If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
Juvat wrote in
: After an exhausting session with Victoria's Secret Police, Jim Yanik blurted out: Why would pilots be firing TOWARDS the windscreen? The attackers would be coming from the REAR of the plane.Armed pilots would be firing REARWARDS.They certainly aren't going to wait until the hijackers are fully IN the cockpit. Maybe the second or third islamist **** surging into the cockpit... Would trip over the dead body of the 1st one thru the doorway.The pilot is going to draw the gun at the first indication of the door being forced. And be ready for intruders. Maybe the FFDO pulls the trigger early when drawing the weapon out of the holster... They may have to disengage the safety before that happens.Or if a double action trigger,the pull(on the first shot) would be long enough that type of AD would not happen.I doubt they'll have very light trigger pulls. **** happens. Those pilots who -choose- to be armed,would learn how to handle and use their firearms.An accidental discharge would be very unlikely to occur. Even so,it's still better than the alternatives of the pilots being murdered,being shot down,or crashed into some building.(the big picture) Also,I've read that Sky Marshals use ordinary (premium)JHP ammo,as they might have to penetrate a seatback or other barrier. IIRC,the guns are .40 S&W caliber. FAMs are using standard ammo, we were dicussing this today on the way to SFO. FFDOs are switching from Glocks to H&K .40 Juvat "standard" ammo;could be FMJ(full metal jacket),not known for stopping power,or JHP(jacketed hollow point),which expands upon impact.(regarded as the better choice for personal defense) People seem to come up with any excuse or farfetched or unlikely scenario in order to make an argument against armed pilots.Very irrational. -- Jim Yanik jyanik-at-kua.net |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
"John R Weiss" wrote:
"Gord Beaman" wrote... So, if armed pilots thwart only ONE hijacking... Quite true BUT. I worry about endangering those 'essential to flight units'. Think of the ever present danger of a loaded pistol in the comparatively small confines of an airliner cockpit for years and years, while a steel door (or two) is fairly innocuous. Also, as a matter of curiosity, what would you expect to happen if a 9MM or so slug were to go through one of the windscreens?. Aren't most glass and plastic laminated? (NESA?) Given the circumstances under which a FFDO's weapon would be fired, I suspect the damage done by an errant bullet would still be orders of magnitude less than the alternative. The program has been well thought out, the training has been given great reviews by virtually all involved, and the sole "hard" issues remaining are either administrative in nature or have to do with on-the-ground subjects. Windscreens are laminated, but I don't know if they all have glass components. The curved windscreen in the 747-400 appears to be all acrylic. Side windows are much thinner. A 9 mm hole in a side window would probably be noisy. Given the angles and other factors present, I can't accurately assess what would happen to a windscreen with a shot from the inside. I suspect that in many cases the bullet (especially if a frangible round) would be deflected, and the windscreen would maintain most of its integrity. Thank you John, a nice calm reasoned answer among all this hysterical hyperbole. So then, if they aren't laminated, how are they deiced?...a high percentage of military a/c use glass/clear conductive material/glass laminate called NESA. They apply a current to the conductive material and this keeps the screen quite warm...it also adds strength in some installations. -- -Gord. |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Jim Yanik wrote:
Why would pilots be firing TOWARDS the windscreen? The attackers would be coming from the REAR of the plane.Armed pilots would be firing REARWARDS.They certainly aren't going to wait until the hijackers are fully IN the cockpit. Jim, you appear to think that pilots are the only people who know how to operate pistols. Why would that be now?. Could it be that you've never heard of 'smuggling a gun aboard' or even 'an inside job'??. My my!... -- -Gord. |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
Jim Yanik wrote:
People seem to come up with any excuse or farfetched or unlikely scenario in order to make an argument against armed pilots.Very irrational. While you are of just the opposite bent. Why not discuss the different offerings and try to pick the most effective/safest all around method?. Nobody doubts your gun knowledge here but you certainly can appear strident and unreasonable when someone argues against you. And please don't say "I do not!", I'm merely telling you how you come across. -- -Gord. |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
"Gord Beaman" ) wrote in
: Jim Yanik wrote: People seem to come up with any excuse or farfetched or unlikely scenario in order to make an argument against armed pilots.Very irrational. While you are of just the opposite bent. Why not discuss the different offerings and try to pick the most effective/safest all around method?. Nobody doubts your gun knowledge here but you certainly can appear strident and unreasonable when someone argues against you. And please don't say "I do not!", I'm merely telling you how you come across. -- -Gord. I'm advocating the KISS principle. Rather than spend lots of bucks on methods that can still be bypassed or breached,armed pilots will be effective and inexpensive,*immediately applicable*(a BIG positive),and in the long run,safer. Much of some folks "no-guns" arguments are based more on biases or wrong information.(IMO,more bias than anything else.) Cockpit defense need not be rocket science. -- Jim Yanik jyanik-at-kua.net |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
