2 Air Transat pilots charged with being impaired

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

Post Reply
ipilot54
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 206
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 6:58 am

2 Air Transat pilots charged with being impaired

Post by ipilot54 »

---------- ADS -----------
 
Lotro
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 294
Joined: Sun May 01, 2011 9:15 am

Re: 2 Air Transat pilots charged with being impaired

Post by Lotro »

I'm not sure that it matters but when Transat is involved I always wonder if these are TFWs...

If they are, there's a great PR opportunity for someone, maybe even everyone, except them...

I suppose I'm just a drama-hungry sensationalist. Back to watching the RNC coverage!
---------- ADS -----------
 
TFTMB heavy
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 656
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 9:58 am

Re: 2 Air Transat pilots charged with being impaired

Post by TFTMB heavy »

Air Transat does not have any TFW.
---------- ADS -----------
 
photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 11306
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Hangry and crankypated

Re: 2 Air Transat pilots charged with being impaired

Post by photofly »

Why did the passengers get $200 compensation and not EUR600?
---------- ADS -----------
 
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
CpnCrunch
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4011
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:38 am

Re: 2 Air Transat pilots charged with being impaired

Post by CpnCrunch »

photofly wrote:Why did the passengers get $200 compensation and not EUR600?
Because non-European airlines won't pay out that compensation until you force them to:

http://travelsort.com/blog/getting-unit ... ight-delay
---------- ADS -----------
 
photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 11306
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Hangry and crankypated

Re: 2 Air Transat pilots charged with being impaired

Post by photofly »

A quick call to the Globe and Mail or CBC from a passenger pointing out that not only is Air Transat providing drunk pilots but also won't live up to its responsibilities might be in order. The time to twist the handle is when the relevant testicles are already in the vice.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
CpnCrunch
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4011
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:38 am

Re: 2 Air Transat pilots charged with being impaired

Post by CpnCrunch »

---------- ADS -----------
 
confuzed
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 443
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 11:37 am

Re: 2 Air Transat pilots charged with being impaired

Post by confuzed »

photofly wrote:A quick call to the Globe and Mail or CBC from a passenger pointing out that not only is Air Transat providing drunk pilots but also won't live up to its responsibilities might be in order. The time to twist the handle is when the relevant testicles are already in the vice.
Wow, at least we all now know that you fall into the "sensationalist, call the media, ambulance chasing lawyer types" category. :roll:
---------- ADS -----------
 
You start with a bag full of luck and an empty bag of experience. The trick is to fill the bag of experience before you empty the bag of luck.
photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 11306
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Hangry and crankypated

Re: 2 Air Transat pilots charged with being impaired

Post by photofly »

Two pilots arrested (the entire flight crew ffs!) for being incapable doesn't need much sensationalising, it does all the heavy lifting all by itself. Unless you think it's a "just another humdrum day at Air Transat" occurrence?
---------- ADS -----------
 
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
PROC_HDG
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 183
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 8:52 pm

Re: 2 Air Transat pilots charged with being impaired

Post by PROC_HDG »

The pilots are innocent until proven guilty.

If you believe everything every flight attendant says, you're an idiot. If you claim you've never dabbled in the grey areas of the 8, 10, or 12 hour alcohol rules, you're a liar.

I'm not saying what they're accused of did or didn't happen. I'm just saying have a little respect for your fellow professionals. Maybe they f*cked up and made a bad decision. The courts will decide that.

PROC_HDG
---------- ADS -----------
 
confuzed
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 443
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 11:37 am

Re: 2 Air Transat pilots charged with being impaired

Post by confuzed »

photofly wrote:Two pilots arrested (the entire flight crew ffs!) for being incapable doesn't need much sensationalising, it does all the heavy lifting all by itself. Unless you think it's a "just another humdrum day at Air Transat" occurrence?

Not saying these pilots did not make a mistake, but when people such as yourself sit there and make comments about "let's run to the media and report it all, just to really twist the knife" is pretty ignorant and unprofessional if you ask me. Should something similar happen to you then I would hope that other people would treat you a little better then how you are insinuating this should be handled. I don't know the full story, but at the end of the day people made an error in judgement. I am sure whatever company it were to happen to would handle it appropriately, why do they need people such as yourself wanting to really make it worse?
---------- ADS -----------
 
You start with a bag full of luck and an empty bag of experience. The trick is to fill the bag of experience before you empty the bag of luck.
User avatar
Bede
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4427
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 5:52 am

Re: 2 Air Transat pilots charged with being impaired

Post by Bede »

PROC_HDG wrote:If you claim you've never dabbled in the grey areas of the 8, 10, or 12 hour alcohol rules, you're a liar.
Seriously?? That's one thing that is completely preventable and has a pretty high probability of getting you fired. Not a chance.
---------- ADS -----------
 
CpnCrunch
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4011
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:38 am

Re: 2 Air Transat pilots charged with being impaired

Post by CpnCrunch »

The 8 hour rule is kind of irrelevant if you're drinking a lot. After a "typical" Scottish 5-pint session, it will take about 11 hours to be legal to drive, never mind fly. (Not saying that this is what happened to these guys, but it seems likely).

