 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeArticlesDiving DestinationsLearning Scuba DivingMarine LifeMiscellaneousDiscussion GroupsGeneralScuba EquipmentScuba LocationsAustralian ScubaUK ScubaDirectoryScuba Clubs |
Scuba Forum / General / July 2006Doria claims another
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/07/11/D8IPJ5V82.html > http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/07/11/D8IPJ5V82.html Sad. The Mt. Rainier (thanks Jammer!) of diving claims another one. :( It says that dude dove the Titanic! That must be one big assed set of doubles. > > http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/07/11/D8IPJ5V82.html > Sad. The Mt. Rainier (thanks Jammer!) of diving claims another one. > :( > It says that dude dove the Titanic! That must be one big assed set of > doubles. $38,900.00 and you can too; http://www.adventures.ca/gasnet/1250-3.htm > It says that dude dove the Titanic! That must be one big assed set of > doubles. He was a CCr diver - Inspiration I believe > > It says that dude dove the Titanic! That must be one big assed set of > > doubles. > > He was a CCr diver - Inspiration I believe I heard it on the local radio this morning; he lived locally here in NJ. Google News brings up several reports... "David A. Bright, an internationally renowned authority on the sinking of the Andrea Doria who was helping lead preparations to commemorate the disaster's 50th anniversary later this month, collapsed and died on Saturday after making a dive into the wreck of the ship, about 60 miles south of Nantucket. He was 49 and lived in Flemington, N.J..." Rest of the article can be found here: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/11/us/11bright.html The general summary appears to be that he surfaced from his dive, boarded, and then collapsed. The apparent diveplan was that he was intending to go down to see if the keel of the Andrea Doria had been breached by the Stockholm's bow. It virtually goes without saying that he would have been on Mix, but it is unclear if he was OC or CC for this particular dive. David was president of the Nautical Research Group (http://www.nauticalresearch.com/); there's another page there with his general background and qualifications. Overall, he was clearly highly qualified for this dive, for in addition to 100+ dives on the Andrea Doria, he had also worked for NOAA for two years doing research dives on the USS Monitor, etc. Clearly well respected and as the organizer of the forthcoming 50th Anniversary services for the 'Doria, clearly someone who was giving back to his community. He will be missed. -hh > It says that dude dove the Titanic! That must be one big assed set of > doubles. It's at 12,460 ft... 377.6 ATMs... 5550 psi... Not only would it have to be a big a.s set of doubles, but a rather high pressure set also... You would need less than 0.4% O2 in the tank to keep the PPO2 below 1.5... Perhaps an interesting theoretical calculation, but I would not want to have to stake my life on the O2 analyzer being *that* accurate... Hmmm... I wonder what the deco time for that woiuld be assuming you are complete saturated... > > It says that dude dove the Titanic! That must be one big assed set of > > doubles. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > accurate... Hmmm... I wonder what the deco time for that woiuld be > assuming you are complete saturated... I'd assume that this would be a multi-mix dive since I would think it would be really hard to live long enough to get deep enough for the .4% O2 to become able to sustain life. Of course, I've never taken a mix class, nor have I made a dive deeper than 45-50 feet. > I'd assume that this would be a multi-mix dive since I would think it > would > be really hard to live long enough to get deep enough for the .4% O2 to > become able to sustain life. A reasonable assumption. > Of course, I've never taken a mix class, nor have I made a dive deeper > than 45-50 feet. Wow. You need to get yourself down to Florida, where we'll take you on one of those high tech dives to 60 or 80 feet. A slow progression is a good idea, but it's probably time to stretch your limits a little and colorful Florida reefs, while we still have some of them, is a good place to do it. Lee > > I'd assume that this would be a multi-mix dive since I would think it > > would [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Wow. You need to get yourself down to Florida, where we'll take you on one > of those high tech dives to 60 or 80 feet. I thought that some of you guys may be surprised at my lack of experience. My max depth would have been 25 feet, but I got to make a few dives in Jamaica that extended it down somewhat. > A slow progression is a good idea, but it's probably time to stretch your > limits a little and colorful Florida reefs, while we still have some of > them, is a good place to do it. It's definitely on my want list (along with Cozumel), but it's hard to schedule something like that around my wife's work schedule. The last two years she has made living by teaching special ed classes and coaching junior high athletics. In the summer (the natural "vacation" time, she works as the high adventure director at a summer camp. There is normally a week off between the end of summer camp and the beginning of teacher inservice, but not necessarily. This year, she won't be coaching so her schdedule should be a little more flexible (but not by a lot). I can pretty much take off whenever I want (assuming that the other guy who can deal with the computers is not on vacation), so trips like that only require that Janeen is able to get time off (normally, we have to schedule vacations during her "break" periods... winter break, spring break, summer break). Word is, she may be making a trip to Ecuador in the not too distant future (leaving me at home to fend for myself for another week or two). If that's the case, It'll make it a bit easier for me to justify making paltry little trips to places like Florida when she can't go. :-) > I thought that some of you guys may be surprised at my lack of experience. > My max depth would have been 25 feet, but I got to make a few dives in > Jamaica that extended it down somewhat. I'm not sure I'd call it a lack of experience. I think I'd add a qualifier like "experience with deeper dives." At the recreational level, the planning is a bit different and the need to keep things like gas supply and your no deco limit is a bit greater, but, diving is diving, if you know what I mean. >> A slow progression is a good idea, but it's probably time to stretch your >> limits a little and colorful Florida reefs, while we still have some of >> them, is a good place to do it. > It's definitely on my want list (along with Cozumel), but it's hard to > schedule something like that around my wife's work schedule. The last two [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Janeen is able to get time off (normally, we have to schedule vacations > during