|
Pardon the Loud Noise, Sir...
We all knew it was inevitable. Well, it finally happened. Let's see how this gets whitewashed in the next 24 hours.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> By DIANA RUGG / WCNC E-mail Diana: [email protected] CHARLOTTE, N.C.-- A US Airways pilot’s gun accidentally discharged during a flight from Denver to Charlotte Saturday, according to as statement released by the airline. The statement said the discharge happened on Flight 1536, which left Denver at approximately 6:45am and arrived in Charlotte at approximately 11:51am. The Airbus A319 plane landed safely and none of the flight’s 124 passengers or five crew members was injured, according to the statement. It was a full flight. And airline spokeswoman said the plane has been taken out of service to make sure it is safe to return to flight. A Transportation Safety Administration spokeswoman reached by WCNC Sunday said the pilot is part of TSA’s Federal Flight Deck Officer (FFDO) program, which trains pilots to carry guns on flights. Andrea McCauley said the gun discharged in the cockpit, but she could not release how the gun was being transported at the time. She did not release the pilot’s name, but said he was authorized to carry the weapon and was last requalified in the FFDO program last November. A statement from TSA said the airplane was never in danger, and the TSA and the Federal Air Marshals Service are investigating the incident. WCNC reporter Diana Rugg is following up on this story. If you or someone you know were on that flight, please e-mail her at [email protected]. ... |
Yep, have to agree, it was inevitable.
Guns and pilots together on the FD is a very bad idea, as boys and their toys do not mix well. Wonder what he was doing...playing quick draw McGraw?:rolleyes::} |
Have Gun Will Travel . . .
This F/O with an apparent siege mentality must have had the trigger cocked; the only way for the gun to fire, albeit accidentally!
Thank goodness for the armor plated cockpit door to protect the persons outside the cockpit. :eek: |
Inevitable ?
As most of us know it does not take the hammer to be cocked before a discharge can occur. Simply dropping the weapon onto a cockpit floor is enough to cause a discharge if you have "one up the spout".
(Speak to my colleague with the shattered ankle bone if you have any doubts, albeeit done when his shooter fell from the seat between his legs in the car, and before you ask it was legal and in Joburg) I wonder what the chances are of a single discharge starting a cockpit electrical fire. Seems to me that the risks of taking out your partner or worse must also outweigh the advantages ? Imagegear |
Pardon the loud noise,captain
TSA’s Federal Flight Deck Officer (FFDO) program,
How long does the program go,when did it start?:ugh: |
Having one in the chamber is just as irresponsible as having one in and the thing cocked IMHO. In fact, why did the 'flying leatherneck' think it was acceptable to have the thing on board in the first place?
|
It's the whole American gun obsession thing, isn't it?
A pro-gun person said a while ago "An armed society is a polite society". They must have beautiful manners in Baghdad then. |
Reminds me of Chickenhawk, when Bob Mason blew out the bubble "dryfiring" someone's personal toy after being badgered to do so. Commanding Officer, handing Bob the remains of a VOR and asking, " So, Bob, did the VOR draw on you first?" :D :D :D
|
Slightly off-topic I know (blame SeldomFixit), but wasn't Chickenhawk a great read!
Cam |
We can only hope this knocks sense into the chaps who condone this type of nonsense. I have a funny feeling that's very wishful thinking.
|
Only in America ........ :rolleyes:
|
Does anyone know the make of weapon they use, or does one get qualify for the licence then pop down to Wal-Mart and tool up with whatever you fancy?
|
I can't wait for the report on this one. That is, if there will be one?
BTW, don't blame the Effoh. It doesn't say who carried the gun. |
As most of us know it does not take the hammer to be cocked before a discharge can occur. Simply dropping the weapon onto a cockpit floor is enough to cause a discharge if you have "one up the spout". Some older weapons (e.g. single action revolvers, original Colt 1911) can easily be made to discharge if dropped. A fault in a modern weapon can also render them liable to accidentally discharge if dropped. I would hope that a pilot permitted to carry a loaded firearm onto an aircraft would be issued with a modern well designed firearm, and more importantly, be trained exactly how to handle the firearm safely. Alas, many "trained" firearms users that I've come into contact with scare the holy crap out of me with their unsafe gun handling..... I'd be very interested to know exactly what type of firearm was being carried, and what the training requirements are.... |
Whilst stretching to reach the chart holder, the pilot's spurs caught the clasp of the gun case which spilled open. As the gun fell out, the first officers trusty steed, which was teathered to the jump seat, stretched his aching hooves. The gun caught Silver's front right hoof and was launched against the Captains seat back where the weapon discharged, scaring the bejesus out of all on the flightdeck. Silver left a horse shaped hole in the flightdeck door as it bolted to the aft Lav, taking the jumpseat assembly with him.
|
Out of curiosity, does the “TSA’s Federal Flight Deck Officer (FFDO) program” prescribe which side arms can and can not be carried and the types of shells are they allowed to use?
