Pardon the Loud Noise, Captain...
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sixandthreeland
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The gun is nothing but TIME. combined with the door, the two of them MIGHT buy you enough time to maintain controll of the aircraft untill you reach the ground and turn a potential cruise missile into a building.
After that, you are correct, it is all about maintaining control of the cockpit. I would add that buying time is also no longer necessary if it happens that the controversial tool is used well.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SA
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to be clear, I'm in no way criticizing our Swiss friend's post....I just thought it ironic. Sort of like a Texan espousing a vegetarian diet. (Wasn't it the Swiss who made skiing a shooting sport in the Olympics. Now THAT'S a strange place to tote a gun!)
I believe Mr. Nielsen was from one of the Scandinavian countries and probably didn't enjoy the same rights and privileges with regards to firearms ownership in Switzerland. Of course, someone will certainly make the argument that if Mr. Nielsen had a gun, he might still be alive.
Regardless, when I first heard about this ND in the cockpit, my first thoughts were "what a tool." Thanks to this forum, I've learned quite a bit and now have some sympathy for the guy. On a related topic (perhaps a bush pilot can chime in here) aren't pilots in Alaska required to be armed? (Forced landing in the wild in-mind)
I believe Mr. Nielsen was from one of the Scandinavian countries and probably didn't enjoy the same rights and privileges with regards to firearms ownership in Switzerland. Of course, someone will certainly make the argument that if Mr. Nielsen had a gun, he might still be alive.
Regardless, when I first heard about this ND in the cockpit, my first thoughts were "what a tool." Thanks to this forum, I've learned quite a bit and now have some sympathy for the guy. On a related topic (perhaps a bush pilot can chime in here) aren't pilots in Alaska required to be armed? (Forced landing in the wild in-mind)
Wunderbra
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Bedford, UK
Age: 44
Posts: 313
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wino, you mention a trigger lock mechanism. Is this the barrel type, that fits behind the trigger and physically blocks it's movement?
If so, then surely unloading the weapon would be the first priority, as putting the lock in place renders it safe and useless for defence anyway, there's no point in locking it with one up the spout.
And especially if there is a risk that putting the lock in place might cause the action to be fired off.
If so, then surely unloading the weapon would be the first priority, as putting the lock in place renders it safe and useless for defence anyway, there's no point in locking it with one up the spout.
And especially if there is a risk that putting the lock in place might cause the action to be fired off.
From Post #192
Practically, you have a choice of around 190 (Alaska and Hawaii are not countries)
And why? It really is the blind leading the blind over there isn't it?
Quote:
So what country do you think the US could learn from? And why?
So what country do you think the US could learn from? And why?
And why? It really is the blind leading the blind over there isn't it?
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well let's put some perspective on this. Everyday we carry many potentially dangerous items in the cargo hold. The system is designed for safety and generally works well but we know from experience it is not 100% perfect. We also know that pilots are the most controlled and monitored profession yet we have had a few who deliberately caused accidents so there again we do not have a 100% perfect score. We have rational discussions and reactions regarding most of these rare events however in this case many have gone ape over it.
More details here: a description of the trigger-locking mechanism, the name of the captain and an estimate on how many pilots (12000) are in the FFDO program at present:
http://www.charlotte.com/local/story/557520.html
http://www.charlotte.com/local/story/557520.html
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But you know what? We already decided its okay to have dead pilots at the controlls. Otherwise we never would have raised the retirement age for pilots. More pilots will die at the controlls from the increased retirment age, and thats a FACT!
Give me a break... I'll love to know where did you get that "fact"... You complain now, but you'll be quite glad that rule exists once you hit your 60's.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener....THE%20REALITY
Union Goon
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posts: 1,097
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PA38.
So is it your medical opinion the chances of a stroke and heart attack REDUCE with age? Really? hmmmmmm. We must have it backwards then. Maybe EKGs should only be untill you are 40 and then discontinued.
Where did I say whether or not I was for the raising of retirement age. The reality is that more pilots WILL die at the controls as older pilots fly. The other reality is that it is also not a safety risk to the passengers in the back as long as there are two or more qualified pilots on board. (And by law in airline ops there must be)
That is the point of redundancy. And it doesn't matter if someone has a heart attack, stroke, Kidney stone or is shot. The other pilot flies the plane. That is the whole point of certification of aircraft for commercial operations. No single failure should be able to bring down the plane.
And the same thing goes for a bullet strait into the center of the instrument panel. We aren't talking about spraying a clip from an AK47 all around the cockpit. Even if you some how have a miracle shot that does an astonding amount of damage, there is still the instrument panel of the pilot sitting next to you, or the standby instruments that have their own power and static sources.