her "break" periods... winter break, spring break, summer break). You need to encourage your wife to schedule an occasional "Girl's Night Out" to justify your occasional bonding with the guys dive trip. You'd be hard pressed to find a better place than right here in S. Florida to go. You already have friends here that don't give a damn how shallow (pun intended) your experience is as long as you dive safely. OK, we're not going to encourage you to join us at the bottom of the Oriskany, or even the Spiegel Grove, but there are plenty of places we dive that you'd enjoy and be welcome. We don't always dive to 140 fsw or more. > Word is, she may be making a trip to Ecuador in the not too distant future > (leaving me at home to fend for myself for another > week or two). If that's the case, It'll make it a bit easier for me to > justify making paltry little trips to places like Florida when she > can't go. :-) Give us as much notice as you can. Some of us still work for a living. Lee > > I thought that some of you guys may be surprised at my lack of experience. > > My max depth would have been 25 feet, but I got to make a few dives in [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > your no deco limit is a bit greater, but, diving is diving, if you know what > I mean. Considering that the extent of my dive experience comes from Balmorhea State park (around 20-25 days of diving... most days include multiple dives), the Odessa College swimming pool (for training purposes), the Texas A&M swimming pool/dive tank (for training purposes... I didn't finish the class the first time because other things came up), Jamaica (less than 10 dives), and some minor repair work/cleaning at the bottom of the swimming pool at the local Boy Scout Camp (less than 10' deep, so I don't really count those as dives), I'd say definite lack of expereince. Overall, I've got less than 75 actual dives under my belt including my OW check out dives. The vast majority of those dives are in exactly the same conditions (or, at least, close enough) so they could be lumped together as far as experience goes. I spend a lot of time at Balmorhea practicing skills, so my OW skillset is pretty good. I still need some work with my bouyancy control (I spend WAY too much time adjusting my BC), but overall I think I'm decent in most areas. > >> A slow progression is a good idea, but it's probably time to stretch your > >> limits a little and colorful Florida reefs, while we still have some of [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > You need to encourage your wife to schedule an occasional "Girl's Night Out" > to justify your occasional bonding with the guys dive trip. That's a pretty good idea, except that she doesn't really have any "girl" friends. For that matter, most of her friends are actually just my friends that she hangs out with. For the most part, I'm free to do whatever I want and she's free to do whatever she wants, but I'd feel bad spending our money on a trip that she didn't get to go on. If she goes to Ecuador without me, that changes things though. > You'd be hard > pressed to find a better place than right here in S. Florida to go. Of that I have little doubt. Pricing is right, transportation isn't unreasonable, diving is great (from what I've heard) and the people seem to be pretty nice too. > You > already have friends here that don't give a damn how shallow (pun intended) > your experience is as long as you dive safely. I guess I'm out then. ;-) I'd hate to show up and have everybody make fun of me for diving my Zeagle Ranger instead of a BP/W and actually using a standard octo instead of a necklace. :-) I chose the Ranger because it had all of the features I was looking for when I was looking, namely, lots of shiny D-rings and a relatively hefty price tag. :-) The Tusa fins may be a source of ribbing as well. They were the cheapest open heel fins I could find when I was getting certified and I haven't seen the need to change them since. I'm not especially happy with them, but I'm not unhappy either. They get the job done for hte type of diving I've experienced so far. That may change when I experience some "real" diving. > OK, we're not going to > encourage you to join us at the bottom of the Oriskany, or even the Spiegel > Grove, but there are plenty of places we dive that you'd enjoy and be > welcome. We don't always dive to 140 fsw or more. ahhh... I don't get to dive deep? You guys are no fun. ;-) > > Word is, she may be making a trip to Ecuador in the not too distant future > > (leaving me at home to fend for myself for another [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Give us as much notice as you can. Some of us still work for a living. I know the feeling (working for a living). When my wife gets home from camp we'll see what her schedule looks like and figure out if and when we can afford to go. If she can come, I'd love to make it a family vacation. If not, I may just have to come alone. It may turn into a Dive with Chris, but I'd hate to take some of the thunder away from the Dive with Gregs > I still need some work with my bouyancy control (I spend WAY too much time > adjusting my BC), but overall I think I'm decent in most areas. You definitely need to visit S. Florida. Buoyancy control is so much easier when your weighting is spot on and you don't have wet or drysuit issues to deal with. > That's a pretty good idea, except that she doesn't really have any "girl" > friends. For that matter, most of her friends are actually just my [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > me, > that changes things though. Then you either need to encourage her to get some girl friends or forget my idea. I don't recommend you encourage her to go out with your friends without you. That might not be a problem, but it sounds risky to me. > Of that I have little doubt. Pricing is right, transportation isn't > unreasonable, diving is great (from what I've heard) and the people seem > to > be pretty nice too. Actually, most of us are a.sholes, but we are on our best behavior when visited by those we like. > I'd hate to show up and have everybody make fun of me for diving my Zeagle > Ranger instead of a BP/W and actually using a standard octo instead of a [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > I > experience some "real" diving. Any ribbing you get will be good natured. Safe diving does not depend on a specific choice of gear . . . within reason, of course. >> OK, we're not going to encourage you to join us at the bottom of the >> Oriskany, or even the Spiegel >> Grove, but there are plenty of places we dive that you'd enjoy and be >> welcome. We don't always dive to 140 fsw or more. > ahhh... I don't get to dive deep? You guys are no fun. ;-) You can dive deep, we're just not going to encourage you. >> Give us as much notice as you can. Some of us still work for a living. > I know the feeling (working for a living). When my wife gets home from > camp > we'll see what her