A friend and commercial airline pilot for one of our major airlines asked me for my recommendation for a firearm to carry in the cockpit. He said he would be one of the first due to his military training and experience, and that he had put his name on the request list.
Super accuracy will not be the main issue, possibly 3 feet. I suggested a compact smooth shooting revolver snubby with JHP or full wadd cutters -- who wants to worry about a failure to feed while trying to control the airplane? --or a Glock 27 for its compact firepower.
These are the ones on my ccw (maximum of 2) for similar reasons.
If you enjoyed reading about "cockpit firearm" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
January 9, 2003, 12:42 AM
Arnt there going to be mandated guidlines?
Arnt they going to have to use special rounds that wont pierce the hull?
January 9, 2003, 01:00 AM
Diesle, a bullet penetrating the fuselage causing a problem is Hollywood fiction. Worst that would happen is hitting a wiring harness or hydraulic line. Still no problem of any great proportion. If it hit a window, it would just go right through, and even if the window blew out, it would be hard to maintain pressurization, so a descent to below 12,000 feet would be all that's needed before finding an alternate airport.
January 9, 2003, 10:12 AM
..that requires a lot of night flying. I currently wear a shoulder holster with a J-frame or G27 under my Navy goat skin flight jacket. I keep it on until I'm underway. When summer comes, I guess I'll wear my light EAA jacket and the same pistols. Both pistols are loaded with RBCD.
Blackhawk: I'm usually low enough that a hole in the window wouldn't matter, but I'd surely hate to have an "explosive decompression" at altitudes greater than 15000 feet. Shooting backwards and then trying to get the mask on before hypoxia set in would be a drag. It might have been easier when I was younger. (Well hell! I KNOW it would have been easier when I was younger! Who said, "If I knew that I was going to live this long, I'd have taken better care of myself". :) )
January 9, 2003, 10:37 AM
Any published reports or tests on in flight ballistics that your aware of?
January 9, 2003, 03:00 PM
If the airline industry mandates superior training, I
think the sub-compact Glock would be and excellent
choice; however, if the training isn't up to par, I would
tend to favor a Smith & Wesson 360PD snubby! Cuz
the pilots and crew aren't going to be doing a lot of
shooting inside of that cockpit.
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member
January 9, 2003, 03:40 PM
My vote also goes with a J frame.
January 9, 2003, 04:48 PM
I think I'd want a hammerless revolver loaded with .38 if it was me.
I agree with the reliability factor and it might be nice not to worry about clothing or contact shooting jamming the weapon. Aircraft cabins are very tight quarters.
I'd be worried about over penetration. Not that a round leaving the aircraft through the skin is a worry, but a round going through the bulkhead into a tightly packed passenger compartment should be a concern.
January 9, 2003, 07:01 PM
A Glock or revolver. Not a J frame though as an extra round could be useful. Maybe a S&W Model 66 with a 2.5" barrel.
Revolvers might be the best idiot-proof solution.
January 9, 2003, 08:28 PM
I would think a N frame smith(44spl,45 colt) loaded with magsafes would be fine.
January 9, 2003, 09:30 PM
Gun: Lots of choices; let's say a Glock 19 as a baseline.
Supercompact autos and especially snubby revolvers are hard enough to shoot, even at close range, and offer no advantage where only temporary concealment is required.
Ammo: Something with PLENTY of penetration. I would consider candy cane alternating ball and JHP. Why? Shooting a 9mm hole in an aircraft fuselage is not a problem. Hitting a control run is a manageable problem. Shooting through a terr and hitting a passenger is regrettable.
BUT, you have to figure the terr is there to use the whole plane, all crew, and all passengers as a cruise missle against more people at his target. If you have to shoot through a passenger or stewardess to get the terr, that is what must be done and you must have the round to do it.
Does that sound hard and cold?
Ask the Air National Guardsmen who are mostly called-up airline pilots waiting to be scrambled to shoot down a hijacked plane full of their coworkers and customers what is hard and cold.
January 9, 2003, 09:44 PM
In the cockpit I would want a revolver over an auto. In those
tight confines I wouldn't want to have to worry about brass
flying around. Also for a pilot to fire at someone behind him he
WILL have to contort his body just to get a pistol pointed in the
general direction, much less aimed. In that type of 'stance' I
wouldn't want to have to worry about the slide of an auto
dragging/snagging anything or position induced limp-wristing,
any of wich will cause a semi to jam.