The general rule is 1 hour per unit of alcohol (1 pint = 2 units) from when you stop drinking, plus one extra hour. Here is a useful calculator:

http://morning-after.org.uk/?page_id=82
---------- ADS -----------
 
photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 11306
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Hangry and crankypated

Re: 2 Air Transat pilots charged with being impaired

Post by photofly »

I suggested running to the media if and because the airline is refusing to pay the compensation which it is required to do by law. Not to make the pilots' lives more miserable. They clearly don't need my help with that, they are quite expert enough.

I have sympathy for drunk pilots, but it's extremely limited. Nobody put a bottle to their mouths and a gun to their heads, and if they have an ("I'm incapable of not drinking") alcohol dependency the time for sympathy is when they remove themselves from flying duty to seek help, not when PC Plod hauls them out of the cockpit in handcuffs.

And no, I've never dabbled with drinking and flying. Not even close.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
User avatar
SheriffPatGarrett
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 205
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 5:11 pm

Re: 2 Air Transat pilots charged with being impaired

Post by SheriffPatGarrett »

That's the same company that made a hero of a former
drug dealer and alky that dumped overboard all his fuel
when a leak occurred(instead of burning it first)
and then busted all his tires when landing...

During WW II, booze was nearly free for flying crews and after the war, being a chain smoking alcoholic
was the sexy thing to be...I remember several instances of pouring drunk chief pilots in their seat for their
instrument ride with the feds(they retired as DOT inspectors, of course)...
A close knit mafia they were, just like the dopers crowd at that company.
---------- ADS -----------
 
AuxBatOn
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3283
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:13 pm
Location: North America, sometimes

Re: 2 Air Transat pilots charged with being impaired

Post by AuxBatOn »

CpnCrunch wrote:The 8 hour rule is kind of irrelevant if you're drinking a lot. After a "typical" Scottish 5-pint session, it will take about 11 hours to be legal to drive, never mind fly. (Not saying that this is what happened to these guys, but it seems likely).

The general rule is 1 hour per unit of alcohol (1 pint = 2 units) from when you stop drinking, plus one extra hour. Here is a useful calculator:

http://morning-after.org.uk/?page_id=82
In Canada, you there is the 8-hour rule but to operate any motor vehicle, your BAC also needs to be <= 0.08. I imagine all countries have a similar set of rules (time and BAC).

So, 1 drink, 6 hours ago won't cut it, even if below 0.08, just like 11 drinks 12 hours ago won't cut if, if you BAC is still above 0.08. In some US States, you can be charged for DUI at 0.04 (police has the option between 0.04 and 0.08, depending on how affected you are).
---------- ADS -----------
 
Going for the deck at corner
CpnCrunch
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4011
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:38 am

Re: 2 Air Transat pilots charged with being impaired

Post by CpnCrunch »

AuxBatOn wrote:[
In Canada, you there is the 8-hour rule but to operate any motor vehicle, your BAC also needs to be <= 0.08. I imagine all countries have a similar set of rules (time and BAC).

So, 1 drink, 6 hours ago won't cut it, even if below 0.08, just like 11 drinks 12 hours ago won't cut if, if you BAC is still above 0.08. In some US States, you can be charged for DUI at 0.04 (police has the option between 0.04 and 0.08, depending on how affected you are).
In Canada we also have the rule that you can't be "under the influence" of alcohol or drugs, so you would likely be charged if you flew when over the limit for driving in Canada, even if it's longer than 8 hours. I suspect a lot of people just don't realise how long it takes for alcohol to be metabolised when you've drunk a lot.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Baja Guy
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Jun 08, 2013 7:26 am

Re: 2 Air Transat pilots charged with being impaired

Post by Baja Guy »

And if you fly in Alberta for oil companies utilizing contrail standards, you will probably be restricted to this:
d) Unless further restricted by the Aviation Authority (in which case those restrictions shall apply), NO Flight Crew Member or maintenance employee shall perform their duties:
i) Within twelve (12) hours after the consumption of ANY alcoholic beverage, OR within twenty-four (24) hours after the consumption of alcohol in sufficient quantities as to cause impairment of the ability of the individual to perform their duties and/or to cause legal impairment as defined by applicable law.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Jean-Pierre
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 390
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 4:56 pm

Re: 2 Air Transat pilots charged with being impaired

Post by Jean-Pierre »

FFS. Just when people finally forget about that drug smuggler Capt.
---------- ADS -----------
 
AuxBatOn
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3283
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:13 pm
Location: North America, sometimes

Re: 2 Air Transat pilots charged with being impaired

Post by AuxBatOn »

CpnCrunch wrote:
so you would likely be charged if you flew when over the limit for driving in Canada, even if it's longer than 8 hours.
Not likely: you will absolutely be charged under the Criminal Code of Canada, article 253:
Operation while impaired

253 (1) Every one commits an offence who operates a motor vehicle or vessel or operates or assists in the operation of an aircraft or of railway equipment or has the care or control of a motor vehicle, vessel, aircraft or railway equipment, whether it is in motion or not,

(a) while the person’s ability to operate the vehicle, vessel, aircraft or railway equipment is impaired by alcohol or a drug; or

(b) having consumed alcohol in such a quantity that the concentration in the person’s blood exceeds eighty milligrams of alcohol in one hundred millilitres of blood.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Going for the deck at corner
Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”