Keresés

Részletes keresés

belic Creative Commons License 2001.09.28 0 0 10
Hello!

Ha jol tudom, akkor evi 2x10 lovest ad le egy atlag rendor nalunk. Az osszehasonlitas kedveert: szerintem egy szitoacios lovo versenyzonek "illik" legalabb 24 edzesen resztvenni ahoz, hogy megtartsa az engedelyet (ha jol tudom, ez nincs kozpontilag szabalyozva), es egy edzesen nem szokas 50-nel kevesebbet loni.

Teljesen igazad van, rendszeres edzest kell elvarni mindenkitol, akinel fegyver van, de nem lehet elutasitani azzal, hogy ugyse fog edzeni.

A fulkbe bejutasrol: szerintem a 2-3. legikisero agyonverese utan ki fogja nyitni a pilota. :-(

Bel

Előzmény: wilard (9)
wilard Creative Commons License 2001.09.28 0 0 9
Pontosan erről van szó. Rendőreink állítólag rendszerességgel vesznek részt lőgyakorlatokon. Néhány esetben láthattuk, hallhattuk milyen eredménnyel. Mit tegyen a pilóta? Kap egy kiképzést, majd évente egyszer részt vehet megerősítő gyakorlaton?
Ne feledjük: a fegyver az előbb-utóbb elsül.

Miért nem jobb megoldás, ha a fülkébe való bejutást akadályozzák meg?

A megelőzést már nem is említem.

Üdv

Előzmény: Vgyuri (8)
Vgyuri Creative Commons License 2001.09.28 0 0 8
Az izraeli titkosszolgák nagyon régen használnak 22-es Berettát repülőgépfedélzeten gyengitett lőszerrel. Azért az még halálos, csak tudni kell vele lőni.
gvass1 Creative Commons License 2001.09.28 0 0 7
hi,
a hagyomanyos lofegyverekbe valo nem-halalos, vagy csökkentett atutesu toltenyek repulogepen annyiban rejtenek egy minimalis veszelyt, hogy eleg a terroristanak loszert folvinnie, es megszerezni a fegyvert.

A csak-gumilovedekes fegyvernel - mas tolteny nem toltheto be - ilyen veszely nincs, es mivel halalos hatasa sincs, a terrorista sem tud vele fenyegetozni tulzottan.

De hasonloan alkalmazhato lenne - fegyvertelen tamado ellen - mondjuk a halokilovo fegyver, vagy az elektrodkilovo sokkolo, bar ezek hatranya, hogy mivel csak 1-lovetuek, tobbet kellene beloluk felvinni.

Előzmény: supporter2nd (5)
supporter2nd Creative Commons License 2001.09.27 0 0 6
Ugy ertem, hogy P7PT8

Bocs a gepelesi hibaert

supporter2nd Creative Commons License 2001.09.27 0 0 5
Mar letezik ilyen fegyver (ha meg gyartjak), megpedig a P7PT9, sot, ha jol tudom, az MP-5-nek is van ehhez a toltenyhez egy valtozata. Onnan lehet megismerni oket, hogy a fegyvereken kek potty van.
Egyebkent nem is biztos, hogy uj fegyvert kellene tervezni, eleg csak megfelelo toltenyt megfelelo lovedekkel hasznalni. Mintha a Glaser es a Magsafe toltenyeket direkt repulofedelzeti hasznalatra terveztek volna, de ebben nem vagyok biztos, ugyhogy nem art majd nemi lektoralas Gvasstol.
belic Creative Commons License 2001.09.27 0 0 4
Hello!

A magyar Keseru muvek epp mostanaban fejlesztett ki egy gumilovedekes revolvert, ami 20-25 J energiaju (ennek kb. a fele is napokig lathato kek-zold foltot okoz). Egyertelmuen nem elet- es repuloveszelyes, de fegyvertelen tamadot jo eselyel megallit.

Rendvedelmi szerveknel (ujabban a magyar bortonoroknel is) elterjedt eszkoz a gumilovedekes soretes puska. A durvabb loszer eseten (amikor viszonlag keves, de nagy meretu lovedek van) garantalt a bordatores, de esetleg halalos is lehet. Szerintem a puha lovedek miatt nem tenne kart a gepben, hatranya a viszonylag nagy meret.

Szerintem a ketto kozti atmenetbol lehetne egy igazan hatasos fegyvert letrehozni, raadasul a fegyveren nem is kellene valtoztatni, csak a lovedeken. Egy puha gumilovedek valoszinuleg akkor sem sertene meg a repulo falat, ha pl. a .38 special revolvernel megszokott 350J koruli csotorkolati energiaval rendelkezik, es egy ilyen mar eleg rendes elrettento- es megallitoerovel is rendelkezik.

Bel

Előzmény: wilard (1)
supporter2nd Creative Commons License 2001.09.27 0 0 3
Bocs, rossz cimet adtam. A valodi:

www.keepandbeararms.com

supporter2nd Creative Commons License 2001.09.27 0 0 2
www.keepandbearguns.com

Ezen a linken megtalalsz egy olyan cikket, amely a pilotak felfegyverzeset elemzi. Ha nem tudsz angolul, szolj, es leforditom.

A szoveg a fedelzeten levo fegyverekkel foglalkozik, es a hozzajuk fuzodo mitoszokat cafolja.