schedule looks like and figure out if and when we can > afford to go. If she can come, I'd love to make it a family vacation. If > not, I may just have to come alone. > It may turn into a Dive with Chris, but I'd hate to take some of the > thunder > away from the Dive with Gregs. Greg has been honored more than he deserves. Dive with Greg I probably should have been Dive with Lee I, just as Dive with Greg II should have been Dive with Magilla I. We both took pity on him. Lawyers don't make friends easily. A dive with Chris will be a welcome change. Lee > > I still need some work with my bouyancy control (I spend WAY too much time > > adjusting my BC), but overall I think I'm decent in most areas. > > You definitely need to visit S. Florida. Buoyancy control is so much easier > when your weighting is spot on and you don't have wet or drysuit issues to > deal with. Does a dive skin count against bouyancy? That's all I generally wear. > Then you either need to encourage her to get some girl friends or forget my > idea. I don't recommend you encourage her to go out with your friends > without you. That might not be a problem, but it sounds risky to me. She doesn't normally get along real well with other girls. Not because there are problems, but because she doesn't have much in common with them. She was a tomboy growing up and she never really grew out of it. It's not a problem. I think that most of my friends are actually asexual. :-) Occasionally, she'll hang out with some of my female friends (without me), but it's pretty rare. I've been considering encouraging her to pick a night to have a weekly get-together with them. That would give me and "the boys" to go play poker or something and not feel bad about her getting left behind. > > Of that I have little doubt. Pricing is right, transportation isn't > > unreasonable, diving is great (from what I've heard) and the people seem [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Actually, most of us are a.sholes, but we are on our best behavior when > visited by those we like. So, it's pretty much the same as everywhere else... :-) > > I'd hate to show up and have everybody make fun of me for diving my Zeagle > > Ranger instead of a BP/W and actually using a standard octo instead of a [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Any ribbing you get will be good natured. Safe diving does not depend on a > specific choice of gear . . . within reason, of course. I know, I was kidding. > >> OK, we're not going to encourage you to join us at the bottom of the > >> Oriskany, or even the Spiegel [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > You can dive deep, we're just not going to encourage you. Oh, that's okay then. :-) > Greg has been honored more than he deserves. Dive with Greg I probably > should have been Dive with Lee I, just as Dive with Greg II should have been > Dive with Magilla I. We both took pity on him. Lawyers don't make friends > easily. I thought that might be the case, but I'd hate to bruise his fragile ego. :-) > A dive with Chris will be a welcome change. Hopefully, it will become a Dive with Chris and Janeen. Trips alsways seem to be better when she's along. > Does a dive skin count against bouyancy? That's all I generally wear. Not usually. The very thin neoprene ones probably have some effect, but not enough to worry about. If all you're wearing is a skin and you're still having problems with constant buoancy adjustments, something is probably wrong. The most likely thing is your weighting. Carrying too much weight forces you to carry more gas in your BCD. The more gas you carry in your BCD, the more it contracts and expands with changes in depth and the more you have to adjust for buoyancy changes. The problem is most noticable at shallower depths where the volume changes by the greatest percentage per change in depth. From 33 feet to the surface, the volume changes by 100%. Between 99 and 66 feet, it only changes by 25%. Gosh I hope I got that right. At any rate, the deeper you are, the less noticable the change is. What you are experiencing is something that needs to be adjusted for, in the range where it's most noticable, an annoying combination at best. > She doesn't normally get along real well with other girls. Not because > there are problems, but because she doesn't have much in common with them. > She was a tomboy growing up and she never really grew out of it. Doesn't sound like a problem to me. All good women were tomboys at one time. The best ones still are. Star, are you still a tomboy? > I know, I was kidding. I know. I was too. > Hopefully, it will become a Dive with Chris and Janeen. Trips alsways > seem > to be better when she's along. I understand completely. If that works for you, it certainly works for me. Maybe it will give me a way to get my wife back in the water. She had a scary experience a few years ago and has not been diving since. Lee > Doesn't sound like a problem to me. All good women were tomboys at one > time. The best ones still are. > > Star, are you still a tomboy? define "tomboy." I have 2 bikes (the kind with pedals - mountain and road) and use them regularly. I hike/cllimb, run, and obviously dive. I own 2 handguns. I have regular manicures and wear heels. Does that work? > I understand completely. If that works for you, it certainly works for me. > Maybe it will give me a way to get my wife back in the water. She had a > scary experience a few years ago and has not been diving since. Oh dear. Lemme have her. * , who does spend time with spouse's diver-friends occasionally because he knows I am quite safe with them. > I have 2 bikes (the kind with pedals - mountain and road) and use them > regularly. I hike/cllimb, run, and obviously dive. I own 2 handguns. > I have regular manicures and wear heels. Does that work? I figured. Only 2 handguns? What calibers? >> I understand completely. If that works for you, it certainly works for >> me. >> Maybe it will give me a way to get my wife back in the water. She had a >> scary experience a few years ago and has not been diving since. > Oh dear. Lemme have her. Would that I could. A few years ago, we were diving up in Boynton Beach, where pretty much everything is drift diving. Jayna, I and some diving friend of ours hit the water and, like always, I immediately dropped below the surface. I sometimes get seasick on the surface. It doesn't stop anything, but people tend not to want to share a regulator with someone they just watched chum. Whoever we were with did the same. Jayna couldn't. Her weight belt was still on the boat that, by then, was moving away to drop the next group of divers. She got their attention, but before she did, she freaked enough to bite right through her moutpiece. I was directly below here the entire time, but she had no way of knowing. I got back up before the boat returned and helped her get her weightbelt on, but the damage was done. She finished the dive using her alternate and has not been diving since. She's not freaked, you understand, at least not in her mind, she just doesn't feel like going diving today . . . every time we go diving. If she's only face the fact that her experience made her nervous, there'd be no problem getting her past it. I've go no plan for dealing with "I don't feel like it." It lets me dive with people and in ways and places that she would not chose, but it also puts a bit of a crimp in our live aboard and other dive travel. The shame of it is, she's a natural at diving. Lee > > I have 2 bikes (the kind with pedals - mountain and road) and use them > > regularly. I hike/cllimb, run, and obviously dive. I own 2 handguns. > > I have regular manicures and wear heels. Does that work? > > I figured. Only 2 handguns? What calibers? 