brickhistory

Conditions/terrain/foliage of the area? Game being hunted? .30-06 is a very good choice for all around work, agreed. Your Remington is a good gun with knockdown power. Big, heavy guns to hump however. Hunting in the South where the woods are scrubby and reasonably thick? .30-30 was a good choice for the 75-100 yards back in the day. Shooting across the Great Plains? .243 goes a long way in a straight line. Any more details as to what/where you want to hunt?

Taurus 24/7 OSS .45 acp, black, three dot sights Bought this gun for a couple of reasons: 1) I had the gun buying itch, 2) Good price for a new high capacity .45 ($350 + $30 dealer transfer fee = site called gunbroker), 3) felt better in my hand than a comparable XD45 as well as being $250-300 cheaper. Put my first 100 rounds through it this morning, took it straight out of the box. Every round fed fine and went bang on the first pull of the trigger. Accuracy at 7.5 and 15 yards was very good with no sight adjustments needed, all inner 9 ring if not 10s. Pros: it's been a while since I've shot a full size pistol; mostly been shooting my compact .45 and a .44 snubbie. I was pleasantly surprised to relearn at how a big gun handles the recoil better and allows me to get the sights aligned faster for the next shot. It was amazing to have 12+1 rounds of .45 at one go. That nearly doubles my Colt Government 1911 or my compact carry one. For serious target work, that was almost too many to keep the thing up and steady for that many bullets (or I'm a big puss, but I digress). For faster, center of mass work, this was a great piece of hardware. This is a internal striker design, i.e., there's no external hammer, so the pistol is essentially double-action only (ok, not the technically accurate term, but it works for me). Keep pulling the trigger and it keeps going off until the magazine is empty. The Taurus literature says it's a "second strike" capability in the event of a misfire. As for me pesonally, too many years of tap and rack are ingrained, not to mention the other semi's I have are not so designed, so keeping my habit pattern seems a better bet than remembering which gun I'm using in an emergency. Cons: speaking of that trigger, it has an extremely loooong pull. It felt really mushy the first few magazines. I got used to it, but it is definitely different. I still think I will wind up putting a Hogue slip-on grip. It still felt too narrow in my hand and my trigger finger could and did reach around and hit the magazine release by accident (no, not a pure case of incorrect gun hold, I've just got NBA-style fingers but without the talent). It addition to stinging, ejecting the magazine inadvertantly would look really silly. To disassemble it for cleaning, there is a small-ish pin that physically comes out of the frame and has to be set aside and reinserted for assembly. Lose it and you now have a gun-shaped rock. I'm no design engineer, but that seems not a great feature. Other reviews I've read said this pistol was a contender for a SOCOM large semi-auto competition that was floated a few years ago. This pin in the field would seem to be a "doh!" feature. This also seemed like a damned big gun at first. I compared it to my 1911 after I got back and it's pretty much the same size in all dimensions, just seemed bigger while shooting it. Again, probably because I haven't shoot full size in a while. Note: image from Gunblast. Not my photo, but it does give a good size comparison OSS v. 1911 Overall, me likey.

Does the "trench art" lower or raise any such $$$ value for the weapon or is that an eye of the beholder thing? Is that as important a consideration in the market as the mechanical condition?

Web photo, not my exact gun. Was able to spend this morning at a range, put 100 rounds of .45ACP through my house gun and 115 rounds through my new carbine. I mainly wanted to ops check both the carbine and the five different clips I'd purchased (one 15 rd mag comes with the gun) - 3 15rd'ers and 2 30 rd'ers. All fed properly and went bang at the appropriate time. The gun was pretty accurate out of the box. As it's cold and I'm getting too old to freeze, I only shot indoors at the 25 yard range. All rounds went through the nine ring. Probably all would go through the 10 ring if I were more proficient. It was a lot of fun to shoot. At .30 cal, there's not a lot of recoil, so a sore shoulder is not an issue like the M1 Garand after a similiar number of trigger pulls. Drawbacks so far - ammo is pretty expensive. Best I have found so far is at Georgia Arms, and even that's $.50 per. Also, after putting those 100+ bullets through, the thing was freakin' hot! Not just really warm, but almost burning skin hot. Gonna pull it apart to clean it and see what's going on inside. I don't recall this being an issue when I had one previously (why, oh why, did I sell that thing?! Dumbass...). Also, it's pretty short for a tall guy. Guess that's why it's called a carbine... Final verdict, as of today, anyway, was it's a fun gun. Able to put out a respectable number of rounds in a short amount of time. Fun to shoot, looks good, a little pricey per trigger pull, however.