January 9, 2003, 09:50 PM
The pilot does not even have to shoot, if the perp sees an 8" barrelled monstrosity with a .44 wide hole peering at him. ;)
I'd have to say the biggest and baddest there is, a Raging Bull, Super Blackhawk or Desert Eagle, with the top 2 or 3 being rubber bullets to inflict paralizing pain, the fourth could be a RBCD or Glaser round to control overpenetration.
My 2 cents.:D
January 9, 2003, 11:05 PM
He said he would be one of the first due to his military training and experience, and that he had put his name on the request list.
What list? I've been trying to find out how to get signed-up for this and I haven't found squat.
January 10, 2003, 12:23 AM
An auto of complete reliability and large capacity. Remember, the pilots are not allowed to carry, it's a flight deck gun. Kinda like a car gun thread. Sig, Beretta 92, USP, or Glock. 9mm be fine
January 10, 2003, 12:27 AM
I'm certainly not up the most current on the issue, but seems like the last I recall hearing - with much credibility - was most likely Sigs ... Altho not seen in a while, I believe Lefteyedom from TFL was staying pretty much on top of the issue. I've forwarded this page to see if I can rouse him ...
January 10, 2003, 01:13 AM
If either of the Pilots are having to defend the flight deck (cock pits are found in fighters, BTW), then the Flight Engineer must already already be dead? :uhoh:
As far as pistol choice... if it were me, I'd opt for a sub-compact Glock... if a revolver is mandated... make mine a 3" Ruger SP-101, or S&W 60-6.
I think the best handgun possible to send those uh, slime of ME decent to Allah would be a good ol' American 1911 COLT!!! :D :cool:
January 10, 2003, 07:11 AM
Any decent autoloader or revolver is fine in an airplane. I prefer autoloaders and my current carry piece in my airplane is a CZ-75 PCR. Light, accurate, reliable.
The others are correct, the de-pressurization thing is all Hollywood.
January 10, 2003, 09:45 AM
My humble $0.02:
Large calibre, like 45ACP or 45Colt, Projectile Golden Sabre, Gold Dot, Win/Fed "Personal Defense" rounds.
Something to punch a large deflation hole in the BG, without perforating folks in the first 3 rows....
January 10, 2003, 03:28 PM
I agree w/ foghornl. A large-caliber snub would be ideal. W/ a frangible bullet, it would do all the damage needed for a one-shot stop w/ minimal collateral damage.
Something along the lines of the Taurus snubs or S&W's 696 would do well. Taurus' .45ACP Tracker (w/o the ports) would be the berries...:D
January 10, 2003, 11:25 PM
I went to a "LEO Flying Armed" class that is reqiured for any cop who wants to carry on a plane (extradition or other events that require that you be armed, not just carrying). It is federally mandated/ FAA researched, so I'm assuming that they are right when they said that explosive decompression is indeed a Hollywood phenomenon.
Expounding on Steve M's input-We shoot from some only barely odd positions in my IDPA group. By barely odd, I mean seated on the ground, lying down, etc. EVERY time we do this I see stoppages that are generated from "limp wristing" or a variant of not having the gun in line with the forearm when it goes off. For this reason, I vote revolver. J-frames are tough guns to shoot well. N-frames are a bit heavy, but an N-frame beats a J for "shootability." The funny looking S&W 5-shot .44 Special (giant Centennial, I forget the model) would be good. We are hopefully talking about short range and there WILL be innocents behind the "jihacker." The number of bad guys will likely be small, so the 5-shot deal doesn't bother me. If limited capacity bothers anyone, the 8-shot 627 would be great. Slick trigger job, short bbl. for close quarter retention advantage, and maybe some of the Remington 125 mid-range magnums or 158+Ps if the pilot is not a regular shooter. I love autos, carry one daily for self-defense and work, but I am a bit wary of them in the odd positions a flight deck shooting might generate, not to mention the fact that pilots are pretty busy guys and may not log a lot of range time.
Shooting through a good guy to hit a bad guy? No thanks, bullets don't go straight through bodies when you need them to. I'll go to plan B, whatever it is.
January 10, 2003, 11:35 PM
Mil Spec Loose!! Colt 1911 and Federal Classic 185 Grain JHP.
Easy to use, Lots of power, and it will NOT! Penetrate the skin of any commercial jet.
Ammo capacity isn't a consideration for a "Stick it in their face and FIRE!" Cockpit gun.
