Asiana 777 Crash at SFO
07-11-2013, 10:42 AM
#441
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,837
Originally Posted by Twin Wasp
Foreign Air Carriers operate under FAR 129, not 91. FAR 120 only applies to part 119 certificate holders and 120.123 specifically says it does not apply overseas. So no samples given by US crews outside of US territories under the DOT program.
So 120.105 list aircrew members as being safety sensitive positions which require testing - even if contract outside of the US.
Each employee, including any assistant, helper, or individual in a training status, who performs a safety-sensitive function listed in this section directly or by contract (including by subcontract at any tier) for an employer as defined in this subpart must be subject to drug testing under a drug testing program implemented in accordance with this subpart. This includes full-time, part-time, temporary, and intermittent employees regardless of the degree of supervision. The safety-sensitive functions are:
(a) Flight crewmember duties...
(a) Flight crewmember duties...
(a) No part of the testing process (including specimen collection, laboratory processing, and MRO actions) shall be conducted outside the territory of the United States.
The Presidential Airlines crash in Afghanistan (if it had not been fatal to the crew) would have required testing?
(b) The provisions of this subpart shall not apply to any individual who performs a function listed in § 120.105 by contract for an employer outside the territory of the United States.
07-11-2013, 10:51 AM
#443
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: B787. Left seat.
Posts: 270
Good comment USMCFLYR. The requirement to being tested is irrelevant to this thread. I don't know if they were or weren't, I'm pretty sure that Asiana would not have objected. It is highly doubtful that they would have been impaired after a ULR trip, even if they reported under the influence they would have metabolized before landing.
07-11-2013, 11:00 AM
#444
Junior Senior
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: Whiskey Papa
Posts: 2,850
I don't think anyone on this thread has suggested the possibility of being impaired. My original post clearly stated that. The question I raised that started this discussion was surprise that foreign carriers don't have to go through testing following an incident/accident on American soil and wondered how US crews were treated with respect to that overseas. Nothing more, nothing less.
07-11-2013, 11:02 AM
#445
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,293
Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
I'm surprised by them not having to be tested per US regs.
I'm even more surprised that they would not have to be tested by their own regs.
rickair says there isn't anything in ICAO requiring testing for all. Surprising.
It is hard to imagine that an airline operating international flights has a safety program that doesn't include some sort of regular testing much less post-mishap testing requirements.
I'm even more surprised that they would not have to be tested by their own regs.
rickair says there isn't anything in ICAO requiring testing for all. Surprising.
It is hard to imagine that an airline operating international flights has a safety program that doesn't include some sort of regular testing much less post-mishap testing requirements.
But I would imagine that most airline crews world-wide are subject to drug and/or alcohol testing per their own regs.
As someone pointed out the DOT does not require overseas testing for US crews, almost certainly because of the difficulty in assuring that said testing would be conducted fairly and in accordance with DOT rules which protect the testee and prevent fraud. Most likely any positive results would be invalidated due to process issues.
07-11-2013, 11:14 AM
#447
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,293
Originally Posted by EYBusdriver
One of the destinations I fly to regularly is Australia and they have signage all over the place that they can test you at any time you are airside. No exceptions if you are foreign.
For clarity, there are two kinds of testing...
121/DOT and similar which is related to aviation regulation. You can lose your ticket if you fail, or refuse. This can be random or circumstantial (ie accident / incident)
Criminal testing, which may be an option according to local law. I'm certain SFO PD could have given the pilots a breathalyzer on-scene if they had whatever passes for probably cause in that jurisdiction (but I'm sure there was no probable cause). In some jurisdictions, probably cause might amount to just being present at a certain time and place (ie DUI checkpoint).
If you fail a local test, that does not count as a DOT test, but would expose you to local criminal sanctions (and attendant FAA aeromedical fallout).
07-11-2013, 11:20 AM
#448
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: B787. Left seat.
Posts: 270
Originally Posted by MikeF16
Good post, but this sentence summarizes nicely. This could just as easily have been Emirates or Etihad.
07-11-2013, 11:28 AM
#450
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,293
Originally Posted by EYBusdriver
Sorry for the thread drift..An earlier poster was implying that the EY and EK culture was similar to the Korean culture.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
