The guy sitting in the shade doesn't bother me. Unless he suddenly decides he wants to get in another flight before he goes home. Then he becomes far more dangerous than the guys I know with bad eyesite and fading memory who usually seem to either have a friend who stands with them or who ask for help, and usually seem to fly smaller slower trainer type planes anyway.
It only takes the equivalent of one beer to cause a measureable deterioration in reflexes and judgement. Things happen mighty fast when something goes wrong with a plane or car.
The only time I saw someone get noticeably drunk at a field, several members got him taken care of, including loading his equipment into his car, one member got his keys to drive the car to his house, and another member got him into another car so he had a ride home while the first member drove his car. He was upset while it was happening, but he had the intelligence to come back the next day and apologize for being an idiot and to thank the people who took care of him

If you consume as much alcohol on the ground as you do in the air you better quite flying!!!

Hi Horrace

When I wrote the initial post, the new Safety Code revision was not available. From some discussions, I know that it is different from the proposed one sent to the Leader Members for their input. The input from the LMs was used to make additional changes, as I understand. Also in the discussions, the drinking rule, in particular, was mentioned more than once. The EC came to some consensus that was OK, but not to the total satisfaction of all involved.

If I had access, I am not sure I would have posted it. I think we all understand the intent. I thought it might be interesting to see if some fresh ideas about the wording would come from the members of this forum. So far, what has developed here has been very different that the rule that was submitted to the LMs. In particular, the concept of including all those involved in flight operations.

Hi Mike

Just so you understand... The deal you sign every year is the Safety Code. What is being discussed here is a revision of that very code. The EC has been working on a revision to remove the ambiguities. This is not another rule, but a rewrite of the existing ones.

In the case of the rule about drinking, it seemed to say that if you have ever in your life had a drink, you could not fly models as an AMA member.

I fly at two public fields with no alcohol rules and at a Baptist Church. Not much drinking at the flying field, which is as it should be. I flew controline for a while at a field with some outlaw RC guys who mostly barbecued and drank beer. We got several of them to fly some controline. Interestingly enough, they would not fly a controline trainer after a few beers, but would fly RC airplanes in a polluted state. They did crash a good bit.

Jim

As the alcohol level goes up, the intelligence level goes down. They probably realized what would happen if they tried stepping in circles with the CL, but didn't have a clue about how alcohol affects every part of the body.
Few of my fellow club members will drink alcohol on the same day before they fly, and only a few will have as much as a beer before they drive home.

Deciding when someone has had too much to drink to safely participate in our hobby is a difficult task. We can all spot the commode hugging drunk, but there are lots of folks that do not exhibit obvious signs of intoxication until well after they pass the safe level of intoxication.

For several years I taught DUI enforcement and Standardized Field Sobriety Testing to police officers. The Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) at which a driver is presumed to be under the influence is .10 in most states. Several states have reduced that level to .08. In my career I have encountered thousands of subjects under the influence. In is not uncommon to find someone that has a BAC of over twice the allowed level that, to the casual observer, appears sober.

The eight hour prior rule also has its faults. The average person "burns up" alcohol at a rate of .015% per hour. So if someone really ties one on the night before, and gets their BAC up to .25, (the highest BAC I ever personally tested someone at who was operating a vehicle was .38) would still have a BAC of .13 eight hours after they stopped drinking. (.015 x 8= .12)

I do not have a problem with someone having a couple of drinks while flying. Writing a rule that allows this is something I am happy is not my responsibility.

Eric

As an Rc Pilot and a fullsize pilot I always have to think about the FAA wording which goes something like 8 hours bottle to throttle or a blood alcohol of .04 or greater or under the influence.
the last bit covers a lot.... like a hangover
Enjoy your beer ( I do ) but don't drink and fly or drive

Your right Hoss, I dropped the ball on that time factor. And yes, I have read the current version, that is the primary reason I changed the wording from "participation" to operating. If someone is sitting in the peanut gallery at the field, he could still be considered to be participating.

It appears we are on the same page on this one!

They should keep it simple like P-51 said, "Do not operate aircraft while under the influence of drugs and alcohol". Leave it up to the clubs about the actual drinking policy. They are the ones that have to deal with drunk members, the public, and the courts if there is an accident.

And for those who think its stupid for having "no drinking period" at the field, remember that when some tipsy person puts a foot through the wing of a 1/4 scale and starts a fight over it. Or the aurguing that begins between a few guys who are having a few on the tailgate, then turns in the pissing match that breaks up the club, or the 13 yr old who gets into someones cooler and has a few while dad is out flying.

