Armed Pilot who had accidental discharge gets his job back

As a gun person and a union member. I don't think he deserves his job back. What was he doing WITH the gun while flying? was there a threat somewhere? The idiot was PLAYING with his firearm and it went off. IT could have just as easily killed or injured an innocent passenger.

I don't fly, but if i did... I would make it a point to make sure I was not on that idiot's flight. Sounds stupid and petty but its enough to trust someone with hundreds of lives and to be an idiot on top of it... no thanks.

JOe

and yes i read it... it says they must holster their weapon AFTER they land. Why is he doing it MID landing?

JOe

PRESS RELEASE March 27, 2008

AIRLINE PILOTS SECURITY ALLIANCE

Blame Shifts to TSA
in Pilot’s Gun Mishap

Contact: David Mackett ([email protected])

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Airline pilots and federal flight deck officers (FFDO) say ill-conceived TSA weapons handling rules were to blame for the accidental discharge of a pilot’s firearm in the cockpit of a US Airways jet last weekend.

Federal officers familiar with the investigation say they repeatedly warned TSA officials that an unprecedented TSA requirement that pilots take off and lock up their guns before leaving the cockpit is manifestly unsafe and would result in accidents.

“The pilot was trying to lock his gun and remove the holster in an airplane going 300 miles per hour in preparation for landing and the padlock depressed the trigger,” said a federal flight deck officer who declined to be identified.

“TSA knew this could happen but didn’t get rid of the requirement.”A special working group within the Federal Air Marshal Service recommended TSA adopt standard federal weapons carriage rules for flight officers last year to prevent accidents.

But, TSA officials declined to implement the group’s recommendation. “Every other federal law enforcement officer in the air and on the ground carries his gun concealed on his person where he can control it. And he never touches it except in an emergency, because the less it is handled, the better,” said David Mackett, president of the Airline Pilots Security Alliance.

“TSA’s got these pilots taking off and putting on their guns 10 times a day. It’s a recipe for disaster and that’s why no other agency does it.” Mackett says TSA’s unilateral policy that pilots’ guns be carried ‘off-body’, has resulted in numerous guns being lost or stolen, and now in an accident. “We have to have the FFDO program since screeners miss so many weapons at checkpoints and air marshals will never protect more than 1 or 2% of flights.

But, TSA can’t continuously ignore standard procedures proven over thousands of other law enforcement officers and then blame the pilot when it goes wrong.”“We said, ‘Just use the same procedures you use for your own air marshals,’” said one federal flight officer. “How hard is that to understand? It’s long past time Congress took a hard look at the way this program is being run.”

In many respects, the upper echelon of TSA is not unlike a group of idiots in search of a village. (They found it in D.C.). They've managed to create a bigger set of problems than those they're trying to solve; certainly their solutions have cost the country (that would be you and me) billions of dollars, not only in their budget, but in lost time and commerce. My sympathies are totally with the pilot in this case.

Hurrah!

This pilot was following screwed-up proceedures and got screwed as a result. Pilots who are willing and qualified to carry a firearm onboard make us all safer in the event of a hijack. They should be encouraged - not hamstrung by regulations and proceedures devised by idiots that CAUSE accidents - and then fired to take the fall for the idiots.

No, he was not an idiot playing with a gun. He was following Department of Homeboy Security procedural rules. The pilots unions have been warning the DHS that this was going to happen. For a long time. It was inevitable. I would love to meet the IDIOT that came up with that holster and procedure. DHS still doesn't understand the problem with requiring the pilots to remove and insert a padlock through the trigger guard of a loaded gun 5 or 6 times a day.(or more depending on how many times the cockpit door is opened for meals and toilet breaks) The air marshalls don't have to do this. Why should the pilots? They have gone through the exact same training.

I take it this was

A) A person who was unfamiliar with his/her Pistol

B) A Pistol which was ambiguous as for if it is at Battery or not

C) Bad or no training of operative, far as Gun/Pistol handling/safety

D) Someone I would not want in the Pilot's seat on any airline/airplane I would be on

E) Someone who should have elected a large Frame 'Double Action' Revolver, with AMPLE room in the Trigger Guard behind the Trigger...and not been in posession of an 'Automatic' of any kind

Oye,
Just a simple question. Can you read English? Sorry, just wondered.

