I have never run into any flight attendants who had a problem with allowing the drinks to flow freely. One thing that does surprise me is that I have never been carded on any of my flights. Something that struck me as funny was a few weeks ago when I was in F on an ASA flight. After I had been served my third drink the flight attendant asked "you are 21 right?". I assured her I was to which she replied "well, I thought so" and then told me to let her know when I was ready for another drink.

If the airlines are concerned on "over serving" passengers then maybe a solution is to put it in their contract of carriage that they will not be held responsible for the actions of the passengers. Don't take it out on the rest of us who can hold our liquor. The only times I have heard of passengers acting out after drinking while on an aircraft it was due to them being on some type of medication that should not be mixed with alcohol.

In my opinion there is no better flight then having an interesting person in the seat next to you to talk with over a few drinks.

For me it boils down to what could be considered standard practice. If we all know the rules and customs, then we all get along better. I don't think anyone would consider the OP's experience the norm. I don't recall ever being on a flight where the drinks didn't flow at pretty much whatever rate the passenger chose.

So if it's outside the norm, why did it happen? Was the FA using the "judgment" policy to push her own feelings on alcohol? If that's the case, what the FA did was wrong. Was it some new emphasis on not overserving? If that's the case, why can't Delta let us all know so some FA doesn't have to make us feel like children?

If the OP was hammered, then the FA did the right thing. Otherwise, this situation seems like a divergence from what most would consider standard practice.

safety and drunk driving!
 

Two things. If someone get's too far gone and there is an issue, say a hole in the roof of the cabin, do you want this person endangering everyone else in the emergency? :mad:

Next, do you want an over drinker driving home after the flight? Not me! :confused:

For all of those saying that if the OP wasn't "hammered", "belligerent", "obnoxious", etc. that he should have been served another drink, keep in mind that a lot of people go straight to a car after getting off of the plane. I can have lots of drinks without being any of the above, but there's no way that I should get behind the wheel at that point.

And for those of you saying that the airline isn't responsible for what happens on the ground afterward, here is an example where the airline was held responsible:
US Air, New Mexico

Admirable, but my record is 5.

So ask if he's driving. Absent predrinking I don't expect he was pushing up against the legal driving limit in this case either.

I'll be honest -- If I were an FA my feelings would be:
1) It's too easy to lie about whether you're driving or not
2) "Absent predrinking" is a big one -- not easy to tell, and also easy to lie about.

It's just not something that you mess around with, IMO. I'd say 4 drinks on a flight seems like a good amount... I'm not advocating for limits, but it's not like he was told no more after one or two...

It's the responsibility of airlines to keep people sober? That's a bit of a stretch.

Of course it's a "big one", but we're talking about ~1 drink more than normally metabolized in this time period! He's likely no drunker than he was when he got on the plane at the time of the interaction. This is like saying no more after "one or two" in that he would only be feeling the effects of one or two drinks after downing the 4th.

We're talking about 4 drinks in, by the time he's landed and deplaned, about 4 hours. That's in the range of how much you'd expect to metabolize in that time period.

You say 4 drinks on a flight. Is that 4 drinks on a 45-min puddle jumper (most people would feel that!) or 4 drinks ATL-JNB? I'm not sure "per flight" is the right metric here.

Most (if not all) states in the US have laws that prohibit serving alcohol to intoxicated people, and also 'dram shop laws' that make the person serving the alcohol responsible if the drinker subsequently injures/kills someone else (e.g., in a car crash on the drive home).

I can understand reasonable differences of opinion regarding whether or not the FA should have cut off the OP. However, pretending that state laws don't exist (or thinking that they can be overridden by an air line's CoC) doesn't make much sense to me.

If they're the ones serving the alcohol, then yes, it is...

I'm not advocating a per flight limit (as I stated very clearly in the previous post). In fact, I think that would be a horrible idea. What I was saying is that 4 drinks on a domestic flight doesn't seem like it's a ridiculously low number to start watching what else is served.