January 10, 2003, 11:39 PM
Charter Arms Bulldog .44 spc Small gun BIG hole...
January 11, 2003, 12:31 AM
S&W J frame .38 snubbie
The S&W Airlite models would probebly be the most convenient for a pilot to comfortably wear concealed on those long flights.
January 11, 2003, 09:30 AM
While I was reading my post, I remembered who had this idea first, the heavy revolver in the cockpit. I read an article by Leroy Thompson several years ago in which he mentions a gun he wore while "training third world air marshals." I think it was an N-framed .44 Special, 3 inch or so barrel, round butted (maybe to K frame size), and some action and finish improvements. The smith was Kurt Hardcastle, IIRC.
January 12, 2003, 09:46 AM
I've no problem with anything 9mm-45 Colt revolver/semi, but really, if you want to stop the threat toot sweet, why not just have a stubby 12 gauge?
Coach gun anyone? although I'd prefer a pump.
Assuming that those in control actually want to prevent any further hi-jacks, having an "illegal" shorty on board shoudn't be no big deal.
Why dial 911 when you can just call for the mop-up crew when it's all said 'n done?
Handguns are for those who want some excitement. ;)
January 12, 2003, 12:59 PM
labgrade, that makes took much sence!
How about a shorty clipped at arms reach and something in 9mm or better on the hip...
January 12, 2003, 01:19 PM
A problem that I can see with a shotgun is that it is an area weapon and if you miss the likely hood of hitting something vital in the aircraft is increased, since you have several projectiles making up the load and any hole puched through something is going to be a minimum 70 caliber hole or larger, especially at close range. (10 feet or less).
Should the charge miss and make it's way into the passenger compartment the potential to injure/kill many people exists, much more so than 1 or 2 shots from a pistol, which might not even make it out of the flight deck.
While I would favor a 1911, a revolver would be the way to go. I would look at the larger caliber 44/45 and probably lead hollow point bullets over jacketed ones. Anything to reduce over penetration or the possibility of.
January 12, 2003, 05:47 PM
We all know that handguns suck for "stopping power," but what is it we're discussing here? How to immediately stop the threat or "9mm vs .45?"
Yup. Some poor innocent might get popped out the backside - always a consideration -, but the alternative is .... ?
Handguns suck for stopping power & that's exactly what need be done here and now.
Give 'em a good door, a shotgun & some training. Not like this is rocket science.
& yes, if the crew wants to carry a handgun too = sure, why not?
"labgrade, that makes took much sence!"
Hey, Diesle, it's me. ;)
January 12, 2003, 09:12 PM
While I don't know the intimate details of an aircraft flight deck, I do know that there is a lot of electronics and wiring and main flight controls all containd in a rather limited space.
Now with a pistol bullet (irregardless of 32,38,9mm etc) if it struck one of these panels it would do damage, but in a narrow and limited track.
A charge of 00 buck will be literally destroying a path thru the electronics, getting wider as it travels and with pellets being deflected off of frames and braces allowed to go on and damage and destroy other systems.
In my opinion stopping power is to be strived for, but, there is a point of diminishing return and firing a shotgun on the flight deck, is one of them. We are attempting to stop an incident in which the plane could be taken over and and used as a weapon, not to take the plane out of the sky and have it crash because an important sub system or several was shredded by a shotgun.
How thick or substantial is the wall between the flight deck and the passenger area? Probably not very thick and would it slow down a load of 00 buck?
On another point have you fired a shorty shotgun, especially one small enough to be used in the confines of an aircraft flight deck?
It is a proven fact that it is hard enough to get people to practice with the relatively light recoiling 38 special and now we want to take that same person and give them a much harder recoiling 12 gauge. Ask any police trainer and they will tell you that the most hated part of training or qualification is firing the shotguns with buck shot or slugs and that is with a full size shotgun (18 or 20 inch barrel full size butt stock versus a 14 inch barrel and a pistol grip, with a folding buttstock) I would suspect that, if polled, the majority of people would pick a pistol over a shotgun.
Like anything we are each entitled to our opinion.
Have a nice day.
January 13, 2003, 12:38 AM
I'll be sharing with our AA pilot all these inputs. He wasn't at the sqdn this past weekend, but another AA pilot was; and I asked him what list he was on; he replied it probably was the union website where he applied, but wasn't positive.