(a simple yes or no would suffice, not looking to breach security!) JAS |
OK, gents, you lot seem to need some reassurance, so let me do my best.
I am not a member of the program, but I've flown with some who are. Here's what I feel comfortable telling in public: - The training is thorough. It is done by the federal government, at the same school that teaches Border Patrol officers. - They don't take everybody. They certainly don't take "cowboys." Those are the first ones scratched off the list. Screening is very thorough, takes awhile and involves face-time with at least one psychiatrist. - The weapons/ammo are standard issue, very modern and quite safe. Don't know what happened in this case but it was most certainly not dropped. I would suspect the FFDO was checking the chambered round - not a standard maneuver but I've heard some guys do it. - There are more FFDO's now than federal skymarshals. The program costs the government next to nothing. And we haven't had an aircraft attacked in six-and-a-half years. Would you have thought this a good thing on September 12, 2001? - We know it's an american thing. Got it. You don't understand. Got that too. If you want you can do a search and read some of the thousands of PPrune posts on guns and america in the archives..... |
Huck,
I'll take your last point first and not restart the old controversy. But as to - There are more FFDO's now than federal skymarshals. The program costs the government next to nothing. And we haven't had an aircraft attacked in six-and-a-half years. |
A pro-gun person said a while ago "An armed society is a polite society".
They must have beautiful manners in Baghdad then. That was an interesting observation. Obviously, being armed alone is not enough. I have thought about this on occasion, when thinking about armed Vikings, armed knights, armed Indians and settlers....... In addition to being armed, there were rather strict customs regarding the use of these arms. Nowadays, we seem to have no customs or honour, and so you get these mindless killings for an ipod or a cap or a pair of shoes.....or just because one feels like it. A 16 year old killed the other day on his paper route in Copenhagen. Another knifed on the street. In each case, 3 against one unarmed.....and for no "reason" other than being violent. But then the non-armed have to choose whether they are going to arm themselves for self-defence. Then the armed may become more "polite," or they may choose to be even more violent initially, assuming that their victims are now armed... Interesting circle here........ But this has to do with one particular incident. Personally, I cannot see how a "well-trained" person could "accidently" discharge a firearm. Spontaneous combustion? It should never have been out of its case, holster or where-ever it is normally kept while in flight, unless it was thought to be used. He shouldn´t have been "checking it," loading it or showing it during routine flight. That seems simple enough... |
Well, I would say that the lack of atacks is because the real terrorists get the message. Namely, that trying to hi-jack an airplane is not worth the effort.
Hey, wait a minute.......That would mean that the number of hi-jacks in Europe, where pilots are not armed, should be on the rise. But as this is not the case, I would conclude that arming pilots is unnecessary from a deterrence point of view. (or any other point of view for that matter) |
Personally, I cannot see how a "well-trained" person could "accidently" discharge a firearm. Spontaneous combustion? It should never have been out of its case, holster or where-ever it is normally kept while in flight, unless it was thought to be used. He shouldn´t have been "checking it," loading it or showing it during routine flight. That seems simple enough... As to comparisons US vs. EU, oh now stop. If your ground screening, etc. were as pathetic as ours, you'd be begging for a pistol too.... Let me give you the bottom line: we've got all the guns in the world, and civil rights laws that will stop any confiscation. Given that set of initial conditions, can you really argue against the good guys arming themselves as well? |
At what stage of the flight, was the gun fired?
Huck. Your last point - We know it's an american thing. Got it. You don't understand. Got that too. Is one of the best remarks in the debate and so I shall make no debate with your other points. The USA is a very young country, in it's present form only since 1959. Looking from a country that can trace lineage for more than 1,000 years we know that it takes time for each country to find - and make - it's own balance. By further comparison so that you do not feel unduly criticised, South Africa is one of the youngest countries and is in a real mess. |
Calm Down Calm Down, the Captain just Far$ed
Damm, I say God Damm,
Accidents do happen, Hot coffee gets poured over SLF's who hardly moan (allegdly ) Guns get fired , Bombs get dropped , It is all about learning from our mistakes :ugh: Let us not judge the Gun culture in Baghdad, US, or the Knife culture in UK, How about giving the benefit of doubt to the poor chap who fired his gun, Now he/she knows for certain the gun works :p Carry on Flying |
I'm picking up a lot of anti-US sentiment / stereotyping on here. I would be geniunely interested for those people to explain what experience led to them holding such a view and whether this was media driven or from personal experience.