That is the whole cornerstone of certification of airlines and the equiptment they fly.
the only arguement against the guns that has any validity is the chance of a gun being taken away from the pilots somewhere inside the secure area. But there are far easier ways to get a gun into the terminal or onto an aircraft that would be much more predictable (predicatability is the most important thing if you are trying to plan a terrorist attack). Planning an attack to use a pilot's gun won't work because first you have to know whether a pilot is an FFDO, then you have to be sure he is carrying that day (and wasn't reassigned to another flight). Because there is no REQUIREMENT to carry FFDOs may not have their gun on the day you planned to take it away from them. Then even if you do get the gun away from them somehow, it is locked and you are going to need to find some big heavy duty tools to get it unlocked...
There are much much easier and more predictable ways to get guns into aircraft.
Cheers
Wino
So is it your medical opinion the chances of a stroke and heart attack REDUCE with age? Really? hmmmmmm. We must have it backwards then. Maybe EKGs should only be untill you are 40 and then discontinued.
Where did I say whether or not I was for the raising of retirement age. The reality is that more pilots WILL die at the controls as older pilots fly. The other reality is that it is also not a safety risk to the passengers in the back as long as there are two or more qualified pilots on board. (And by law in airline ops there must be)
That is the point of redundancy. And it doesn't matter if someone has a heart attack, stroke, Kidney stone or is shot. The other pilot flies the plane. That is the whole point of certification of aircraft for commercial operations. No single failure should be able to bring down the plane.
And the same thing goes for a bullet strait into the center of the instrument panel. We aren't talking about spraying a clip from an AK47 all around the cockpit. Even if you some how have a miracle shot that does an astonding amount of damage, there is still the instrument panel of the pilot sitting next to you, or the standby instruments that have their own power and static sources.
That is the whole cornerstone of certification of airlines and the equiptment they fly.
the only arguement against the guns that has any validity is the chance of a gun being taken away from the pilots somewhere inside the secure area. But there are far easier ways to get a gun into the terminal or onto an aircraft that would be much more predictable (predicatability is the most important thing if you are trying to plan a terrorist attack). Planning an attack to use a pilot's gun won't work because first you have to know whether a pilot is an FFDO, then you have to be sure he is carrying that day (and wasn't reassigned to another flight). Because there is no REQUIREMENT to carry FFDOs may not have their gun on the day you planned to take it away from them. Then even if you do get the gun away from them somehow, it is locked and you are going to need to find some big heavy duty tools to get it unlocked...
There are much much easier and more predictable ways to get guns into aircraft.
Cheers
Wino
Wunderbra
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Bedford, UK
Age: 44
Posts: 313
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A quote from the article linked above.
Hmmm, sounds like a quote from a certain post above!
One US Airways pilot who has been an officer for about four years declined to describe the procedures for handling the gun and holster but said he wasn't surprised that a gun discharged on a flight.
"I suspect he was securing his weapon and had a little accident," the pilot said. "It's going to happen again."
"I suspect he was securing his weapon and had a little accident," the pilot said. "It's going to happen again."
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fail to see the need for fire arms on the f/d. Sniffer dogs are trained to detect an additive in Semtex…Ethylene glycol dinitrate. Having said that, the three other mixtures/composites could be blended together in flight, for security reasons no more information.
I doubt after 9/11 terrorists would be contemplating the idea of taking over the f/d
Daz
I doubt after 9/11 terrorists would be contemplating the idea of taking over the f/d
Daz
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The following quote is from the news article's 'comments' section. It's absolute garbage. I've met well over a hundred FFDO's, and perhaps more since they don't announce their status unless required, and they have never displayed childish behavior. They've mentioned their training and have never mentioned people being kicked out of training or 'storming' out of class. The fact is the program is well run but nothing, including preventing terrorism, is foolproof.
The sad part is folks will decide these comments reflect the truth.
http://www.charlotte.com/local/story/557520.html
From feedback from the trainers and others I don't feel the pilots are well suited for carrying fire arms- many have acted like childern- when told they could not do exactly as they pleased with their weapons- some even have "stormed" from class or have been asked to leave based on their lack of professional conduct- if thats how they act in class, I sure don't want an armed pilot at 35K feet with attitude issues.
The sad part is folks will decide these comments reflect the truth.
http://www.charlotte.com/local/story/557520.html
From feedback from the trainers and others I don't feel the pilots are well suited for carrying fire arms- many have acted like childern- when told they could not do exactly as they pleased with their weapons- some even have "stormed" from class or have been asked to leave based on their lack of professional conduct- if thats how they act in class, I sure don't want an armed pilot at 35K feet with attitude issues.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Vancover
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is this True
Capt. Bob Hesselbein, chairman of the pilots union, said some airlines are better than others about encouraging pilots to volunteer for the program, but he wouldn't elaborate. Most pilots support the concept of the program, he said.
What is the real percentage of this group that really aproves of guns on the flight deck, seems to me if it in reality is "most" then all the pilot group would be using their vacation, days-off or personal time to be in these classes, heck start more schools, generate more spending help the ecomony.
Once the person trying to damage, where ever, gets to the position he wants you will not stop him.