Cockpit really is for fighter jets, but the C5 community still refers to the flight station as the cockpit. We also have an aft flight deck, a courier compartment, cargo compartment, and a troop compartment that is separated from the flight deck via the cargo compartment.
We have flight engineers, as do many cargo carriers; but these days there are not too many flight engineers on the passenger planes -- captains, first and second officers.
As for holes in airlplanes, we have quite a few where seals get worn away. I've just jammed little blankets or sheets of plastic should the gap affect cabin altitude.
I agree with one post in that a damaged hydraulic line would temporarily incapacitae a system; but there's reduncancy -- backups.
I still would recommend that he eventually carry a bobbed hammer revolver; but when the authorization comes, who knows how the weapon will be brought to the plane, maybe a special postiion within the airline to deliver and pick up at each airport, possibly in a permanent lock box in the flight station with daily changing simplex combination locks and be part of the pre flight check list; I just cannot imagine Baltimore, SF, Boston etc allowing armed pilots off the airplane in their safe cities.
January 13, 2003, 01:19 AM
I'm not talking about a "shorty" shorty - just a 18-20" bbl 12 gauge. OK, call it a 20 gauge. & no advocate of a pistol grip/folder-stock anything - just a straight stock shotgun.
How smart ya gotta be to be able to stuff the thing against your shoulder, point it & pull the trigger?
Betcha for any amount of training, we'd get a bigger bang for the buck with a shoulder-fired than anything handgun - regardless of caliber.
All I was curious about was how to stop the threat - not what my fave handgun caliber was. Who really cares?
Far as overpenetration? Guess what? Live with it. Anything suitable enough to stop the bad guy in the first place just might have some overpenetration.
Handguns suck. Shotguns don't.
Somebody might get hurt? = Yup, Leverage that against a plane full of 200+ folk smokin' into some Chicago high-rise ....
But that's just me.
Argue yer fave handgun all you want. I'd just as soon stop the threat.
January 13, 2003, 02:30 AM
cmsgt any chance you could post your reply again? :) Glad I am not the only one who double taps (what would 5 be called?) Penta-taps?
January 13, 2003, 02:40 AM
Full size shotgun in a limited area doesn't really work to well and given how the pilot might have to shoot from the pilots seat, I can't see it happening. Can you? ( 40 inches long at 18 inches of barrel, 26 inches long with 14 inch barrel and buttstock in the folded position, 32 inches deployed)
So we have to realistially look at the shorty to try and make it work, if we go with a shotgun.( A pistol is about 9 inches)
If a person is poorly trained or doesn't want to practice because the shotgun, beats the stuffing out of him or her (a side effect of poor training) he/she might just point and jerk the trigger and miss the broadside of the Bg (so to speak) so any advantage of the shotgun is lost.
I agree that we have to stop the threat, but I also know that when things get out of hand that the most effective weapon is not always the most suitable one for the job.
If you want a simple test, take an empty shotgun and secure it to a chair or place it in a closet in the upright position, with a lock or velcro straps. Then sitting in a chair immediately in front of it (have a timer set to go off in a minute or two) with a small table ( and another chair beside the table. when the timer goes off jump out of the chair, without knocking over the small table, and go to the shotgun and release it from the chair/ closet, cycle it and bring to bear on the imagined threat.
Test 2, sit in the same seat and draw a pistol (unloaded) from under your coat turn and egage imagined threat from the seat.
What is more effective?
January 13, 2003, 04:43 AM
I give up.
Post was about an effective firearm.
A shotgun is. A handgun is less.
So make it a 10" barrel 20 gauge with no stock, #12 shot.
Whadaya want? You go pick something to make you happy.
I'd betcha a sterum-thrust with a long gun would be just about as effective as just shooting 'em with a .38 snubby & still ya get to shoot 'em once they've bounced back some.
I guess then I'd have to vote for a .22 CB because it isn't so loud.
Confined quarters 'n all .... :rolleyes:
Jeez! try to talk to somebody .... ;)
Seriously, I'd figure that the door would have to be breached first & would give some sort of warning. Grab the SG & prepare to "repell all boarders" kinda thing.
Worst case, have the pilot show the perp a Bruce Lee video.
What do I know? I'm just some 'net hack anyway ....
