okay, do you think its fair that his life is totally ruined; he was below the legal limit .038...the limit is .040...and now his life is completely ruined because the cops still pressed charges against him...Do you think he deserved such harsh treatment?
2006-07-11 12:20:52 · 11 answers · asked by lusaisthebest 3 in Cars & Transportation ➔ Aircraft
To correct two answers above, commercial pilots are regulated under 14 CFR 121, not 14 CFR 91, and breath alcohol levels are not zero for pilots. Allowable is below 0.02%, between 0.02 and 0.04 required that the pilot be removed from his position and retested and can not return to his position for a min of 8 hours and until he tests under 0.02%, and 0.04% requires removal from his position and treatement as required by a substance abuse professional. If this happens twice, he can never be a pilot again.
2006-07-11 17:10:05 · answer #1 · answered by Jerry L 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
FAA regulations state that the pilot must have less than .04% alchohol in the blood, and have a minimum time of 8 hours between drinking and flying. So that is not the problem.
The problem is, the pilot was over the legal limit according to the laws of Florida(?). This is why he is serving jail time.
This could potentially be a problem. I personally question how the state in question can have a regulation that conflicts with FAA regulations. The individual states do not have the authority to make regulations for the air, that is the FAA's job.
Because of this, I do not think that this pilot deserved what he got. While what he did was stupid, he was legal according to the FAA and therefore underserving of any punishment.
EDIT:
For those of you who think the limit is 0, I suggest you read FAR 91.17, which reads in part:
(a) No person may act or attempt to act as a crewmember of a civil aircraft:
(1) Within 8 hours after the consumption of any alchoholic beverage
(2) While under the influence of alchohol
(3) While using any drug that affects the person's faculties in any way contrary to safety; or
(4) While having .04 percent by weight or more alchohol in the blood
EDIT 2:
Thanks for the clarification, Jerry. My FAR/AIM doesn't have part 121 and I'm only a private pilot. I forgot that commercial pilots come under different regulations.
2006-07-11 20:15:47 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely - he deserves every bit of his punishment. The "legal limit" for pilots is ZERO, you refer to a limit for car drivers, not airline pilots who are responsible for the lives of hundreds of people in a complex piece of machinery that has to land safely. The choice to drink was his own. Let's be thankful that this irresponsible behaviour is extremely rare.
Now if we could just get drunk drivers off the road....
Edit 1: I still maintain the alcohol limit for commercial pilots is zero.
The FAR's and the various amendments get complicated, but it is clear no pilot may operate an aircraft "While under the influence of alchohol."
A lawyer may argue how much alcohol would cause an influence. But as commercial pilots we need to take the strictest interpretation of the regulations, and in my books that means the legal definition is ZERO.
Besides, we are required by society to demonstrate the highest possible level of professionalism as our passengers (after all they are paying our wages) are counting on us to get them to their destination safely. So we also have a moral obligation for a zero alcohol limit.
Imagine a pilot having alcohol in his/her blood being faced with a real emergency, such as United Airlines Flight 232 which lost part of its tail in flight, and the pilots did an amazing job of getting that ship to the ground in Sioux City saving 186 lives.
2006-07-11 20:02:54 · answer #3 · answered by astarpilot2000 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely! The .04 BAC you are referring to is for truck drivers, not for pilots, and even for truck drivers, if the driver shows ANY blood alcohol content (below .04) he is required to remain parked for 24 hours before being allowed back on the road.
Allowable BAC for pilots is ZERO! There is nothing in the world worse for airline safety than a drunk pilot! He was taking unnecessary risks not only the lives of his passengers and crew, but also with the lives of every other person on that airport. I think they should throw him UNDER the jail, and forget where they put him!
2006-07-11 21:54:10 · answer #4 · answered by JetDoc 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it's his own stupid fault, with a job such as an airline pilot comes great responsibility, a nice paycheck and extreme consequences for your actions, especially when you have the lives of hundreds of people in your hands. There is a saying in the airline world, 12 hours between the bottle and the throttle.
2006-07-11 19:50:05 · answer #5 · answered by ERRRRRR 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is not a matter of some arbitrary number, this is a matter of morality! Assuming he is guilty, which is yet to be proven, this was a very foolish choice and he deserves every bit of harsh treatment he gets. That could have been you or I on the plane.
I wonder why the captain didn't say anything?
2006-07-12 17:58:29 · answer #6 · answered by minefinder 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
.038? could have been a slug of mouthwash....could have been from the night before.....don't try him before the court does. Part of the problem is over zealous airport security personnel trying to make a name for themselves with a "big bust" there is two pilots in that cockpit and you better believe that if the other pilot thought there was a problem it would be dealt with.
2006-07-11 20:08:22 · answer #7 · answered by pecker_head_bill 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do you want your pilot to be half-drunk when flying you and your family about?
The cops aren't ruining his life - the courts do that, and he'll have his day there.
2006-07-12 02:36:47 · answer #8 · answered by knaughty_kniight 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well, I do not think he should register anything on a breathalyzer before flying a plane..
He knew what he was doing, so let him serve the consequences..
2006-07-11 19:23:23 · answer #9 · answered by The Chesire Cat 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
their being hars cause if he had taken off things could have gone terribly wrong...
2006-07-11 19:24:42 · answer #10 · answered by Chuck S 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