TexasCHLforum.com

Pilot to Flight Attendant; Wanna see my gun?

Pilot to CoPilot; Hold my Latte and watch this...

BANG!!

Flight Attendant to Pilot; Whoa, that was quick. Don't worry, it happens to a lot of idiots that put their finger in the trigger gaurd when they're not supposed to.

KBCraig wrote:

Blinking Dog wrote:CHARLOTTE, N.C.-- A US Airways pilot’s gun accidentally discharged....

CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- A US Airway pilot negligently discharged his gun....

Fixed it.

Just want to be clear, I just copied the headline as the subject header. I don't believe a gun with its safety engaged and locked in a box will go boom on its own. But of course we don't want to hurt the pilot's feelings and call him out on it. Easier to blame the gun I guess.

I'm guessing he was playing with it. From what I'm hearing/reading, this happened during flight, when the gun should already have been in the holster and nowhere else. Pilot probably pulled out his H&K to fondle, and pressed the trigger. Not a lack of training, but a lack of personal discipline on his part.

BTW, IIRC, they're currently using H&K USP Compacts. Good little gun, not likely to AD (I use a similar gun for work, the P2000, and it's nigh-impossible for this gun to AD - it takes a conscious effort to pull the trigger).

Slightly different focus ...

The anti's have been at least hinting for years that if a bullet penetrates the skin of the aircraft, the whole thing will just come apart in mid-air. I saw pictures last night on the news, the bullet definitely 'exited the aircraft', but the thing just did not come apart at all. Could it be someone had it wrong?

TraCoun

I getcha TraCoun, maybe a "silver lining"?

TraCoun wrote:Slightly different focus ...

The anti's have been at least hinting for years that if a bullet penetrates the skin of the aircraft, the whole thing will just come apart in mid-air. I saw pictures last night on the news, the bullet definitely 'exited the aircraft', but the thing just did not come apart at all. Could it be someone had it wrong?

TraCoun

Mythbusters debunked the loss of pressurization myth a year or so ago on one of their episodes. As well, the Aloha Airlines flight that had the whole roof ripped from the fuselage back in 1988 and successfully landed back in Hawaii should prove that a small, or even massive, loss of pressurization is not going to rip the airframe apart. If anything, the fact there has been one minor incident in 5 years of the pilot's carrying should show them it is a pretty solid program.

TraCoun wrote:Slightly different focus ...

The anti's have been at least hinting for years that if a bullet penetrates the skin of the aircraft, the whole thing will just come apart in mid-air. I saw pictures last night on the news, the bullet definitely 'exited the aircraft', but the thing just did not come apart at all. Could it be someone had it wrong?

TraCoun

There was a good experiment on this concept on Mythbusters a while back. They shot the window of an airplane and no, no radical de-pressurization. No one was sucked out the hole. Nada. So yes, pretty much everyone who thinks radical things happen from a tiny hole in a plane are wrong, but no they're likely not going to change their thinking. At least, not if they're anti-gun.

LarryH wrote:I haven't been following the details of the program. If the gun was not kept in a separate lock box, but in the pilot's flight case, it's quite possible that some other object in the case made its way (under the influence of vibration or g-forces) inside the trigger guard and placed enough force on the trigger to cause the "bang".

It's not always the booger hook that presses the bang switch.

Why wasn't the safety on? Unless the safety was broken, the gun should not have discharged at all - even if it was in a bag or box with other objects. I own an H&K .40. That safety switch takes a very positive movement to be engaged/disengaged.

The story today was that the pilot was stowing the gun away about 10 minutes prior to landing.

Obviously, the pilot fumbled something in the process.

But I would question why he/she should even have to go through the process. Why not just carry the gun like any other LEO would do? Or like a CHL for that matter?

You put the gun on when you get dressed and get going and take it off when you're ready to hit the sack for the day.

The only exception that would be needed would be on international flights to repressive and/or feeble-minded countries that would not allow for the pilot to leave the plane with the gun. So in those cases, the plane itself would be treated as US Territory (I think it is anyway, right?) and the gun would be locked up inside. This could easily be done AFTER the plane landed, (and before the cockpit doors are opened) when the pilot presumably had a lot less on his or her mind.

What ever happened to "common sense"?

If I was running things, (meaning the FAA) at the time I would have issued revolvers to every flight deck officer on US flag carriers on Sep. 12, 2001. If any of them didn't feel comfortable with it after a brief orientation and explanation, I would make sure that they understood that they were perfectly free to get themselves another job.

As I recall, the FAA did a 2 or 3 day stand down after the attacks. This would have allowed for plenty of time to get this done, including a brief stint of range time.

If enough guns weren't available on such short notice, they could have been portioned out while S&W, Ruger, etc. built what was needed.

What ever happened to common sense?

Why is it that almost 7 years later only around 10% of our flight deck officers are armed?

Leave it to the Feds to screw up a good. The training was probably terrible to begin witn, and if a pilot is going to go armed, then he/she should go armed. To be that means that from the moment they step into the airport until they leave, it should be on their person in a proper holster concelaed by their jacket when not on board. Teh high amount of mandated handling could very well have had something to do with this discharge.

I saw the picture on the news of the exit wound on the front of the aircraft. I thought they were supposed to be using the bullets that are designed to come apart. I think they are called AFR or truncated metal. They essentially trun to powder when they hit something and were supposed to be designed to not penetrate the skin of the planes.

A pilot shoots one snake on the plane, and everyone starts second guessing. sheesh!

Frangible is the word and they are designed to fragment after impact, but they can still penetrate about half of regular bullets.

Box O Truth tested a popular 9mm frangible and it went through 6 layers of drywall and impacted the seventh.

The Glaser Blue Tip (tested) is made of compressed #12 shot. It is believable that it could penetrate a couple of layers of thin aluminum.

Quote: "I thought they were supposed to be using the bullets that are designed to come apart."

Sounds like you may have been reading and believing what ain't necessarily so in the "magic bullet" ads in some of the gun rags. Last I heard, they were using "normal hype" JHPs like most of the rest of us.

Yep. Frangible. Thats what I was thinking. Dont really recall where I heard they were carrying, but it may very well have been in a magazine or catalog. One thing is sure, I saw the picture, and it didnt do what it was supposed to do if they were frangible. It was a good size hole. Id hate to have to explain that one.