Airplanes & Guns:
Myths and Reality

from Angel Shamaya
Founder/Executive Director

September 19, 2001

MYTH #12
"We don't want the plane to depressurize at 30,000-feet because someone thinks they saw a hijacker." -- Representative Greg Walden
(quoted here, his website, his email address) 1) Concealed carry permit holders are among the most lawful people in our society. Anyone who has a valid report of a concealed carry permit holder opening fire "because they thought they saw" a criminal is invited to provide credible information for verification (as opposed to emotion-rich but fact-poor rhetoric).
2) Are we also to believe that a government employee or Sky Marshal would behave differently than a citizen if "they think they see a hijacker?" If so, why? What abilities of discernment have been bestowed upon government employees and Sky Marshals that cannot be bestowed upon citizens and pilots?

3) People who oppose the right to self-defense on the ground ought not even be considered in this discussion, because their anti-gun fairy tales have already been disproved on the ground. Cities where concealed carrying of firearms have been decriminalized are safer than they were before restrictions were lifted. (See More Guns, Less Crime by Professor John Lott.)

On Depressurization

from Dan Todd
Licensed Aircraft Engineer for 20 years
Lead Technician for a Major Airline

On the overall question: "Is shooting hijackers on aircraft an appropriate thing to do considering the risk of damaging the operational integrity of the aircraft," the answer is "Hell Yes." I've been a licensed aircraft mechanic for over 20 years, and am the Lead Technician for a Major Airline. I know aircraft. I've been an active shooter for a lot longer than that and I know firearms and ammunition too. So I suppose I'm entitled to an opinion on the matter. By the way, there is special ammunition just for this application.

First of all, there already is a "hole" in the aircraft, for regulating the cabin pressure. It's called the outflow valve. It modulates to maintain desired cabin pressure, in response to signals from a cabin pressure controller, which responds to inputs from a selector panel in the cockpit, all automatic when it's all working normally.

There's also always pressurized cabin air leaking out past door seals and a few other places. Remember, the airplane is pressurized by a constant flow of compressed air into the cabin from the engines (via the pneumatic systems and the air conditioning systems). If one round, or two or three for that matter pierce the skin, it's not necessarily catastrophic; air will go whistling out the hole, and the outflow valve will close a little further to maintain the desired cabin pressure. Now if the bullet hits a cabin window, it could I suppose take out pane completely and then there would be a real problem. That would be enough air whooshing out fast enough to cause a complete depressurization, someone could be extruded through the open window frame (it has happened) and some people wouldn't get their masks on fast enough to keep from passing out. Emergency exits cannot be opened at altitude. About 8 psi would be a typical differential pressure at altitude, and the doors are plug doors, meaning that to get one open it has to move inside the airplane first, so it's 8 lbs X too many square inches to be physically possible.

On bomber aircraft, the crew compartment is pressurized, the bomb rack and bay area is not. The pilot compartment on fighter aircraft is pressurized. With regard to bullets penetrating aircraft skin, well, the skin isn't made to stop bullets, but putting a small hole in the fuselage isn't necessarily a big deal, hitting a control cable would be undesirable but again, not a for sure disaster. Same with a hydraulic line, same for an electrical cable. In summary, it's pretty tough to down a transport category aircraft with small arms fire. Boeing's 737s, 757s and the rest are very much like bulldozers with wings on them in that regard.

Dan Todd, Licensed Aircraft Engineer for 20 years
Lead Technician for a Major Airline
September 17, 2001

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Depressurization

from David M.
Licensed Aircraft Engineer

One or even several bullets puncturing the pressure cabin wall would be hardly noticeable and the aircraft's pressurization control would easily cope with the slight loss of air. The likelihood of a single bullet causing a massive structural failure is so remote as to be insignificant. It is quite possible that gunfire in the cockpit or passenger cabin could cause damage to fuel, hydraulic or electrical lines but again it would have to be unlucky to cause a major problem that could not be survived.

Commercial jets pressurization systems are designed to maintain the cabin at a pressure altitude of not exceeding 8 or 9 thousand feet no matter how high the plane is flying, and they do this with a typical differential of maximum 6 to 9 psi. Rapid depressurization is uncommon and systems warn of creeping depressurization because at a cabin altitude of over 15000 feet blackout is likely to occur but by then the oxygen masks will have long before deployed typically at around 10 to 12000 feet pressure altitude.

I believe I read somewhere that a Boeing 747 can lose five cabin windows and maintain cabin pressure so I personally would not be worried about a few potentially life saving shots being fired by a sky marshal - what effect that might have on ones hearing is another matter entirely!

Regards, David.
September 17, 2001

wilard Creative Commons License 2001.09.27 0 0 1
Melyek ezek az eszközök?
Előzmény: gvass1 (0)
gvass1 Creative Commons License 2001.09.27 0 0 0
hi,
miert, szerinted az jo megoldas, hogy egy tapetavagoval ki lehet nyirni 6 ezer embert?

Azt a vilag legjobb repteri ellenorzese sem zarja ki 100%-ig, hogy kest, vagy egyeb olesre alkalmas berendezest felvigyenek a gepre.

Vedekezni pedig valahogy kell, erre nem feltetlenul a hagyomanyos, femlovedekes lofegyver a legjobb megoldas egy repulogepen, ahol tulnyomasos az utaskabin, de vannak olyan eszkozok, melyek hatasosoak lehetnek, de megsem utik at a repulogep falat.

Előzmény: wilard (-)
wilard Creative Commons License 2001.09.26 0 0 topiknyitó
Az amerikai pilóták szövetsége az kéri a kongresszustól, hogy engedélyezzék számukra a fegyverek tartását a pilóta fülkében...

Szerintem ez a lehető legrosszabb megoldás. Mi a véleményed?

Ha kedveled azért, ha nem azért nyomj egy lájkot a Fórumért!