What is the real percentage of this group that really aproves of guns on the flight deck, seems to me if it in reality is "most" then all the pilot group would be using their vacation, days-off or personal time to be in these classes, heck start more schools, generate more spending help the ecomony.
Once the person trying to damage, where ever, gets to the position he wants you will not stop him.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Supporting the program doesn't mean you personally are inclined to volunteer. Are some pilots at my company opposed to the FFDO program? Yes, but it seems to be a very small number. I personally have not met any pilot who have expressed opposition to the program. I've seen the posts by some in opposition but finding dissenters is a lot harder to do than it is to find supporters.
Everyone who enrolls is doing so on their own time and to different amounts at their own cost(days off, or loss of pay, or use of vacation days). As anyone flying a regular schedule knows the impact on the rest of the month's schedule is significant when you have to block 7-8 days off.
The program is not just a simple matter of signing up and you get accepted. You have to apply, get accepted(a fairly detailed protocol), and then find the time and pay for some of the costs, to attend. Even with those obstacles news reports state that the school runs full classes all the time.
Every graduate I've spoken with has been highly complimentary of the training.
Based on those observations it seems like the program is highly supported by U.S. based flight crews.
YMMV, especially if you don't know the program, or the individuals that have completed the course.
Everyone who enrolls is doing so on their own time and to different amounts at their own cost(days off, or loss of pay, or use of vacation days). As anyone flying a regular schedule knows the impact on the rest of the month's schedule is significant when you have to block 7-8 days off.
The program is not just a simple matter of signing up and you get accepted. You have to apply, get accepted(a fairly detailed protocol), and then find the time and pay for some of the costs, to attend. Even with those obstacles news reports state that the school runs full classes all the time.
Every graduate I've spoken with has been highly complimentary of the training.
Based on those observations it seems like the program is highly supported by U.S. based flight crews.
YMMV, especially if you don't know the program, or the individuals that have completed the course.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: France
Posts: 2,315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
misd-agin,
To me, you sound like a sane intermediary in a discussion that tends to go off the rails at times. So it's you I'm asking the question to.
Was this indeed, really, honestly, the first occasion of an ND in the cockpit?
Or have others been "papered over", figuratively and literally? (Speed tape is great stuff.)
After all, the scenario is not that improbable, in particular in view of what seems to be the current "regulations".
CJ
To me, you sound like a sane intermediary in a discussion that tends to go off the rails at times. So it's you I'm asking the question to.
Was this indeed, really, honestly, the first occasion of an ND in the cockpit?
Or have others been "papered over", figuratively and literally? (Speed tape is great stuff.)
After all, the scenario is not that improbable, in particular in view of what seems to be the current "regulations".
CJ
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: England
Posts: 964
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the prime aim is a detterent then it would be safer to tell everyone that there are guns on the flight deck, but actually there are not! Just do not have them. Then just report an occasional Negligent Discharge and hey ho. no one comes through the door and you don't risk shooting the Captain in flight (however desirable that may be
)
)
Trash du Blanc
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the prime aim is a detterent then it would be safer to tell everyone that there are guns on the flight deck, but actually there are not! Just do not have them.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ChristiaanJ,
Ah, the ol' "try flattery first..."
It's the first ND I've heard of inflight.
The naysayers like to wring their hands about what happened. I say, so it happened, and where did the bullet go? The most unlikely place to cause any damage. Another hole () in the John Wayne theories.
I think you'll find amongst gun owners/users that AD's/ND's are rare. But they do occur.
I was an adult supervisor at a paint ball game. Very poor muzzle/trigger protocols observed. Teenage kids, about 6 ND's. I spent most of the time protecting the kids around me(take your finger off the trigger, point your gun at the ground or in the air, etc, etc) The kids around me learned very quickly that I would not tolerate poor gun control protocol. I made the decision that my kids would no longer participate in that group activity due to the poor safety standards in place.
Guns have risk associated with them. Not having guns also has risks associated with that decision. It's the balance between the two POV's that folks argue about.
Ah, the ol' "try flattery first..."
It's the first ND I've heard of inflight.
The naysayers like to wring their hands about what happened. I say, so it happened, and where did the bullet go? The most unlikely place to cause any damage. Another hole (
) in the John Wayne theories. I think you'll find amongst gun owners/users that AD's/ND's are rare. But they do occur.
I was an adult supervisor at a paint ball game. Very poor muzzle/trigger protocols observed. Teenage kids, about 6 ND's. I spent most of the time protecting the kids around me(take your finger off the trigger, point your gun at the ground or in the air, etc, etc) The kids around me learned very quickly that I would not tolerate poor gun control protocol. I made the decision that my kids would no longer participate in that group activity due to the poor safety standards in place.
Guns have risk associated with them. Not having guns also has risks associated with that decision. It's the balance between the two POV's that folks argue about.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Phoenix, AZ. USA
Age: 56
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts