvies which is right behind our hotel in SLC. Very cool place to hang out but all there draft beer is 3.2 beer! Hardly anything to get your panties in a wad over. Now with that being said I usualy have a few beers with dinner. What would trigger a .039 the next day when I report to work? I dunno. We are all different and our bodies react differently to alcohol. Until we are all issued breathalizers with work and check ourselves before our flight the next day we will never know where we are at unless we dont drink at all! If it was me I would be getting a good laywer, filing a few wrongfull lawsuits claiming I was scared for life and never fly again with full pay!
 
Won't SWAPA provide him with legal council free of charge?

Yes, but it wont be free. SWAPA will flip the bill.
 
AA717driver said:
Until his blood test comes back, all this is conjecture.


Many brain cells ago I thought I heard a discussion about the blood test request wrt DUI - I think you can ask for one but I don't think the cops are under any obligation to give you one. Granted DUI is governed by state laws, but I think the standard is just breathalizer - take it or lose your license. Anyone know of a "right" to a bloodtest in this case?

Also, isn't the measured reading from a breathalizer call a "BAC" ? This must pass the legal-ese for a "blood" alcohol level, and I know that blood tests are not routinely done for DUI's - breathalizer is all it takes to convict on a DUI.

On a different note, I hope most would agree that this guy should not have gone to work, even if he did just blow under the limit. That being said, what level does it take to put a pilot in jail? What did the America West guys blow, or were they sunk because of the time-stamped security video of them drinking within 8 hours?

I hope it's not ulimately up to a zealous DA and a local Salt Lake jury of his "peers".
 
Hamburger said:
Won't SWAPA provide him with legal council free of charge? For all the bashers out there, that's what ALPA would do.

I've heard that they actually have a clause in their contract that demands that the hotels provide them with discounted beer, wine, and cocktails on overnights, I think it's called 1-2-3. Any truth to this? Talk about a recipe for disaster.

Uh, NO never heard of this. No truth to this what so ever!
 
Maybe a good lawyer will be able keep this guy from facing any criminal charges but the FAA is going to have a dang good case for revoking his license. Remember, he blew a .039 an HOUR AFTER he was detained.An expert witness will easily be able to show that at the time he entered the aircraft with the intention of flight he would have been over the .04 limit. If I remember correctly there was an NWA FO who was detained in MSP a few years ago after flying in from SAT smelling of alcohol. The prosecution was able to show what range his BAC was in when he took off from SAT based on the amount of time that had elapsed from takeoff to when he was issued a Breathalyzer and the average rate an adult male metabolizes alcohol. I think I remember reading that he would have been over a .10 Simply stupid in my opinion.

At any rate, this guy is facing one big uphill battle.
 
Last edited:
satpak77 said:
AA717

keep in mind the criminal charge requires .10, not a mere .04.

His walk (from the criminal standpoint) is now a slow stroll and is picking up steam as we speak....

Since violations of FAR's do not provide for a right to a jury or "probable cause" and "beyond a reasonable doubt" minimum, he may have some issues in that arena.

But one bridge at a time....

What happens when you refuse a breathelizer??
 
The battle will not be insurmountable, uphill? you bet, life changing?, yes but it can be for the better. He will have help through SWA,s HIM,s program if it is applicable after his evaluation. Its not easy and it will be a life altering event if he is diagnosed as being alcoholic, he will have to abstain from alcohol the rest of his career after passing both a psych and cognitive battery of tests and up to two years of monitored sobriety just for starters.
So now I am sure someone will say great now he gets another chance to fly drunk! he should be shot, killed, drummed out, given a shopping cart and some cans and dropped of in down town San Diego!. Wrong, wither you agree with it are not the medical community is unanimous that alcoholism is a disease and the FAA is in agreement. This guy should get a second chance, not a no consequence free pass but a second chance and that is exactly what HIMS is for.
 
Saabslime said:
Maybe a good lawyer will be able keep this guy from facing any criminal charges but the FAA is going to have a dang good case for revoking his license. Remember, he blew a .039 an HOUR AFTER he was detained.An expert witness will easily be able to show that at the time he entered the aircraft with the intention of flight he would have been over the .04 limit. If I remember correctly there was an NWA FO who was detained in MSP a few years ago after flying in from SAT smelling of alcohol. The prosecution was able to show what range his BAC was in when he took off from SAT based on the amount of time that had elapsed from takeoff to when he was issued a Breathalyzer and the average rate an adult male metabolizes alcohol. I think I remember reading that he would have been over a .10 Simply stupid in my opinion.

At any rate, this guy is facing one big uphill battle.

I believe he was given a breathalizer upon landing and blew a .05+ and was fired shortly thereafter, no discussion.

That incident was in Jan 2001.
 
Second chance my a$$. Alcoholism or not, this guy made a choice to show up to work under the influence. Whether he blew a .039 or a .39 is just semantics. The fact that he blew anything at all shows a serious lack of character and judgment especially when you consider the responsibility we as professional airline pilots are charged with. Would you seriously get a warm fuzzy knowing you just put your family on an airplane with somebody who got a second chance for something like this? And I used to wonder why the rest of the world looks at Americans as being "soft". :rolleyes:
 
Uppercrust said:
What happens when you refuse a breathelizer??

121.458 (d) (2) (f)

http://www1.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library%5CrgFAR.nsf/FutureEffective/19B26F0ED54D9DF4862571960066BEBE?OpenDocument

In addition, some states may have "refusal to submit to sobriety test" laws enacted, some which may or may not apply to aviation.

also lets look at some definitions in 121.1

http://www1.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library%5CrgFAR.nsf/FutureEffective/8BF3EC7863F023AD862571960066BF2A?OpenDocument

Alcohol concentration (or content) means the alcohol in a volume of breath expressed in terms of grams of alcohol per 210 liters of breath as indicated by an evidential breath test under this appendix.
 
Last edited:
Saabslime said:
Whether he blew a .039 or a .39 is just semantics. :rolleyes:

Actually its "just" the regulations, in this case which states .040.

For a criminal violation, its .10

So its "just" a matter of a FAA violation and/or jail time or none at all.

But I agree with your other comments....I think most of us do....

By the way, I see no FAR violation here nor a criminal violation, based on the laws existing on the books now.
 
Last edited:
See that is EXACTLY the kind of response I expected from some folks, the same old lack of character, I am an AIRLINE pilot, judgment bs. Look if you know the stove is hot and it has burned you a million times in the past but you still cannot help yourself to keep from pressing your hand down on top of it a problem exists. Character has nothing to do with it, he made a huge mistake and thanks to some people with compassion there exists an avenue to remedy that mistake and NEVER make it again. I'll tell you another secret slick, American Airlines will not fire anyone for an Alcohol related incident as long as they successfully complete the HIMS program, relapse is almost Nil and physicians and surgeons have copied the model.
 

Latest posts

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom