| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Guns in Airplanes | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 15 2005, 11:58 PM (366 Views) | |
| Dwayne | Jun 15 2005, 11:58 PM Post #1 |
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
|
Please explain your answer. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| 24thcenstfan | Jun 16 2005, 12:34 AM Post #2 |
|
Something Wicked This Fae Comes
|
I chose the last option. However, I believe it would depend on the type of bullet used. Actually, I think either nothing would happen (depending on where the bullet went), or if the bullet pierced the hull, the plane would slowly decompress. At least that is what I gleaned from some of the information put out when the air marshall debate flaired up after a certain event (<= trying hard to keep politics out of the thread there). |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| 8247 | Jun 16 2005, 01:02 AM Post #3 |
|
Apparently we look like this now
|
Dwayne....You had to have watched Mythbusters tonight. I saw that they were doing that experiment on the episode they ran tonight, but I didnt watch it. What happened? |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dwayne | Jun 16 2005, 07:22 AM Post #4 |
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
|
Pick the 3rd option and that's what happened on Mythbusters. Now I'm totally in favor of arming the flight crew of aircraft. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| ~Luthien~ | Jun 16 2005, 08:01 AM Post #5 |
|
Little Sister Of Sistertrek
|
^^^ I dun wanna know what happens cuz i have to fly in 4 weeks! Yikes! |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Deleted User | Jun 16 2005, 08:26 AM Post #6 |
|
Deleted User
|
Oooh! Where to? |
| | Quote | ^ | |
| Minuet | Jun 16 2005, 09:48 AM Post #7 |
|
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
|
Doesn't it really depend on where the gun was aimed?
If you shoot the pilot and co-pilot the plane won't decompress, but you will be dead anyways. If you shoot your spouse sitting next to you the plane will continue to fly. The possibilities are endless. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Minuet | Jun 16 2005, 09:52 AM Post #8 |
|
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
|
Not that I am against arming the crew (I actually have to think about that and form an opinion) But if someone punctures the plane what good would an armed crew do? The plane is already punctured. They may need guns to protect themselves from the scenario I listed above, but it won't do anything to prevent the guy in the last row from shooting a hole somewhere in the plane. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Jun 16 2005, 10:01 AM Post #9 |
|
Time to put something here
|
Min, I think the point was that the reason a lot of people say they don’t want the flight crew of an aircraft armed is to avoid the explosive decompression when a hole is shoot through an plain like we see on TV and Movies. According to this program Dwayne watched they showed that this explosive decompression would not happen. So if this does not happen then to Dwayne it makes a stronger case in his mind for arming the flight crew. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Minuet | Jun 16 2005, 10:03 AM Post #10 |
|
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
|
^^^ If that was the intent then the question should have been clear about that and the thread should be moved to the Politics forum. Dwayne - what was your intent with this thread and why did you choose the Modern Technology forum? |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| ~Luthien~ | Jun 16 2005, 10:07 AM Post #11 |
|
Little Sister Of Sistertrek
|
Sweden! To see my friends again! 6 months has been to long.... :rolleyes: |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Jun 16 2005, 10:08 AM Post #12 |
|
Time to put something here
|
I think it is the right place. I don’t think the original intent was to talk about arming flight crews, but only to relate an infesting fact he saw on tv. Later down the post Dwayne added that this interesting fact would cause him to more strongly agree with arming flight crews. The only reason I responded to what you wrote the way that I did was be cause I thought you had misunderstood his comment in the last post only. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Minuet | Jun 16 2005, 10:43 AM Post #13 |
|
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
|
^^^ My intent was to widen the possibilities, not narrow them. I thought keeping the possibilities wider was more in keeping with the forum and examining the myriad of answers under different circumstances. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Deleted User | Jun 16 2005, 10:53 AM Post #14 |
|
Deleted User
|
What about arming them with Tasers? Or would that affect the plane? |
| | Quote | ^ | |
| somerled | Jun 16 2005, 12:20 PM Post #15 |
|
Admiral MacDonald RN
|
The skin or the window of the aircraft would be puntured and the aircraft would decompress slowly. If silenced , most people on the plane including the crew may not even notice anything untoward happening. Wasn't this done on Myth Busters (in a very crude manner). The hull of the aircraft is very strongly built , and the windows are unlikely to blow out. The pressure differential is insufficient (maximum 1 ATM gauge) ie there is insufficient stored energy in the pressurised cabin to cause a catastrophic event. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Science and Technology · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2


1:53 PM Jul 11