Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
US Airways pilot's gun discharges while in flight
If there's one thing that fires people up besides shirts with the F word on it, it's guns.At issue is whether or not pilots should be allowed to carry weapons in the cockpit. While it's a definitive way to reinforce security at 30,000 feet, the presence of a firearm onboard increases the potential for accidents -- and disaster.
That's what happened last Saturday when a US Airways pilot's gun accidentally went off in the cockpit during the flight. Nobody was injured and the aircraft landed safely, but wow, they were lucky.
Suppose that bullet went through the front window instead of somewhere into the fuselage. At that altitude could the pilots withstand explosive decompression? Would the entire cabin decompress and the pilots be killed?
According to the TSA, the pilot in question was trained under the Federal Flight Deck Officers program and last certified in November. Details are still sketchy on how the firearm was stored and what caused it to discharge in the cockpit, but I'm pretty sure that with the safety on and without a bullet in the chamber a weapon shouldn't accidentally fire.
I suppose if it were up to me and on my flight, I would prefer the pilot to have a gun and thwart a terrorist at the small risk of having an accident. While flight deck doors are locked from the inside these days and any instigator would have a really difficult time getting access, the extra layer of security does supply a grain of comfort. I'm glad everyone was safe on the US Airways flight.
Filed under: Airlines, Transportation, News
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
OwdenBowden Mar 24th 2008 4:12PM
The caliber of the built used in these on flight weapons is enough to put down a terrorist / hijacker while maintaining the integrity of the plane and its passengers.
Doug Johnson Mar 24th 2008 11:31AM
I am a retired airline pilot and am not a fan of pilots having guns. It doesn't bother me that much that they do because an accidental discharge in the cockpit would likely at the worst exit the skin of the aircraft and leave a tiny hole that would not affect pressurization much like in the movies. We have had big birds come through the skin of the nose and leave large gaping holes and blood everywhere but the plane landed safely. Any time a gun discharges people can get hurt and systems can get damaged but the fact it happens in an airplane doesn't automatically make it a disaster. The press would like to make it seem that way though.
Drew Thaler Mar 24th 2008 4:17PM
Explosive decompression doesn't happen the way it does in the movies. (There's an episode of MythBusters on that very subject.) A hole in the cockpit would be just that, a small hole. Even a window being blown out wouldn't do more than make the pilots mildly uncomfortable - put on a oxygen mask to keep your O2 levels up, put on a coat, and you're basically fine.
That said, there's plenty of stuff that a bullet could potentially hit by accident -- including the other pilot -- which would be bad news. If guns are going to be allowed, they should be subject to a redundant safety check just like everything else on the plane. Someone other than the person who's carrying it should be required to check and make sure there isn't a bullet in the chamber and that the safety is on.
Phil Skiver Apr 17th 2008 11:30PM
I would review the weapons training given to the pilots. I don't believe a chambered round is necessary until an incident requires such as it only takes seconds for a pistol to be loaded if the handler knows his weapon. If lack of proper instruction is at fault send the pilot back for a (revised) refresher course, don't fire him. If investigation shows the pilot was disregarding proper training, by all means get him out of the cockpit.