We had all this happen to us, so we had good reason to ban drinking. Nobody was flying, just using the club field as a hangout place to drink. Pissing all over the place and leaving beer cans everywhere. Yup, those were the fun days.

Scott

I guess some where out there in R/C land there is a drinking problem.
If there is then in my many years in the hobby I haven't seen it. I must be
one lucky guy.

I have to wonder, what is such the big deal ?
I should be more concerned about a guy who has had a beer and "seems" OK? ,perhaps
I should be more concerned the fello pilots who don't do a range check, or who really badly
need a new set of glasses to correct their eye sight but won't spend the money.

Example:
Sit back some day and count the number of people who don't do a range check.
Then count the number of beer drinkers.

My point is ,write all the rules you want , it will make little difference to most of the membership.
We/they, will for the most part will do as we wish anyway regardless of what's written on paper
by the AMA.

Just an observation
Roby

Does anyone have a actual account of a alcohol related injury? J.R. the deal we sign every year seemed good enough for most people. I "seemed" to understand it pretty well. So a rewrite will fix all that? My problem is who's going to enforce this. Has anyone really seen the new rewrite? Do we really know what it will say?-MIke

Perhaps the manufacturers could install a breathalizer tube on the side of the transmitter, not allowing the radio to transmit if the flyer breathes, say a .1% or higher. [X(]

Darn! Can't find my radio switch! (Hiccup!!)

Mike

Rather than go through it all again, have a look at at this thread
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.a...member%2Cinput

Ok so whats it going to say? Does anyone out there know?

I agree that 'prior to' wording just won't do it. I like the 8 hrs prior, and allowing spectators to have a beer, in moderation of coarse. A pilot woh drinks would be grownded for the day. I personally don't like beer that much but many do and i don't see it to be a problem if done responsibly. As far as enforcement, it would seem to me that the new saftey officer, every club will have, would be the logical one to oversee this. Any violations could have a 0 tolerance and be grounds for revoking of the membership and a reporting to all surounding clubs of the violation so the problem isn't just transfered.

Regardless of how the rule is worded, it will still be up to individual members to accept and live up to it, and up to the various club administrations to enforce it and take appropriate action against people dumb enough to violate it.
About blood alcohol levels: When I had a pleasant month of March in 1990 test driving on a frozen lake in Northern Sweden, we were briefed that the limit in Sweden was 0.04%. For me, at at my weight of about 195, that meant slightly more than a beer per hour. The penalty for the first offence was 2 year suspension of driving liscence and a year in jail. Nobody asked what they did for a second conviction. The Swedes claimed this lowered the accident and death rate involving DUI by over 50%. You did not have to actually be driving, either. All you had to do was be caught behind the wheel of a car, or the only occupant of a parked car. They justified it using the numerous clinical studies that measured changes in thought processes, reflexes, and several other factors with subjects drinking various beverages under controlled conditions.

I'll never have a problem with this rule because i never plan to drink and i don't see why you want to kill brain cells and ruin your liver. Its better just not to get started. What does beer do for you that Coke won't do? Sorry if this affends anybody, but that is just the way i was raised.

TTYL,
Andrew T.

Or what does coke do for you that beer won't do?- Rot your teeth.

Red S.

My dad was an FAA medical examiner (her gave full scale pilots their physical exams). Airline pilots had to get a physical every 6 months. He used to say they all were alcoholics.

Seriously, I believe the current FAA rule is either 24 or 48 hours from bottle to throttle.

Coke is just as bad but they just don't get the bad rap beer does, have another cup of sugar. Man I sure hope everyone feels the same way about smoking at the field. Oh well I'm going for a cold one.-Mike

Coke might give a sugar high, but it's not a neurotoxin like alcohol. The sugar effect is only supposed to last for something like 12-15 minutes. The alcohol effect is measureable for hours.

The 2004 AMA rule reads: "I will not consume alcoholic beverages prior to, nor during, participation in any model
operations."
The 2005 AMA rule proposed to the LMs reads: I will not operate my model aircraft within eight (8) hours of having consumed alcohol, while under the influence of alcohol, or while using any drug that adversely affects safety.

Neither will be the final rule for 2005.

The question is how should the rule read in the futrure... 2006 and beyond. This has turned into a discussion of the appropriateness of alcohol, instead. I thought Gordon made some good suggestions. Does anyone have an other suggestions/modifications as to the wording?

In that case, I would just add "Nor will I consume any alcoholic beverages nor take any such drug or medication during any flying session!"

Ok, use coffee as the example then, the caffein lasts for hours. Then of course, there are the numerous OTC cold medicines that are finding there way into some state driving regs... and so on...and so on