I was too slow on the Taurus .45. I consoled myself with a new Auto Ordnance M1 carbine and another .44 special. I'll post on the carbine once I've put some rounds through it. While this is not a historical M1 carbine, it is new which says a lot for me. Looking at the used carbines I could find, there were either really rickety and fairly expensive ($500+) or really nice and really expensive (I found a cherry-looking Rockola, but not for $1,200!). So I have the 1911 .45, an M1 .30-06, and now the M1 carbine .30 cal. I'll call my WWII collection complete if I can get a Thompson and a BAR (ha!).

Anyone owned/shot the Taurus 24/7 OSS in .45ACP? Or the PT845? It fits my hand much better than the XD45 (too narrow) and at $200-ish less expensive, I'm mighty tempted to take a foray into the high-capacity .45 world.

I go off on my own, get stupid drunk for three days AWOL, sober up, come back, tell my tale. Who wouldn't prosecute? I'm a big believer in the simple explanation makes the most sense as you hypothesize. She most likely fucked up, Big Blue made her out to be a hero while embarassing the Krgyz [sic] in getting her out of country ASAP, realizes she has a connection to an up and coming (sts) then three star, decides to cover it up to avoid the public scrutiny. USAF would never do that, would it?

Hey Air Force Times, do that journalism thing.... Oh wait... Upon her next retirement, I see a book deal and maybe a made for TV movie. Oh, and this is unacceptable, Big Blue. Way to uphold honor, integrity, and service before self.

CONUS AAA More CONUS AAA

Back in the good ol' Cold War days, you had a very robust air defense capability in the active duty strangely enough called Air Defense Command (before that it was the Continental Air Defense Command) complete with SAMs (Nike, Nike-Hercules/Nike-Ajax, even some US-based AAA) and interceptors - F-101, F-102, F-106s, Canadian (as part of NORAD before space became a player) with their CF-100s and CF-101s and a hellishly expensive but really amazing for the time radar lines in Canada and the US, off the coasts in picket ships, early AWACS based on the Constellation, and even oil-rig like sea platforms (see Texas Tower 4 for an odd way for USAF dudes to die, RIP). As the threat from Soviet bombers declined, costs from Vietnam and LBJ's "Great Society" escalated, DoD was used, again, to pay for everything else and the budget was cut. One result of that was the air defense mission going completely Guard by the early 1980s. 1st Air Force became the keeper of the airspace and more and more alert positions were eliminated until by 9/11 there were only a handful with birds still on alert. And that mission was for the "threat" coming from outside the ADIZ, not an internal one. So, yes, 9/11 could've happened back in the old days. We weren't watching, nor trained and equipped for an internal air attack as occured that September day. I also think that any self-respecting nation should have a means of protecting its sovereignty, to include airspace defense. Post-9/11, the kneejerk reaction, besides TSA and the like, was a substantial beefing up of the air defense mission with ONE. Lots of $$ spent on tieing in the FAA radars in CONUS to the sector operations centers, lots of $$ spent on upgrading alert facilities and TTPs, etc, etc. And not to mention the money spent on those actually pulling alert. Which, by the way, is a political decision, not really a military one. Congress and the President mandated the CONUS-based operation. Without going into some of the current measures in use today, I still have yet to see how splashing a B767 over Georgetown is better than one hitting the intended target; the bad guys still achieve their aim (no pun intended). But it's a feel good capability. But point the finger at the politicians, not the units involved. If not for that mission, even more fighters would be gone from the inventory. AGRs/extended MPAs/and the like are at the behest of the political leadership. Don't blame the guys who choose to fulfill those missions. Blame the ones who decided they are worthwhile. brick - AGR (ret). DoD air defense liaison to FAA's Air Traffic Control System Command Center, 2002-2008.

MPA = $$ A unit is allocated so many per fiscal year. During GWOT/OCO/etc, etc, etc, the spigot has been wide open. Times are getting tight and units aren't getting a blank check anymore. Guard/Reserve HQs usually also have a pot of MPA that they can shift around to those in hurt status, but that too has been tapped out. A unit has to use that available MPA to keep their crews current/perform their basic mission(s). Additional support requires additional MPA that Uncle DoD has to come up with. One unintended consequence of this open spigot is the thousands of guys/gals who had gone Reserve/Guard well shy of ringing the magic 20 year retirement, i.e., getting retirement immediately upon retirement instead of having to wait until age 60 (yes, I'm aware of the provisions for earlier retirement based upon time activated, yada, yada, yada, but just go with it for now) but due to long-term activation or extended MPA orders now have the time in to qualify. Not an insignificant amount of money involved. Lesson learned (again): Don't go to war expecting it to be cheap...

Dud's (typo intentional) trying to make a living. If he can't drum outrage over something the Administration is doing, then he'll go for it in an inaccurate, skewed essay. Peters was a career Army intel type and wrote a pretty decent Cold War fiction book back in the day - Ivan decides to go for it in Europe type tale. Retired as a Lt Col and went to make his living wielding a pen (or word processor). The Air Force does go 1 v 3 with the other services (I count the USMC as a separate service) for funding. Remember this piece is dated 2005 when the fight for the F-22 (then all-seeing, all-doing F/A-22) was still on-going. But each of the other services also goes 1 v X for its share of the Pentagon funding pie. The USN would love to have a 12 carrier, 400-500 ship blue water navy. The Army spent a boatload (pun intended) on the FCS during the same time as this essay (Peters conveniantly doesn't deal with that as it would counter his own argument). Nothing new here, folks. I look forward to Mr. Peters essay if/when China starts flexing its military muscles in a violent way and all 187 (minus those in depot, down for mx, etc) F-22s are trying to hack it. And not a word back in 2005 for the 40+ year old tankers. Even older BUFFS? Peters knows, actually knew, about boots. Aerospace? Not so much...

I don't think the last Administration (when Powell was actually part of it) and certainly not this Administration believe in the Powell Doctrine. See the arguments about asking for 40,000 troops in Afghanistan, finally getting a committment for 30,000, but with a specific begin to pull out date attached. Don't remember those clauses in the Powell Doctrine. Powell will do himself a disservice if he joins this Administration. Nothing good could come to his reputation from being SECDEF now. The next guy/gal is going to have a helluva rear-guard action either voluntarily or otherwise undoing some Gates' measures, i.e., JFCOM, et al. Congress, of whatever flavor, likes it some defense spending in the home district/state.

Served and drank with "Cowboy" Long at RODN. He was good people. Godspeed.

New Auto-Ordnance M-1 carbine or Ruger Mini-14? I had an M-1 carbine (fcuk why did I sell it?!). No experience with the Ruger. Any opinions based on experience?

SAC as a nuclear weapon babysitter was great. SAC as a combat force willing to face its operational weaknesses, not so much. A high alert rate was God. Whatever it took to keep the board green at 97% or better was all. Didn't matter if numbers had to be fudged. Personal observation from 4+ years pulling alert. YMMV. TAC actually went for its own set of mini-nuke bombers - F-100, F-105, B-66, etc, etc. US Navy as well - A-3, A-4, etc. Air Defense Command did the interceptors (F-101, F-102, F-106) with, of course, SAC having its own long-range escort fighters in the inventory for a while. The fact that those faux nuke fighters performed so valiantly in Vietnam is a tribute to the aircrews and support folks determined to get the job done. Those in command, however, screwed the pooch in the main. I wouldn't bring back SAC or TAC. I would have nuclear wings in the same combat command as iron droppers and hold them to the proper standards for nuke surety. I wouldn't have those assets in a swing role. I would hold a wing commander responsible for executing his/her mission. If in peacetime, pass a realistic ORI or retire. In combat, get the job done or retire. We've got some great hardware. Some being the key word. We don't have nearly enough. A lot of it is really, really old. A full on fight with, say, China, will go through our ranks and leave us exhausted with them saying "I've got plenty more." Perhaps this discussion should be moved to a separate thread vice derailing this one? It's related, but also not.

Here's a wild idea: Both TAC and SAC sucked. SAC because it was a "read a step, do a step, get a banana" mentality designed specifically for going toe to toe with Ivan and not really able to do anything else well. Until B-52s were converted to the iron bomb mission for Southeast Asia for the tactical guys. I'd submit that the BUFFS did the trucking bombs mission really well (save for their same way, same day tactics courtesy SAC) but that the tactical guys didn't run the war all that well and they were the ones in charge. TAC, for much of its existance, didn't really have a pot to piss in and took the scraps of budget left over from SAC. It also had it's own nuclear mission that consumed much of its time and attention to the detriment of air-to-air and air-to-ground with little bombs. The results were paid in blood in Vietnam until those lessons were learned again. ACC (TAC ate SAC) was a good compromise unless you were a SAC crewdog (bomber, tanker, or missiles) in which case you were auto-hosed just because you were on the losing team. Not cool. DESERT STORM was a great showcase for the USAF showing it had it's sh1t together. Fighters and bombers played well together doing the jobs best suited for each. I don't think this is nearly the same USAF as then. It's a lot smaller, it's a lot more worn out, but a lot more combat experienced (in COIN and CAS, not so much against a contemporary, capable foe). How about a command where if you can make things go "boom," you're in regardless of the size of the explosion? If you directly support things that go "boom," you are in. If you haul sh1t, you are in. If you put stuff together, you are in. If you cook chow or patrol the flight line, you are in. If you do a good job at your job, you move up. If you don't, you are shown the door. Separate MAJCOMS, for the most part, are jobs for the generals. Use the NAFs, maybe, if a intermediate command between the COCOMS and Air Staff is required. A lot more bang could be had with the same bucks used. Crazy, I know. But gosh darn it, it just might work. C'mon kids, let's dance...

Dang, there you go again; putting facts into the discussion. Pilots (and navs) wouldn't exaggerate for effect. And those slacker PJs, special tactics guys, gunners, FEs, loads, et al, just sit around with their snack jars of paste waiting for someone to fix it for them.

Awww, you airplane guys are funny. CEP with a Mk 12A, now THAT's a CEP...

"2" to the above. You made the cut for IDE in residence. You, apparently, want to stay in up to 20. By showing your cards, you lose the support of those who did so and will become the fodder for whatever POS assignment/TDY/deployment/bad deal that Randolph and/or your unit(s) will come up with. If you are going for the full ride to retirement, think long and hard about this decision. My advice is that you will make your remaining time harder on yourself for no real reason. Besides, do the numbers for an O-4 vs. O-5 retirement.

Yep, didn't think $8K+ was a bargain but had never been in the market for one either. Would be cool to make my own "technical" for lovely DC. And I recognized the hardware in the avatar. Nice!

Saw a Barrett (used) going for $8,400-ish at "The Nation's Gun Show" outside DC yesterday. I guess if I ever win the lottery, that'll be on the list.

200 rounds of .44 special showed up three days from ordering via Georgia Arms. Sweet! Will give the other recommendations a try as well. Mucho thanks for the advice.

Thanks for the point outs. My google search was simply hits without any validation. I will check these places out.

On-line ammo? Ok, I've apparently exhausted the supply of .44 special (4 boxes of 50) in a 50 NM radius. Having checked, I think, the applicable Virginia laws, I believe I can order ammo and have it delivered to my home. Any reputable/proven vendors used by anyone here?