9 mm semi; 48. Spouse owns a few too, if that counts. > >> I understand completely. If that works for you, it certainly works for > >> me. [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > not chose, but it also puts a bit of a crimp in our live aboard and other > dive travel. The shame of it is, she's a natural at diving. Well, foo. Lemme have her. A few years is a long time. Have you gotten a new mouthpiece for her yet? * >> I figured. Only 2 handguns? What calibers? > 9 mm semi; 48. Spouse owns a few too, if that counts. Immediately go out an buy a .22. Adult ownership of a .22 indicates a true desire to shoot. Get a good one. Did you mean .45, 38, or am I the one that's not enough of a tomboy? Given that you have some of your own, your husband's guns count . . . provided you go out and buy a .22. > Well, foo. Lemme have her. A few years is a long time. Have you > gotten a new mouthpiece for her yet? Well duh . . . she's my favorite dive buddy. Of course I got her a new mouthpiece. Lee > >> I figured. Only 2 handguns? What calibers? > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Did you mean .45, 38, or am I the one that's not enough of a tomboy? .45. Tomboys can't type :-) > Given that you have some of your own, your husband's guns count . . . > provided you go out and buy a .22. Recommendations? > > Well, foo. Lemme have her. A few years is a long time. Have you > > gotten a new mouthpiece for her yet? > > Well duh . . . she's my favorite dive buddy. Of course I got her a new > mouthpiece. Nice guy :-) * >> Given that you have some of your own, your husband's guns count . . . >> provided you go out and buy a .22. > > Recommendations? Get a .22 WMR (Winchester Magnum Rimfire), preferably an 8 shot revolver with an alloy frame. The gun shoots inexpensive .22s for fun, .22 mags for a 42% one shot stop self defense, and makes a great lightweight camping/backpacking pistol. >> Recommendations? > Get a .22 WMR (Winchester Magnum Rimfire), preferably an 8 shot revolver > with an alloy frame. > The gun shoots inexpensive .22s for fun, .22 mags for a 42% one shot stop > self defense, and makes a great lightweight camping/backpacking pistol. I like the way Popeye thinks. I'm a wheel gun man from way back and the gun he describes is very cool. If I didn't already have more guns than I can stay in practice with, I'd probably be at the gun store this afternoon following up on his suggestion. Because I don't have a lot of use for a .22 WRM round, I had not kind of forgotten about them. As I recall, Ruger makes a nice one just like Popeye describes. On the other hand, shooting a quality autoloader is fun in ways different from shooting a revolver and generally better for competition. I've only taken my .22 revolver to the range once since I bought my Browning, about a month ago, and I've been at the range at least three days a week during that period. If you're lucky enough to live somewhere that allows you to go out into a big field somewhere and shoot tin cans, something that I'm no longer allowed to do anywhere down here, you may also find that the joy of keeping a can in, or nearly in the air with an autoloader is a joy you don't want to miss. Lee > >> Recommendations? > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Lee Oh goodie. Will have to try this technique. I think the semiautomatic would work for this, for 10 shots anyhow. I actually prefer the semiautomatic to a revolver, for protection at close range. I've heard stories of revolvers jamming when needed. If I have to put a hollowpoint into someone, I want to know for certain that it will actually get there. Dang, I sound wicked this AM. Lemme go get more coffee. * > I actually prefer the semiautomatic to a revolver, for protection at > close range. I've heard stories of revolvers jamming when needed. If > I have to put a hollowpoint into someone, I want to know for certain > that it will actually get there. > Dang, I sound wicked this AM. Lemme go get more coffee. > > * Ruger MkII or a MKIII 45. The ruger site is down this AM or I would link you to the goods. Plus, you know a guy that can make these pistols very nice, up to and including accessories so as not to disturb the neighbors when you off their cat. > > I actually prefer the semiautomatic to a revolver, for protection at > > close range. I've heard stories of revolvers jamming when needed. If [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > including accessories so as not to disturb the neighbors when you off their > cat. That's disgusting. I've never shot anything alive, nor do I intend to. Quiet would be nice, though; like to protect my hearing. Unless of course its someone who is threatening my immediate safety. * > That's disgusting. I've never shot anything alive, nor do I intend to. It's a joke Lu, relax. It's been years since I shot a cat. > Quiet would be nice, though; like to protect my hearing. Number one reason people buy them. In France and other parts of Europe, if you can have a gun, you can have a suppressor. Here you have to have a license, some states dont allow personal ownership, and all that does *zero* to keep suppressors out of the haqnds of people who would use them for criminal activity. > Unless of course its someone who is threatening my immediate safety. You have better pistols for that already. .22's are for fun. This is the Buck Mark I bought recently. It was the only one Bass Pro Shops had in stock. Click on the picture to enlarge it and look at the front sight. In my opinion, it's superior to any of the blade sights I've seen. Not all Buck Marks come with it. The scope, which I think is actually a red dot, does not come with the gun. I mounted a 2x Weaver on mine which is a bit longer than the one shown. With the see through rings, it sits about as high as the one in the picture. http://www.browning.com/products/catalog/firearms/detail.asp?value=006B&cat_id=0 51&type_id=403 This is a link to three pages of Buck Mark pistols. There are quite a few models including one very much like the Ruger Scott referenced. http://www.browning.com/products/catalog/firearms/category.asp?value=006B Lee >> That's disgusting. I've never shot anything alive, nor do I intend to. > > It's a joke Lu, relax. It's been years since I shot a cat. I switched to microwaving years ago- saves ammo. > >> That's disgusting. I've never shot anything alive, nor do I intend to. > > > > It's a joke Lu, relax. It's been years since I shot a cat. > > I switched to microwaving years ago- saves ammo. We have Engulf and Devour Inc. now days, and they keep the yard and surrounding area pretty much cat free. >> >> That's disgusting. I've never shot anything alive, nor do I intend >> >> to. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > We have Engulf and Devour Inc. now days, and they keep the yard and > surrounding area pretty much cat free. <snicker> I had a roommate in the 80's that used to pick up cats while delivering pizza and feed them to his Doberman. > >> That's disgusting. I've never shot anything alive, nor do I intend to. > > > > It's a joke Lu, relax. It's been years since I shot a cat. > > I switched to microwaving years ago- saves ammo. Arrrrrrrrggghhhhh. * >> > It's a joke Lu, relax. It's been years since I shot a cat. >> >> I switched to microwaving years ago- saves ammo. > > Arrrrrrrrggghhhhh. 48" 40 caliber blowgun, more of a challenge, quiet. Nothing wasted, General Tso's Kitten. >>> > It's a joke Lu, relax. It's been years since I shot a cat. >>> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Nothing wasted, General Tso's Kitten. I just read that three times before shooting a pickle through my left nostril. That'll burn for a damn week. >> 48" 40 caliber blowgun, more of a challenge, quiet. >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > That'll burn for a damn week. Glad you weren't sipping on something with more burn involved..... ;-) On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 00:56:22 GMT, "\"Magilla\"" <cavey_curtis@$$ yahoo.com> wrote: > 48" 40 caliber blowgun, more of a challenge, quiet. Hooked to a SCUBA tank for an air supply? >> 48" 40 caliber blowgun, more of a challenge, quiet. > > Hooked to a SCUBA tank for an air supply? That would work, or just run a hose over to Hot Air Boob. > >> That's disgusting. I've never shot anything alive, nor do I intend to. > > > > It's a joke Lu, relax. It's been years since I shot a cat. > > I switched to microwaving years ago- saves ammo. You have to kill, clean and skin them BEFORE you put them in the microwave. They taste funny if you leave the hair on while cooking. >>>>That's disgusting. I've never shot anything alive, nor do I intend to. >>> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > You have to kill, clean and skin them BEFORE you put them in the microwave. > They taste funny if you leave the hair on while cooking. and they stink up the kitchen. > It's a joke Lu, relax. It's been years since I shot a cat. Hmmm... That would be right before you got your two Akitas, right? > > It's a joke Lu, relax. It's been years since I shot a cat. > > Hmmm... That would be right before you got your two Akitas, right? In that neighborhhod... > That's disgusting. I've never shot anything alive, nor do I intend to. What about the cat who thinks that the hood of your new car makes a nice scratching post? My philosophy is that if it is on my property, it's fair game... People and animals alike... >> If you're lucky enough to live somewhere that allows you to go out into a >> big field somewhere and shoot tin cans, something that I'm no longer >> allowed >> to do anywhere down here, you may also find that the joy of keeping a can >> in, or nearly in the air with an autoloader is a joy you don't want to >> miss. > Oh goodie. Will have to try this technique. I think the semiautomatic > would work for this, for 10 shots anyhow. It's a lot of fun. Easier with a rifle than a pistol, at least for me, but it's fun either way. Kind of like Quigley and the oak bucket he hit twice in a couple of seconds . . . only faster and less expensive. > I actually prefer the semiautomatic to a revolver, for protection at > close range. I've heard stories of revolvers jamming when needed. If > I have to put a hollowpoint into someone, I want to know for certain > that it will actually get there. All firearms have a malfunction mode. If the cylinder can't turn, either because of a sprung frame, blockage, dirt under the star, or whatever, the gun won't fire. You want to keep from getting shot, grab the gun from the top and clamp down on the cylinder. Hold on hard and shoot with your other hand. Keep shooting until the assailant quits moving or you run out of shots. With autoloaders, the failure mode is similar. If the slide is not fully forward, most weapons will not fire. Instead of grabbing the cylinder, grab the slide and push. Keep pushing while you, once again, empty whatever you have into the assailant. Personally, I would not chose a .22 as a defense weapon. On the other hand, even a .22 short is better than nothing and even my pump pellet gun can be deadly if the shot is right. Lee > I actually prefer the semiautomatic to a revolver, for protection at > close range. I've heard stories of revolvers jamming when needed. You've got that way backward. The SA is a better target weapon, and more fun to shoot, but bigger, heavier, possibly less reliable, and probably doesn't come in the magnum caliber, although I don't know that to be a fact. > If I have to put a hollowpoint into someone, I want to know for certain > that it will actually get there. Revolvers (of quality manufacture) don't jam, period. Automatics can, any automatic, sometimes due not to a malfunction of the pistol, but from poor ammo, or a bad magazine. > Dang, I sound wicked this AM. Lemme go get more coffee. > > * >... > The SA is a better target weapon, and more fun to shoot, but bigger, >heavier, possibly less reliable, and probably doesn't come in the magnum >caliber, although I don't know that to be a fact. >... I have a Ruger Single Six which came with a cylinder for LR and one for magnum. Just a data point. (For those who are unfamiliar, a Ruger Single Six is a single action six shot .22 revolver.) Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA ghekhuis@earthlink.net We'll cross that bridge when it rears its ugly head > >... > > The SA is a better target weapon, and more fun to shoot, but bigger, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > magnum. Just a data point. (For those who are unfamiliar, a Ruger Single > Six is a single action six shot .22 revolver.) That's the revolver Pops is talking about. >> >... >> > The SA is a better target weapon, and more fun to shoot, but bigger, [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > That's the revolver Pops is talking about. Naw, the one I had was a Charter Arms, $120 new in '83. I had to toss it. :-) I got a Navy .44, the only single action revolver I own, and a Contender, and a .22 WMR derringer. The rest are O-Frames. > I have a Ruger Single Six which came with a cylinder for LR and one for > magnum. Just a data point. (For those who are unfamiliar, a Ruger Single > Six is a single action six shot .22 revolver.) I seem to remember a company that made a 10 shot .22LR revolver... Don't remember which company off the top of my head... The .357 revolver that I have is a 7 shot one and is definitely compact enough for concealed carry... At that time, it seemed that most of the concealed carry models were 5 shot... > > I have a Ruger Single Six which came with a cylinder for LR and one for > > magnum. Just a data point. (For those who are unfamiliar, a Ruger Single > > Six is a single action six shot .22 revolver.) > I seem to remember a company that made a 10 shot .22LR revolver... > Don't remember which company off the top of my head... Harrington and Richardson. > The .357 revolver that I have is a 7 shot one and is definitely > compact enough for concealed carry... At that time, it seemed that > most of the concealed carry models were 5 shot... Smith makes a stainless 8 shot with a 3" bbl. I had a 4" Smith Model 57 that would start brushfires. With the Pachmayr grips, it didnt feel like an N frame. >> I seem to remember a company that made a 10 shot .22LR revolver... >> Don't remember which company off the top of my head... > > Harrington and Richardson. 9 shot, break top, around for a long time. > Smith makes a stainless 8 shot with a 3" bbl. Damn... Looks like I might be buying another .357... >> Smith makes a stainless 8 shot with a 3" bbl. > >Damn... Looks like I might be buying another .357... I wouldn't carry it. It weighs 29 ounces empty and a person shouldn't need 8 rounds with a .357. If they do, they need more range time. > I wouldn't carry it. It weighs 29 ounces empty and a person shouldn't > need 8 rounds with a .357. If they do, they need more range time. Never said that I would carry it... Of all the guns in my collection, only a couple actually get any real use... Most of them were just impulse purchases because I liked them for some reason -- perhaps they had some neat feature that I wanted -- or perhaps I just came across a good deal on it... Some of them were just because they were going to be banned by the Brady Bill... > I wouldn't carry it. It weighs 29 ounces empty and a person shouldn't > need 8 rounds with a .357. If they do, they need more range time. ...or fewer enemies. :-) In actuality, if you're going to follow the philosophy of engaging with controlled pairs, since the P(h) for PDW's is often very poor when the shooter is stressed, you can generally figure on needing four rounds per target in order to get one successful critical hit. -hh > > I wouldn't carry it. It weighs 29 ounces empty and a person shouldn't > > need 8 rounds with a .357. If they do, they need more range time. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > shooter is stressed, you can generally figure on needing four rounds > per target in order to get one successful critical hit. Plus, if you follow the rule of thirds you should really have at least 12 rounds total. :-) > -hh > >> Smith makes a stainless 8 shot with a 3" bbl. > > > >Damn... Looks like I might be buying another .357... > > I wouldn't carry it. It weighs 29 ounces empty and a person shouldn't > need 8 rounds with a .357. If they do, they need more range time. Need is such a harsh word. Did you read about the old lady who shot the intruder fourteen times? When asked at the trial why she shot him 14 times, she responded "Well, I thought that maybe there was someone else in the house and needed to save a bullet in case I was right." > The SA is a better target weapon, and more fun to shoot, but bigger, > heavier, possibly less reliable, and probably doesn't come in the magnum > caliber, although I don't know that to be a fact. My single action Rugers are certainly bigger. I'm not sure they're heavier, but they may be. They're as reliable as anything I know of. As far as I know, the Ruger single action guns were the first to come in multiple caliber options. Several models came with more than one cylinder. I'm almost positive that a .22 LR / .22 WMR was one of them. > Automatics can (jam), any automatic, sometimes due not to a malfunction of > the pistol, but from poor ammo, or a bad magazine. It doesn't have to be something wrong. It can simply be something inappropriate. For example, my Colt Government Model .380 and my Kel Tec .380 will both chamber just about any round I can put in them. My AMT, won't chamber anything but round nosed bullets. I've yet to find any hollow point it will accept. Another example is the target rounds I loaded for my H&K USP. They were a reduced load recommended by several competitive shooters. What they failed to mention is that the reduced load worked best with a lighter recoil spring. The first round fired fine, but did not generate enough recoil to completely eject the spend case, let alone chamber the next round. I suppose the exercise is good for me, but taking bullets apart after putting them together is not something I want to get better at. With a revolver, the problem has to be something relatively serious. A broken gun will do it. Sometimes an improperly crimped bullet will too. The recoil can work just like my inertial bullet puller. If it does, the round may protrude far enough to keep the cylinder from turning. Everybody that reloads, even us novices, knows this, so it's not a common problem. The only time I've ever had a revolver fail, it was from lack of maintenance. I failed to clean under the ejection star. Eventually, stuff built up to the point where, when closed, the cylinder bound against the frame. Lesson learned. Lee >> The SA is a better target weapon, and more fun to shoot, but bigger, >> heavier, possibly less reliable, and probably doesn't come in the magnum >> caliber, although I don't know that to be a fact. > > My single action Rugers are certainly bigger. I'm not sure they're > heavier, but they may be. They're as reliable as anything I know of. I -do- stand corrected here, but most people consider single action revolvers a different species than double action. > As far as I know, the Ruger single action guns were the first to come in > multiple caliber options. Several models came with more than one > cylinder. I'm almost positive that a .22 LR / .22 WMR was one of them. I don't know which came first, but Smith & Wesson and Colt have always been muti caliber, since the turn of the century. IIRC, the Ruger Single Action really isn't that old, like the 1950's or 60's. I'm almost positive that it's not an ancestor of an original six-gun, like the Colt SAA, for instance. >> Automatics can (jam), any automatic, sometimes due not to a malfunction >> of the pistol, but from poor ammo, or a bad magazine. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > .380 will both chamber just about any round I can put in them. My AMT, > won't chamber anything but round nosed bullets. AMT's 1911A1 is named "The Hardballer" for that very reason. > I've yet to find any hollow point it will accept. Another example is the > target rounds I loaded for my H&K USP. They were a reduced load [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Lee > "Lee Bell" <pleebell2@bellsouth.net> wrote in message >> As far as I know, the Ruger single action guns were the first to come in >> multiple caliber options. Several models came with more than one >> cylinder. I'm almost positive that a .22 LR / .22 WMR was one of them. Re-reading what you said here about multiple cylinders, you may be right. I know some Colt automatics came with .38 and .22 conversion kits for target practice, but I don't remember the details. > > "Lee Bell" <pleebell2@bellsouth.net> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I know some Colt automatics came with .38 and .22 conversion kits for > target practice, but I don't remember the details. I have a friend who used to have the .22LR conversion for the .45. After 3 trips back to Colt for broken links, they sent the weapon back WITHOUT the conversion kit and returned the money he spent to buy it. > I have a friend who used to have the .22LR conversion for the .45. After 3 > trips back to Colt for broken links, they sent the weapon back WITHOUT the > conversion kit and returned the money he spent to buy it. I have a .22 conversion kit for my Colt... Couldn't find one manufactured my Colt, so I ended up getting one that was manufactured by Arthur Ciener... Works good as long as you use the higher velocity .22LRs (e.g. Stingers, Mini-Mags, etc)... Using the typical Remington and Federal promotional loads that you find for around $9-$10 per brick of 500 periodically results in stovepipes... On the other hand, my Ruger Mk-II will digest anything that you feed it without nary a hiccup... Popeye wote > I -do- stand corrected here, but most people consider single action > revolvers a different species than double action. You can include me in the "most people" group. I definitely differentiate between single and double action revolvers. In the autoloader world, Glock muddied the waters. > I don't know which came first, but Smith & Wesson and Colt have always > been multi caliber, since the turn of the century. The turn of the century wasn't all that long ago. I don't know who was first either, but I'm pretty sure Ruger's been making them for at least 30 years. > I'm almost positive that it's not an ancestor of an original six-gun, > like the Colt SAA, for instance. I'm pretty sure you're correct. > AMT's 1911A1 is named "The Hardballer" for that very reason. Figures Lee >>The SA is a better target weapon, and more fun to shoot, but bigger, >>heavier, possibly less reliable, and probably doesn't come in the magnum [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > multiple caliber options. Several models came with more than one cylinder. > I'm almost positive that a .22 LR / .22 WMR was one of them. That's the one I have. It's the Single 6. Very accurate for a revolver. > That's the one I have. It's the Single 6. Very accurate for a > revolver. If you miss, it is your fault. I have scoped the Single Six and it will shoot into a dime at 25 yards off sandbags, with the ammo it likes. >>>The SA is a better target weapon, and more fun to shoot, but bigger, >>>heavier, possibly less reliable, and probably doesn't come in the magnum [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >That's the one I have. It's the Single 6. Very accurate for a >revolver. As opposed to an auto loader? >>>As far as I know, the Ruger single action guns were the first to come in >>>multiple caliber options. Several models came with more than one cylinder. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > As opposed to an auto loader? Depends on the system. An autoloader with a barrel fixed to the frame, like the Ruger Standard, will drive tacks. An autoloader with slides and barrels flapping around is pretty useless, except to spray lead all over the county. Real men duel with muzzle loaders. > Real men duel with muzzle loaders. Like this? http://www.militaryheritage.com/musket9.htm >> Real men duel with muzzle loaders. > Like this? > http://www.militaryheritage.com/musket9.htm Nah, like this. http://www.savagearms.com/muzzleloader_home.htm I'm going to have to talk to Savage about this. The current model has better sights and a better trigger than the gun I bought from them only a short time ago. Mine does, however, share the ability to load smokeless powder and achieve near conventional rifle velocities. Lee > >> Given that you have some of your own, your husband's guns count . . . > >> provided you go out and buy a .22. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > The gun shoots inexpensive .22s for fun, .22 mags for a 42% one shot stop > self defense, and makes a great lightweight camping/backpacking pistol. Ohhhh. Hmmmm. Thanks. Added to the birthday gift wishlist. * >> >> Given that you have some of your own, your husband's guns count . . . >> >> provided you go out and buy a .22. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > * I love my .45s but they're huge. I would recommend this (22WMR) as an alternative self defense weapon (a "back up"). It has -so many- other uses... Lotta utility.  SignaturePopeye "Best thing for him, really, his therapy was going nowhere." -Dr. Hannibal Lector. www.finalprotectivefire.com > I love my .45s but they're huge. I don't recall the one you had in the Keys being all that large. > I would recommend this (22WMR) as an alternative self defense weapon (a > "back up"). I prefer something with a bit more diameter, but different tastes are what make the world go around. > It has -so many- other uses... > Lotta utility. On this, we absolutely agree, which is why I started of by saying Star should go right out and buy a .22. People that really like to shoot, shoot them more often than all other pistol calibers combined. Lee >> I love my .45s but they're huge. > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > should go right out and buy a .22. People that really like to shoot, > shoot them more often than all other pistol calibers combined. Well, when you consider the options: Goal: plinking, varmint, secondary self defense, concealment, light weight for extended backpacking: .22 maybe .25 useless .32 more dangerous to you than them .380 might as well have a 9mm .38 Special see above .38 Special Plus P - honorable mention if you can find alloy .38 Super see above 9mm might as well have a .45 .45 too heavy for back packing, too spendy to shoot volumously. . > .45 too heavy for back packing, too spendy to shoot volumously. Some of the .45s are rather compact... Mine is... Definitely not on the cheap side to shoot as compared to a .22LR... Different mission profiles... That's why a lot of us have so many guns... > Well, when you consider the options: > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > .45 too heavy for back packing, too spendy to shoot volumously. I know Popeye doesn't like this gun very much, but given the criteria and logic the .44 special by Charter Arms is worth mentioning. The early and late model ones get pretty good reviews, the ones made by "Charco" sound pretty disgusting. It's a five shot revolver that only weighs about 20 oz. I think Tarus makes a .44 also but it is much bigger and heavier. Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA ghekhuis@earthlink.net We'll cross that bridge when it rears its ugly head >> .45 too heavy for back packing, too spendy to shoot volumously. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > oz. > I think Tarus makes a .44 also but it is much bigger and heavier. Big bore revolvers just aren't my flavor. That weapon has a stellar reputation with those that own it. But it's pretty big, not cheap to shoot, ect. >>> I love my .45s but they're huge. >> [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > . Hey Popeye. .45s have gotten pretty small. Here's the one I've got. http://tinyurl.com/o7nkr Simple message T-shirt http://tinyurl.com/otjq3 >> .45 too heavy for back packing, too spendy to shoot volumously. >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > http://tinyurl.com/o7nkr Ya, I collect them, 1911A1 variants, and I have a .38 Super that small, 6 round mags and a 2.25 belled barrel, burn the hair off your arm. My carry .45 isn't much bigger. But it isn't what I'd describe as a plinking or camping gun. Or cheap to shoot. Trust me, I have a Colt Tattoo. I love .45s, but it's multiple criteria we're looking at. > Ya, I collect them, 1911A1 variants, and I have a .38 Super that small, 6 > round mags and a 2.25 belled barrel, burn the hair off your arm. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > I love .45s, but it's multiple criteria we're looking at. Go ahead, send him the link to the US&S . >> Ya, I collect them, 1911A1 variants, and I have a .38 Super that small, > 6 [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Go ahead, send him the link to the US&S . :-) SignaturePopeye "Best thing for him, really, his therapy was going nowhere." -Dr. Hannibal Lector. www.finalprotectivefire.com >>> Ya, I collect them, 1911A1 variants, and I have a .38 Super that small, >> 6 [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > :-) so what do you uys think of the steyr M40 :P >>>> Ya, I collect them, 1911A1 variants, and I have a .38 Super that >>>> small, [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > so what do you uys think of the steyr M40 :P One of the best in its day. Marines in the Pacific had Reising M-55s, threw them away, stole Garands from the Army. > Hey Popeye. .45s have gotten pretty small. Here's the one I've got. > http://tinyurl.com/o7nkr Mine's not as small as yours, but it's not all that big either. On the other hand, it is a handfull to shoot. I sincerely wish I had not screwed up and bought the compact instead of the full sized version. I don't normally make mistakes like that. http://www.hecklerkoch-usa.com/index.jsp?loc=101&SITEID=A&PartNumber=704531 Lee > Simple message T-shirt > http://tinyurl.com/otjq3 >> Hey Popeye. .45s have gotten pretty small. Here's the one I've got. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Lee Nice gun Lee. Good set of features. Wayne >> Simple message T-shirt >> http://tinyurl.com/otjq3 Hwæt! "Lee Bell" <pleebell2@bellsouth.net>, men ne cunnon secgan to soðe: > Mine's not as small as yours, but it's not all that big either. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > Mine's not as small as yours, but it's not all that big either. *giggles* > I sincerely wish I had not screwed > up and bought the compact instead of the full sized version. *roars with laughter* > I don't > normally make mistakes like that. Sure. * > > Mine's not as small as yours, but it's not all that big either. > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Sure. Get your mind out of the gutter, so mine can float by. > Get your mind out of the gutter, so mine can float by. I would, but it's attached to the rest of my body... SignaturePopeye "Best thing for him, really, his therapy was going nowhere." -Dr. Hannibal Lector. www.finalprotectivefire.com > > Get your mind out of the gutter, so mine can float by. > > I would, but it's attached to the rest of my body... Ethereal, think ethereal... More clear than glass, *very volatile*, light molecular weight, very fluid... >> Mine's not as small as yours, but it's not all that big either. > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > * You have a dirty mind. I like that in a person. Lee > >> Mine's not as small as yours, but it's not all that big either. > > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Lee ;-) * > Hey Popeye. .45s have gotten pretty small. Here's the one I've got. > > http://tinyurl.com/o7nkr I have the PT-145... 11 shots of .45 and faily compact... >> Hey Popeye. .45s have gotten pretty small. Here's the one I've got. >> >> http://tinyurl.com/o7nkr > >I have the PT-145... 11 shots of .45 and faily compact... Very similar to the 745. The 745's got a single stack magazine and yours is a double. The damn thing barks, don't it? I'll don't find much difference with regard to this gun's recoil when compared to a 1911 though. Perhaps a little more snappy. And I like the DAO feature that Taurus has adopted for the MILLENNIUM Pro line. I look for ammo sales and have been able to pick some up for as little as 9 bucks (50 rounds).Now that's not SD ammo: just FMJ. Even at that though, you could blow through some money on a Sunday afternoon. For target shooting and plinking, I've a S&W 22A pistol. That's my fun gun. Wayne > Very similar to the 745. The 745's got a single stack magazine and > yours is a double. The damn thing barks, don't it? I'll don't find > much difference with regard to this gun's recoil when compared to a > 1911 though. Perhaps a little more snappy. And I like the DAO feature > that Taurus has adopted for the MILLENNIUM Pro line. I've got the 9mm, .40, and .45 in the Millenium line... I like 'em... 11 rounds in a fairly compact package... Since it's DAO, I don't put the safety on when I carry it... > I look for ammo sales and have been able to pick some up for as little > as 9 bucks (50 rounds).Now that's not SD ammo: just FMJ. Even at that > though, you could blow through some money on a Sunday afternoon. Even with handloads, I understand that the best you can probably hope for is around $6 for 50... > For target shooting and plinking, I've a S&W 22A pistol. That's my fun > gun. I've got a couple of .22 pistols... The most accurate one is the Ruger Mk-II with a fairly long bull barrel (around 10 or 11 inches, IIRC)... > Hey Popeye. .45s have gotten pretty small. Here's the one I've got. > > http://tinyurl.com/o7nkr > > Simple message T-shirt > http://tinyurl.com/otjq3 The .45 AMT Backup is absolutely the smallest. >>> I love my .45s but they're huge. >> [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > .45 too heavy for back packing, too spendy to shoot volumously. What's your opinion of the .40? I'll give |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message