January 13, 2003, 10:43 AM
I was belted into the right seat of a King Air over the weekend. (Nice big turbo.) I realized that I could draw and fire my snub (to the rear) with my right hand. But I also realized if I was in the left seat, I'd have to turn the snub "upside down" to fire to the rear with my right hand. As I'm somewhat ambidextrous, I guess I could also wear a left-handed shoulder holster and actually USE my left hand, but believe me~there is NO WAY that I could have used a shotgun with either hand. You're exactly right, a shotgun would be more effectve but there's simply no room to use it.
~On second thought, remember that little double barrel 12ga. "Tubbs" used on Miami Vice??? :D Yeah, that's the ticket!! Where do you buy one of those? :)
January 13, 2003, 12:16 PM
I agree with the short shotgun theory. At close range, you will not miss, and every pellet will most likely enter mr. bad guy. Handgun also as a backup.
January 14, 2003, 12:41 AM
Pilots are X-Military most have learned the Colt 1911 or the Berreta M-9. Give them the guns that they know!
January 14, 2003, 07:43 PM
Not all pilots are ex-military. Actually, I think my company is about 60% civilian background.
Either way, each pilot should be allowed to choose what he is comfortable with.
Lock boxes on the aircraft are for things that you don't mind having stolen. Like to cell phones on our aircraft. They often wander off by themselves.
January 14, 2003, 08:11 PM
I actually would not recommend a revolver. On Sept. 11, there were 4-5 hijackers per aircraft. I'd surely want more than 5 shots (particularly of .38) against that many perps. And reloading a J-frame isn't terribly a fast.
I think a Glock would be a good recommendation. I'd prefer a 19 or 23 over a 26, particularly if they'll qualify for LEO mags.
January 16, 2003, 02:13 PM
Thunder Five in .410 with number 6 shot. At three feet, devastating and not much chance of spraying the whole aircraft. IF one or two pellets go astray no big deal. Small, easy handling, just pull the trigger.
A lot commercial flights have only two people on the flightdeck. The third officer was designed out with the newer craft designated for shorter flights (737 etc).
As an afterthought, I think that commandeering an aircraft has been done and they are going to try something else.
January 17, 2003, 03:38 AM
I actually would not recommend a revolver. On Sept. 11, there were 4-5 hijackers per aircraft. I'd surely want more than 5 shots (particularly of .38) against that many perps. And reloading a J-frame isn't terribly a fast
Revolver would have been fine. The BG's have to go through a narrow hatch to get into the cockpit. That means getting a clean shot at these guys when they come through. With two pilots and a flight engineer each having a J-frame S&W .38 snubby there is plenty of firepower for shooting a half dozen hijackers.
BTW, Speedloaders are pretty fast.
January 17, 2003, 03:54 AM
Thing is the first thing they need to do is fix a solid door. Heck electify it. Put in some type of knockout gas for main cabin if Pilot/Co open a valve everyone except them go to sleep. Then any gun the folks are comfortable with as back up.
January 17, 2003, 01:42 PM
With two pilots and a flight engineer each having a J-frame S&W .38 snubby there is plenty of firepower for shooting a half dozen hijackers.There's almost no airliner flying in the US today that has a flight engineer. Two person cockpits are the rule today in 737s, 757s, 767s, 747-400s, 777s, 717s (aka DC-9s), MD-11s, and all Airbus series. 707 and DC8s used 3 person cockpits, but those are all retired in the US. 727s used 3 person cockpits, but those are rapidly being retired. The L1011s are pretty much all gone as well as most of the DC10s. The older 747s (-200 series) had a 3 person cockpit, but those are being retired quickly; the newer 747 (-400 series) is a two person cockpit.
And one of the pilots has to fly the plane -- one fights, the other flys. (Yes, it might be on autopilot, but he will be busy talking to the air traffic controller, changing the transponder to the hijack code, navigating to the nearest airport, etc.).
January 17, 2003, 01:47 PM
Thing is the first thing they need to do is fix a solid door. Heck electify it. Put in some type of knockout gas for main cabin if Pilot/Co open a valve everyone except them go to sleep. Then any gun the folks are comfortable with as back up.They're working on the doors. They've already braced the doors, but they are replacing them with newly designed, reinforced doors.
Knockout gas? Remember what happened in Moscow with the Chechens? You can't control the dosage. What if it leaks out unintentionally. The aircraft a/c system doesn't work that way (everyone gets the same air) -- the pilots would have to be on oxygen and the reality is that the aircraft carry little oxygen.
January 17, 2003, 06:07 PM
All valid points. But I understand they have already had folks break thru the "hardened door" because they didn't attack them to anything solid. A drunk lady of LESS then 200lbs as I recall broke thru.