"Gord Beaman" ) wrote in
: "John R Weiss" wrote: "Gord Beaman" wrote... So, if armed pilots thwart only ONE hijacking... Quite true BUT. I worry about endangering those 'essential to flight units'. Think of the ever present danger of a loaded pistol in the comparatively small confines of an airliner cockpit for years and years, while a steel door (or two) is fairly innocuous. Also, as a matter of curiosity, what would you expect to happen if a 9MM or so slug were to go through one of the windscreens?. Aren't most glass and plastic laminated? (NESA?) Given the circumstances under which a FFDO's weapon would be fired, I suspect the damage done by an errant bullet would still be orders of magnitude less than the alternative. The program has been well thought out, the training has been given great reviews by virtually all involved, and the sole "hard" issues remaining are either administrative in nature or have to do with on-the-ground subjects. Windscreens are laminated, but I don't know if they all have glass components. The curved windscreen in the 747-400 appears to be all acrylic. Side windows are much thinner. A 9 mm hole in a side window would probably be noisy. Given the angles and other factors present, I can't accurately assess what would happen to a windscreen with a shot from the inside. I suspect that in many cases the bullet (especially if a frangible round) would be deflected, and the windscreen would maintain most of its integrity. Thank you John, a nice calm reasoned answer among all this hysterical hyperbole. So then, if they aren't laminated, how are they deiced?...a high percentage of military a/c use glass/clear conductive material/glass laminate called NESA. They apply a current to the conductive material and this keeps the screen quite warm...it also adds strength in some installations. -- -Gord. Would aircraft use any plastic films in the laminate,such as automotive glass uses? -- Jim Yanik jyanik-at-kua.net |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
"Gord Beaman" ) wrote in
: Jim Yanik wrote: Why would pilots be firing TOWARDS the windscreen? The attackers would be coming from the REAR of the plane.Armed pilots would be firing REARWARDS.They certainly aren't going to wait until the hijackers are fully IN the cockpit. Jim, you appear to think that pilots are the only people who know how to operate pistols. Why would that be now?. Could it be that you've never heard of 'smuggling a gun aboard' or even 'an inside job'??. My my!... -- -Gord. Sure,guns can be smuggled aboard;I've even posted examples of guns brought aboard by mistake by people,and by a US Federal official leaving their gun on their seat and deplaning.But the debate was/is about armed PILOTS,and comments made about -them- firing forwards. If another hijacking does occur using guns,it probably -will- be an "inside job",IMO. But in that case,only an armed pilot will be capable of defending the cockpit.All the other security methods will have been rendered useless then. One other thing;are any "crash axes" available in the passenger compartment? Or solely in the cockpit? (WRT commercial flights) -- Jim Yanik jyanik-at-kua.net |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
After an exhausting session with Victoria's Secret Police, Jim Yanik
blurted out: People seem to come up with any excuse or farfetched or unlikely scenario in order to make an argument against armed pilots.Very irrational. Ummm, if you intended that remark for me...you are mistaken. I remember how farfetched or unlikely a total hydraulic failure in the DC-10 was... until it happened. Juvat |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
After an exhausting session with Victoria's Secret Police, Jim Yanik
blurted out: One other thing;are any "crash axes" available in the passenger compartment? Or solely in the cockpit? (WRT commercial flights) Cockpit only...and ours are very sharp. Juvat |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
Jim Yanik wrote:
If another hijacking does occur using guns,it probably -will- be an "inside job",IMO. But in that case,only an armed pilot will be capable of defending the cockpit.All the other security methods will have been rendered useless then. ?? How does a bad guy (even holding a gun) get through a secure cockpit door?...that's a silly statement Jim. One other thing;are any "crash axes" available in the passenger compartment? Or solely in the cockpit? (WRT commercial flights) In military a/c yes, in civil airliners, I doubt it. -- -Gord. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Bush Pilots Fly-In. South Africa. | Bush Air | Home Built | 0 | May 25th 04 06:18 AM |
Joint German-Israeli airforce excersie (Israeli airforce beats German pilots) | Quant | Military Aviation | 8 | September 25th 03 05:41 PM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |
Israeli Air Force to lose Middle East Air Superiority Capability to the Saudis in the near future | Jack White | Military Aviation | 71 | September 21st 03 02:58 PM |