Over the last number of years I've done quite a bit of research into Jihad and Islamism to try and get an understanding for myself rather that what was reported in the media of why they feel compelled to destroy the west and one thing that keeps cropping up is media control and the Eurabian alliance (far too in depth to go into on here but worth a google if you're interested). Disturbingly you find that there is a media culture of anti-americanism and lo and behold, the readers are slowly suckered into believing that the americans are the oil stealing bad guys and the jihadis are oppressed freedom fighters. This 'laziness' of readers beliefs brings the reader round to this view in such a way that they aren't concerned about looking for the flip side of the report. I personally was finding myself to come to the same conclusion which what prompted me to go digging because I have spent a lot of time in America and have many friends there and have always been in awe of the people and the country and it was disturbing to find myself at odds with this long held view. Anyway, back on topic, this event on an american plane where an FFDO's weapon has somehow discharged is a classic example. Read the report again and its very neutral. The fact is the gun has been fired, nobody was injured, and the plane landed safely. But before you know it, its out on the net before any investigation has happened and people are free to let their imagination run wild and drag up the first stereotype that springs to mind and from there it propogates from a non-event to a full blown 'those dumb yanks and their guns nearly downed a jet after playing with a gun in the cockpit' story. By the time the results from the investigation are released everybody has already had time to file the story under 'S' for stupid yanks and is therefore meaningless. If the results clear anyone of any wrong doing it will be a cover up (as AKAAB framed it at the start of this thread) or simply not reported because its not 'juicy' enough. In summary, think about your motivation for your judgements - sometimes a double check can reveal the reality rather than the myth you are being led to believe. Peace! |
No body has said yet where the bullet went. The thought of a gun being fired in the flight deck fills me with alarm. With all the critical items in there, not least of which are the operating crew!!
I know "It`s an American thing" but if they must take one with them it should be locked away. There will be time to grab it if need due to the time that will be taken to get thoroug the dlight deck door Tristar500 |
I'd certainly take the opportunity to carry one if it was legal in the UK, I had a UK FAC for five years and with the appropriate training do not see a problem:we have a general issue with guns in the UK, they are not the devil in disguise just tools to be treated with the upmost care.
Personally I'd want something with a little more va va voom like an MP5K....Ooh better stop I'm scaring myself now:ooh: |
cowboys should not fly, they should take care of horses not horse power.
if I would have be a passenger I would sue the airline to endangering my flying with on board guns. Passengers Wake up!!!!!!!!! |
Non lethal weaponry
Does the program specifically train in the use of 'firearms' or is there an option/training for the use of Non-lethal weaponry ?
Aside from the obvious issues around stopping power and effectiveness surely non-lethal weaponry might be a happy medium for all ? |
Originally Posted by Huck
- They don't take everybody. They certainly don't take "cowboys." Those are the first ones scratched off the list. Screening is very thorough, takes awhile and involves face-time with at least one psychiatrist.
- It may have changed, but previously the psychiatrist eval was over the phone. - Sadly, there are a number of FFDO's that admit they are in the program to make it less of a hassle to get through the TSA screening. - I have one F/O that likes to make a big production of pulling out his weapon, placing it on the tray table while sorting out his lock box and reloads, then finally putting the damnable thing on his belt or back in his bag. (Just unzip and show everyone what you have if you need that kind of validation, Kimosabe.) |
Passengers can't sue the airline for allowing the pilot to have a gun. The government runs the program and the airline has no say who can carry and who can't.
|
The last weapon that was inclined to go off if you dropped it was the mass-produced WWII Sten gun, and that was because the bolt operated more or less freely in its cylinder on a spring, due to its design for simplicity and cheapness. So if it fell with the barrel pointing upwards the bolt could move backwards, pick up a round on the way forwards again, and fire it with the fixed firing pin (cheapness again) thus starting the automatic sequence of recoil against spring > forward, collect next round > fire > recoil.....etc.
It is inconceivable that any firearm made since, other than home-made ones, would fire accidentally if dropped, unless it is loaded and cocked with the safety off, and the trigger is somehow operated in the fall, and it is an urban myth that any could. The weapon in this incident MUST have been loaded with the safety off to have fired. And that says it all about the so-called "training" that these people have evidently received. |
It went bang, so what!
I believe there is a saying: "If something can go wrong, it will go wrong" according to a Mr Murphy from the land of potatoes who has been proved correct on many occasions.