As to gas. It would not be major problem (I wouldn't think) to increase the amount of O2 for Pilots. The amount of air in plane being circulated is a KNOWN amount. The theater is not. Split second knockout was wanted in theater in airplane you should have time IF door is strong. Even if you don't take folks under you could sure weaken everyone. If nothing else cut O2 to cabin at alitiude. Everyone would get tired/weak/lathargic just like high in mountains.
Treat it like home defense. First line of defense is passanger/luggage screening (outside lights and/or motion detector) Idea is to scare BGs off and if lucky discover/stop them.
Second is physical barrier Flight deck door/house walls/locked doors/windows. Prevent BGs from gaining access.
Third prevent injury if they get in Firearm and less lethal if flight deck breached. / Shotgun/pistol if house breached to stop attack.
:that is Larry's Notes version.
January 17, 2003, 07:24 PM
I've spent enough time on flight decks to know that a shotgun is not a viable option. There is very little room to store (or maneuver) any long barreled weapon, from the crew seats of any modern commercial airliner. The wide bodies are roomier, but the crew stations are nearly as cramped and cluttered as smaller airplanes.
Handguns are very marginal as well, especially being fired over the shoulder, and possibly with an off/weak hand. Not a good situation for the kind of shot placement necessary to stop someone, who is obviously bent on suicide in the first place.
Keep in mind that the crew is belted into their cramped seats, and will most likely be taken by complete surprise. The first clue that an attack is underway, will likely be the shape charge used to breach the cabin door. The flash is also likely to temporarily blind the crew, making self defense even more difficult.
The tactics used on 9/11 will not be used again, as the element of surprise is gone. Also, the gullibility of flight crews to surrender control of their airplane (in hopes of saving lives) will not be repeated.
The next attack will most certainly be supported by ground crews in some manor, such as concealed explosives to be retrieved in flight, and more dangerous weapons than box cutters placed aboard. I suspect explosives will be concealed somewhere on the airplane before takeoff, and used to threaten the passengers and cabin crew, as well as breach the cabin door.
These people don't care if they lose a plane or two, or all of them for that matter. The shock and horror would be nearly the same, if a loaded liner were taken down immediately, or used as a bomb to take down a building later.
Gas is not necessary to incapacitate cabin occupants. The flight crew has the means to stun or immobilize anyone not strapped into their seats, in very short order. You can bet they will react to an explosive invasion of the flight deck, with an immediate and violent maneuver, that will paste an attackers *** to the wall or ceiling, for as long as it takes to un-holster and defend themselves. :D
One request I will make, is please don't arm my flight crew with a Taurus, or Charter Arms handgun! :rolleyes: :D
January 18, 2003, 12:22 AM
Put in some type of knockout gas for main cabin if Pilot/Co open a valve everyone except them go to sleep. There is no such thing as "knockout gas"--that's another Hollywood myth. If there were such a thing, the medical profession would be using it instead of the things they're using now--and saving a TON of money on anesthesiologists. As it is, the available anesthetics still kill quite a few people every year, even when you have the person hooked up to monitoring equipment, and a high-trained anesthesiologist in constant attendance.
The distance between "unconscious" and "dead" is rather slim. As the Russians recently demonstrated with such great alacrity.
January 18, 2003, 02:27 AM
Well go low tech then. Vent outside air into cabin. As O2 level drops folks also. It has been over 15yrs but IF I recall normal air has about 12% O2. Breathed air about 8% you go unconcious about 5%
January 18, 2003, 02:09 PM
BTW, Speedloaders are pretty fast.I've got plenty of speedloaders. IMHO, it takes a lot more time to train someone to reload with speedloaders than it does to reload a semi-auto. Speedloaders are just a lot more fumble-prone.
January 18, 2003, 02:38 PM
The Allied Pilots Association released a video (http://www.alliedpilots.org/Public/InfoCenter/streaming_media.asp) a while back, demonstrating how a handgun could be used to defend the cockpit and also demonstrating how easily a Taser would be defeated. It's definitely worth watching.
January 18, 2003, 05:22 PM
A .410 pump shotgun. Enough power for legal deer hunting in Ohio but without the unwanted penetration.
January 19, 2003, 11:34 AM
In his place my preference would be a lightweight alloy model in .38spl+P in a shoulder rig or crossdraw setup.
If you enjoyed reading about "cockpit firearm" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!