Kingofthehill & Oboyten - you really need to read the thread and follow the links. The pilot is required to remove the pistol and lock it in a special holster. The mandatory 'lock' that must be placed on the pistol when it's holster can go IN FRONT OF THE TRIGGER. It's almost guaranteed that the lock is gonna depress the trigger and cause an ND somewhere along the way, and it's mandated that the pilot use the lock.

The pilot was not playing with his pistol - he was following the rules and using the kit he was given and told that he had to use. Sadly, the stupid rules and stupid kit he was forced to use caused the problem.

we call that "being set up to fail" and it never fails to leave me with a special feeling

rbernie,
Actually the mandatory lock does not go in front of the trigger, it goes behind it. The precedure, while stupid, won't result in an AD if carefully followed.

While pilots put on and remove their weapon from their belt several times a day it's never supposed to leave the holster. As for whether the pilot in question was following procedures or not, I'm certain that he was not following proper procedure but to the best of my knowledge what actually happened that day has not been made public.

Sharkman,
We should assume the pilot was correctly following procedures otherwise it is unlikely that his original "punishment" would be reversed.

If the re-holstering procedure had been designed to be perfectly safe for a normal person to carry out in a confined position (an aircraft pilot's seat) then there would inevitably be a measure of negligence involved in an ND. However, many FFDOs had complained that the procedure was difficult to carry out and that the holster lock was potentially dangerous. This moves the responsibility for the discharge to the TSA. Critical procedures on the flight deck are, to the greatest extent possible, designed to eliminate error by 110%. In this case, barring any other evidence to the contrary, it seems the design of the equipment and the procedures involved, made the occurrence of an AD matter of "when" not "how".

If you had ever flown a commercial aircraft, particular older generation models, you would know that even taking a book from your flight bag risks back damage because of the contortions involved.

Nobody was injured. Langenhahn was fired soon afterwards, but a federal arbitrator has ordered that he be reinstated after the US Airline Pilots Association filed a grievance.

Click to expand...

...

Well, as I understand it and viewing the holster with hole for lock that is supposed to be, as stated, behind the trigger, he put the gun into the holster, then locked it, then (the mistake) gave it a final, extra push to make sure it was all the way in the holster, resulting in the lock (already in place, incorrectly) in front of the trigger, caused the trigger to fire off the one round.

I have an approved holster for my P229/40 with hole for lock behind trigger, this to prevent anyone, other than the pilots, to remove it without unlocking and removing lock, first.

My only problem is, with mine, there is no doubt, being a pre-formed P229 n/r holster and knowing my gun is in all the way. Yet, somehow, he did not get his gun in fully in the first time then, after locking it, the need, or thought of, an extra push, to verify gun is all the way in, and the AD occurred.

I have to lean towards a holster issue that allowed a/the gun in partially and, at the same time, allowed the lock to run thru trigger guard and "in front" of trigger with enough room for gun to then be pushed all the way in and hook the trigger and K-boom.

If I know pilots, good ones always learn from their mistake (if they survive) or otherwise..

Safe flying,


Ls

Poor Procedures

These stupid carrying procedures need to be done away with. It is silly that a pilot have to take on and off a handgun in a cramped cockpit, lock it, put it in a box, lock the box, go to the bathroom, and do the whole routine again in reverse to put the gun back on every single time he has to take a leak. This is a recipe for disaster and it looks like the TSA did nothing but set the pilot up for failure with a wierd holster and running a trigger lock through a loaded handgun's trigger guard. The handgun should be carried in a quality holster that is comfortable for the pilot and conceals under his jacket when he exits the cockpit. The handgun should be on him at all times. The lockbox is good for when he is not able to maintain control of his handgun (such as leaving a handgun at a hotel).

For the uninformed... You ever sat in a really tiny and I mean tiny bathroom stall where your legs are brushing the walls and you go to reach to toilet paper and find your all contorted... That is truely like what some of these cockpit seats are like. There is no room and to be forced into removing a weapon/holster while in this position would be supremely difficult, (and asinine).

People will say whatever they want but next time you get on an airplane, just take a quick peek and you will get the idea.

TSA never wanted the program and has thrown countless roadblocks in its way. It's a wonder than any pilots participate at all.

TSA's management is 100% hoplophobe and that's all there is to it.

Mr_Rogers said:

Sharkman,
We should assume the pilot was correctly following procedures otherwise it is unlikely that his original "punishment" would be reversed.

