Pilot whose gun went off will be fired

EyeInTheSky

Veteran
Dec 2, 2003
2,836
74
Pittsburgh
Group: Story Highlights
US Airways pilot says he was stowing gun when it accidentally went off

Incident occurred as plane was preparing to land in Charlotte, North Carolina

Flight officers group says it will fight termination.

Next Article in U.S. »




(CNN) -- An US Airways pilot who aviation officials say accidentally fired his handgun in the cockpit during a flight will be fired, a spokesman for a flight officers group said.

The airline has begun the termination process for Capt. James Langenhahn, said Mike Karn, vice president of the Federal Flight Deck Officers Association.

Langenhahn told police that he was stowing his gun in the cockpit of a jet preparing to land in Charlotte, North Carolina, last month when it accidentally fired. The federal Transportation Security Administration is investigating the incident.

Calls to Langenhahn's home in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, were not immediately returned.

Don't Miss
Pilot suspended after firing gun in cockpit
In an e-mail, US Airways representative Morgan Durrant said the company's policies prevent it from commenting publicly on a personnel matter.

Karn said his group, which represents pilots who are federally trained and allowed to carry firearms on flights, will fight the termination.

"This was accidental not intentional," Karn said. "This is not the way to treat a long-term pilot."

He said he did not know how long Langenhahn, 55, has been a pilot for US Airways but said he is a veteran with the airline.

The bullet from the H&K USP .40-caliber handgun penetrated the left side of the jet's fuselage but did not hit any crucial wiring or instrumentation, the TSA said.

The gun discharge was the first public incident of its kind in the history of the Federal Flight Deck Officer program, which has trained thousands of pilots to carry weapons in an effort to improve aviation safety.

Created in the wake of the September 11 attacks, the program was approved by Congress as part of the Homeland Security Act on November 25, 2002. E-mail to a friend

All About Transportation Security Administration • US Airways Group Inc.
 
Was that a wisecrack Elevation?

I have read a little bit of what's happening, but it seems as if the East union prevailed right?

Who has been, and will continue to represent this pilot now?
 
Terminating him sounds pretty excessive, but maybe I don't know the whole story. If he has a good record except for that incident, they should just suspend him for a little while and not let him carry a gun anymore. And if they really wanted to punish him make him make a video on gun safety for all the pilots to see. I remember they made a f/a do that for popping a slide one time in 2000. I heard he quit afterwards.
 
If this sticks it's the END of the FFDO program!
======================================================================
=========

And that may indeed be the point of all this.

Can't have those pilots bypassing the sheeple in line now can we?
 
When you shoot a hole in somebodies Multi-million aircraft it tends to piss them off. :shock:

Hey if you can't properly holster your weapon you shouldn't have one. I'm totally OK with the termination.


Hey if Bush Sr would have properly holstered HIS weapon the world would be a different place now wouldn't it? :lol: :lol: :lol:
I'm okay with maybe taking his gun away, but firing him, come on! He was a volunteer trying to save YOUR FANNY, has an accident which was likely caused by poor procedures and/or equipment, and YOU want him fired? Man, you're heartless!
 
I don't think he should be fired, he's a fellow airman and I hate to see that. I sincerely hope usapa gets him his job back. Its easy for non pilots to put themselves on a lofty perch and claim this or that, but anyone who has gone through what it takes to get to the point of commanding a jetliner knows that it is not that simple. Even if he was a usapa voter, that in itself makes no difference to me in this case.
 
It is my understanding that part of the FFDO program is that the gun is not to be out of its holster unless the cockpit is under assault. Period. End of discussion. By the pilot's own admission the gun discharged "as he was putting it away for landing." There is no information from anyone else that the cockpit was under assault; so, why did he have it out in the first place. I mean, other than showing off to the FO what a big gun he had.

As a f/a, I have been wary of this program from the beginning. I don't know about LCC, but it seems to me that most of the pilots who signed up for this program at AA are the last people on Earth I would give a weapon.

That being said, I also think that termination is a little harsh. Permanent removal from the FFDO program and a minimum 6 month suspension w/o pay, perhaps. That would at least get the attention of the remaining program members to not play with their guns in flight.
 
It is my understanding that part of the FFDO program is that the gun is not to be out of its holster unless the cockpit is under assault. Period. End of discussion. By the pilot's own admission the gun discharged "as he was putting it away for landing." There is no information from anyone else that the cockpit was under assault; so, why did he have it out in the first place. I mean, other than showing off to the FO what a big gun he had.

As a f/a, I have been wary of this program from the beginning. I don't know about LCC, but it seems to me that most of the pilots who signed up for this program at AA are the last people on Earth I would give a weapon.

That being said, I also think that termination is a little harsh. Permanent removal from the FFDO program and a minimum 6 month suspension w/o pay, perhaps. That would at least get the attention of the remaining program members to not play with their guns in flight.

I'm a dyed in the wool second ammendment guy and my idea of gun control is both hands, generally speaking. Initially I was 100% in support of the program with no reservations whatsoever. Funny enough to me anyway, I started having more and more reservations about the program as time went by, due in no small part to the Barney Fife factor. I still support the program though, it does serve a purpose and most definately has its place, but perfect it is not.
 
I'm okay with maybe taking his gun away, but firing him, come on! He was a volunteer trying to save YOUR FANNY, has an accident which was likely caused by poor procedures and/or equipment, and YOU want him fired? Man, you're heartless!
US Airways can't take his gun away, the only way they can take the gun out of his hands on their aircraft is to remove him from the aircraft.
 
It is my understanding that part of the FFDO program is that the gun is not to be out of its holster unless the cockpit is under assault. Period. End of discussion. By the pilot's own admission the gun discharged "as he was putting it away for landing." There is no information from anyone else that the cockpit was under assault; so, why did he have it out in the first place. I mean, other than showing off to the FO what a big gun he had.

As a f/a, I have been wary of this program from the beginning. I don't know about LCC, but it seems to me that most of the pilots who signed up for this program at AA are the last people on Earth I would give a weapon.

That being said, I also think that termination is a little harsh. Permanent removal from the FFDO program and a minimum 6 month suspension w/o pay, perhaps. That would at least get the attention of the remaining program members to not play with their guns in flight.
You are misunderstanding the term "put his weapon away" That does not mean he was playing with his weapon, or showing off what a big gun he had.
It is misunderstanding just like this that lead to your next thought.
You trust these guys with your life all day everyday and yet you make the statement about how these are the last people you would trust with a gun.

I am not bashing you in any way, I just have to point out that you are flat out mistaken in your idea of what went on with that discharge.
 
It is completely unreasonble to ask yet even think any safety related organizaton would consider "saving" this guys job. Why not have a drink before you fly? Many an employees have bee fired for far, far less. Sounds as though many of you are more concerned about "saving a brother" than the safety of your fellow crewmembers. To potentially jepardize the safety of crewmembers and passengers to save this guys job is wrong.