Urban Myth
 

Not if you are a nervous flier, enjoy wine with your meal, or otherwise like a drink. Drinking and driving - now that is a bad idea.

No, it does not. In two studies by Higgins (1968 and 1970) on behalf of the FAA showed that BAC is no different when you keep consumption constant and change altitude. In addition, in subsequent studies of observed function, the effect of alcohol was evident at ground and at altitude. There was a separate, albeit small and more noteworthy, independent, affect of altitude. There was no interaction (i.e. the effect was independent, not synergistic) of alcohol and altitude in terms of function, either. The effect of altitude on function is nominal. The effect of alcohol on function is well known and documented - in percent by volume, 0.04% is the threshold, 0.08% is the typical legal limit of impairment and upwards of 0.20% is likely asking for significant trouble and at 0.40% you are pretty much dead.

Furthermore, the issue of the "low oxygen" environment of an airplane at altitude resulting in a lower carrying capacity of oxygen in the blood and thus slowing the metabolism of the liver (the CYP450 pathway specifically) is erroneous. The partial pressure of O2 at sea level is about 150 TOR, and in the pressurized cabin of a normal jetliner (even at 36,000 ft) is about 125 TOR - a negligible physiologic difference in that 125 TOR is sufficient to ensure 100% saturation of hemoglobin in normal adults.

Also not true. In a study by Collins this hypothesis was not supported. The "hangover" effect of alcohol is due to the metabolic by-product, acetaldehyde. The amount is dependent on the amount of alcohol metabolized, not the location of this metabolism.

They are not my mommy.

So as for the urban myth that somehow at 36,000 feet in a metal tube an alcoholic drink has a 2, 3, or even 4-fold effect on you is bunk.

I am one of those people who can see both sides of this issue. I do believe that people who are interested in having a drink should be able to do so, but they must also understand that FA's jobs are on the line, and the safety of all pax are at stake, if they provide too much alcohol to any one pax.

Do I believe in some arbitrary limit? NO. Do I believe that it must be left up to the judgment of the FAs? YES. Do I also believe that anyone who protests more than a token amount about not being given enough free alcohol on a flight is probably by definition a problem or a risk for the FAs and all pax on that flight? YES. Do I also believe that I will be attacked for taking the aforementioned positions? YES.

I'm not sure what the answer is here - I don't drink on planes, primarily because I want to avoid airline toilets like the plague (I typically fly coach). On a NW flight from MSP to Vegas, I was upgraded to first, and my daughter was with me as a lap baby (business trip, and I was still nursing and not prepared to be away from her for 5 days). The man next to us was ordering drinks and anyway, after 4 drinks leaned over and threw up on me and my daughter. We were probably a little over an hour into the flight. Alas, I screwed up and had her feet toward the aisle, not her head, so he ended up vomiting mostly on her head, with a little on my arm and leg. The FA ended up having him moved to the back of the plane and I spent the rest of the flight trying to calm down and clean up my formerly-sleeping daughter. On the bright side, NW gave us each $400 vouchers (even my kid, hadn't paid for her ticket). When he sat down next to us I could have sworn he was as sober as I was. So I guess I come down in favor of deferring to the FA's judgment (though, since the same FA served the guy next to me 4 drinks in an hour, maybe not). Then again, after spending three hours cooped up in a metal tube with my children, there is nothing I like more than a stiff cocktail, so I can imagine sitting down next to a baby in first and wanting to have a pre-emptive drink or 6 in case it behaves badly.

Will I be the one to attack you? NO. Do I like answer questions I ask myself? ABSOLUTELY! :D.

+1 to your response.

There's a difference between being stone sober and not being intoxicated. May as well go for prohibition if you want to hold to the standard used here. Also, I believe Nevada has no Dram Shop law, and I imagine it would be their jurisdiction in this case.