If the re-holstering procedure had been designed to be perfectly safe for a normal person to carry out in a confined position (an aircraft pilot's seat) then there would inevitably be a measure of negligence involved in an ND. However, many FFDOs had complained that the procedure was difficult to carry out and that the holster lock was potentially dangerous. This moves the responsibility for the discharge to the TSA. Critical procedures on the flight deck are, to the greatest extent possible, designed to eliminate error by 110%. In this case, barring any other evidence to the contrary, it seems the design of the equipment and the procedures involved, made the occurrence of an AD matter of "when" not "how".

If you had ever flown a commercial aircraft, particular older generation models, you would know that even taking a book from your flight bag risks back damage because of the contortions involved.

Click to expand...

Mr. Rogers,

I'm well aware of what it's like to fly. I have been a commercial airline pilot for 20 years and am still employed as one. Been there, done that, got the bad back to prove it. You could say that I work with an FFDO on every one of my flights.....

Yes the lock is a stupid idea and it would be a lot safer without it. However, re-holstering should not be a problem because the weapon is not supposed to leave the holster under routine conditions in the first place. Follow SOP, no problem, but you have to be CAREFUL. Rigorous attention to detail can't be stressed enough. I have yet to see an OFFICIAL report on what happened but from what I hear he was not following procedures. That's all I can say about that...

The locking procedure is universally despised and rightfully criticized. I laugh when I hear some TSA talking head explaining how their procedures are standard in law enforcement. Only the pinheads that came up with it think it's a good idea. It takes greater than normal care but it won't result in an AD/ND if CAREFULLY followed.

Sharkman,
Just so you do not think I speak from ignorance I retired with 25 years of commercial airline time and a total of 40 years as a pilot.

Most of the cockpit defense concept was screwed up. The airline I worked for purchased hundreds of tasers as an interim solution to cockpit defense. They checked out most of the pilots on taser use and as far as I know the tasers are still in storage somewhere having never been issued. Apparently someone thought taser use might interfere with cockpit instruments. OK, I got a choice between having my throat cut or getting interference with the cockpit instruments - let me think about this for a while.

This subject has been beaten to death, but sufficient to say, the whole matter of arming pilots was handled badly. Frankly, our government does not trusts pilots, many of who are ex-military with security clearances, but it trusted some of the low IQ, equal-opportunity, people that it took on in an attempt to fill SM positions when the expansion in SM manning took place.

Mr_Rogers said:

Sharkman,
Just so you do not think I speak from ignorance I retired with 25 years of commercial airline time and a total of 40 years as a pilot.

Most of the cockpit defense concept was screwed up. The airline I worked for purchased hundreds of tasers as an interim solution to cockpit defense. They checked out most of the pilots on taser use and as far as I know the tasers are still in storage somewhere having never been issued. Apparently someone thought taser use might interfere with cockpit instruments. OK, I got a choice between having my throat cut or getting interference with the cockpit instruments - let me think about this for a while.

This subject has been beaten to death, but sufficient to say, the whole matter of arming pilots was handled badly. Frankly, our government does not trusts pilots, many of who are ex-military with security clearances, but it trusted some of the low IQ, equal-opportunity, people that it took on in an attempt to fill SM positions when the expansion in SM manning took place.

Click to expand...

Hey Mr. Rogers,
It's all good, I agree with your post, didn't want anyone to think that I was ignorant either. Only the guys I fly with can say that! I know about the taser program, I must work for the same airline that you once did. After several incidents out at the training center I hear they they are going to dust off the tasers and issue them to pilots in training...

I hope that retirement is treating you well. I still have 9-14 years left, hope we last that long...

FWIW the FFDO program has come a long way. Can't get into details but I'll say that the quality of training has greatly improved, much more effective and realistic.

....

It's always amusing to me to read comments from people who condemn people for making mistakes as if any of the ones making the comments are without any faults or have never made any mistakes of their own.

It is a crazy idea to be locking something through the trigger area regardless of weather it is to be in front or in back of the trigger. It is a recipie for trouble.

When I was learning to fly, I was told there were two types of pilots; Those who have been lost and those who will be lost.

I would apply that to guns. I hear the stories nearly every day.

There are two types of gun owners; Those who have had a lapse in their gun handling skills, and those who will.

Glad he got his job back.

I've trained with a pilot as a partner and have seen that holster and the issues re-holstering with it. The area near where the trigger guard goes is weakened by the hole in the leather for the lock.

I could easily see someone thinking they are placing the lock through the hole in the holster when in fact, the hole has been pushed down, out of the trigger guard. Thus, the "hole" viewed by the pilot is actually a void in the holster in front of the trigger.

Government procurement and procedures at its best.