The circumstances will no doubt be investigated by the appropriate authorites. If the damage had been significant, I would contend the information would already be in the public domain. So it seems it comes down to nothing more than "Bang, oops, what went wrong, lets learn", now lets get back to keeping the bad guys out. All of this should not detract from the fact that we should be able to protect ourselves and our fare paying guests from those that wish us, and our western lifestyle, significant harm. That a firearm was discharged should not be vindication for the anti gun lobby to assert that firearms in an aircraft under the control of crew are more dangerous than allowing MustaffaFlyOfThePlane and his band of virgin seeking mates to seek access to the flight deck without the real fear and reality of meeting said heavenly bodies were he to try and gain access. Where I fly, we are not allowed to carry firearms in the flt deck. We are also told that if Air marshalls are placed on board, we may not be told of that fact. Both circumstances elevate the potential risk to both crew and pax. For what its worth, I believe the US has it right in as much as they not only allow suitably screened and trained members of crew access to a weapon, but make it enough public knowledge to additionally serve as a deterrent. Keep up the good work guys (but maybe a little easier on the trigger finger?) |
- Personally, I can think of at least three pilots I know that are in the program and many of their cohorts feel they don't have the maturity or self-control to be empowered with a firearm. - It may have changed, but previously the psychiatrist eval was over the phone. - Sadly, there are a number of FFDO's that admit they are in the program to make it less of a hassle to get through the TSA screening. - I have one F/O that likes to make a big production of pulling out his weapon, placing it on the tray table while sorting out his lock box and reloads, then finally putting the damnable thing on his belt or back in his bag. (Just unzip and show everyone what you have if you need that kind of validation, Kimosabe.) Guns have their place aviation security, but the users of them must be well trained. It's only if they are not that incidents like this become "inevitable". |
I'm picking up a lot of anti-US sentiment / stereotyping on here. I would be geniunely interested for those people to explain what experience led to them holding such a view and whether this was media driven or from personal experience. Over the last number of years I've done quite a bit of research into Jihad and Islamism to try and get an understanding for myself rather that what was reported in the media of why they feel compelled to destroy the west and one thing that keeps cropping up is media control and the Eurabian alliance (far too in depth to go into on here but worth a google if you're interested). Disturbingly you find that there is a media culture of anti-americanism and lo and behold, the readers are slowly suckered into believing that the americans are the oil stealing bad guys and the jihadis are oppressed freedom fighters. This 'laziness' of readers beliefs brings the reader round to this view in such a way that they aren't concerned about looking for the flip side of the report. I personally was finding myself to come to the same conclusion which what prompted me to go digging because I have spent a lot of time in America and have many friends there and have always been in awe of the people and the country and it was disturbing to find myself at odds with this long held view. Anyway, back on topic, this event on an american plane where an FFDO's weapon has somehow discharged is a classic example. Read the report again and its very neutral. The fact is the gun has been fired, nobody was injured, and the plane landed safely. But before you know it, its out on the net before any investigation has happened and people are free to let their imagination run wild and drag up the first stereotype that springs to mind and from there it propogates from a non-event to a full blown 'those dumb yanks and their guns nearly downed a jet after playing with a gun in the cockpit' story. By the time the results from the investigation are released everybody has already had time to file the story under 'S' for stupid yanks and is therefore meaningless. If the results clear anyone of any wrong doing it will be a cover up (as AKAAB framed it at the start of this thread) or simply not reported because its not 'juicy' enough. In summary, think about your motivation for your judgements - sometimes a double check can reveal the reality rather than the myth you are being led to believe. Peace! I would share a cockpit with you anytime. |
Only in America ........ KAL crews have worn sidearms for years, as did US aircrew many decades ago when they were duty-bound to protect the mail after a forced landing. :rolleyes: edit: I've often thought that airlines should advertise the percentage of their crews carrying heat. Some pax might be put off by this, but inasmuch as the bad guys avoid such flights, it's a good thing... :} |
Remember "The Flight of the Phoenix"
My guess is the guy was told his plane was fitted with cartridge starters :}
|
Accidents will happen
If it can happen to this guy it can happen to anyone.
He took it in the foot. http://www.metacafe.com/watch/46491/...n_a_classroom/ The owner of a shooting range in the UK once pointed a loaded shotgun at me. He was excited at the clay torsos he had just shoot and forgot that he had loaded two rounds, he spun around to us in surprise because the French police shotgun round (like six ball bearings) splattered clay all over the place. Apart from the presence of a film crew both experts were not under the kind of duress a pilot would be under facing a real threat. Mickjoebill |
mid life pilot
Crap.....just when I was thinking that I was wrong, you had to go and stir up my thoughts and get me going again. I had never heard of
http://gatesofvienna.*************/2...a-code_19.html before, but Eurabia as a conscious political decision sounds more true than false when looking at recent history. Hmmmmm explains more than a few things, in fact. |
Let's see we start with approval to arm pilots based on positive benefits outweighing negative risk. Risk considers minimial risk of disabling damage to aircraft should gun discharge in flight aimed at bad guy.
Unplanned event occurs where gun discharges accidently and confirms original presumptions of positive benefits outweighing negative risk. |
With 19 years in the military, having been a firearms instructor, a qualified range officer, run two shooting clubs and having shot competatively for my country, I know however many safety features the weapon has had, or however many safety checks the user has, there is still a very real element of risk. It's a very rare case where firearms have a place on a civilian aircraft, particularly in the flight deck.
In my humble opinion. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 14:56. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.