A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

US Air Force survival gun?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #21  
Old April 23rd 04, 02:16 PM
Paul J. Adam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"robert arndt" wrote in message
om...
(B2431) wrote in message

...
Let's see, you guys didn't issue 357 magnums during the war, better

check again
on the pistol caliber. The piece in question was heavy and bulky and

rarely
carried for those reasons.


As stated earlier in reply to Als post, the 9.3mmX74mmR cartridge was
equivalent in POWER to a .375H&H Magnum! Check with a gun expert on
that.


Seriously overdone for a survival gun. Are these escaping aircrew or elite
paratroopers?

Flare pistols launching grenades is a non starter even for you.


You obviously don't know **** about the
Leuchtpistole/Kampfpistole/Sturmpistole.


Again, for survival after escaping from an unflyable aircraft? The idea is
"not to die of exposure, hunger or angry wildlife", not "stand off all of 3
Shock Army singlehandedly". Every ounce of grenades, heavy-calibre
ammunition, et cetera you carry is an ounce less of food, water, radio
beacon, spare batteries, flares, dye markers and other items that might
actually improve your chances of living until rescue.

279,000 of them were issued
in WW2 and all the grenade ammo was used up for them. They were put to
good use and there long before the strap-on GLs we use today on our
rifles.


And they were thoroughly predated by assorted "rifle grenades" that ranged
from the Heath Robinson to the rather practical.

**** off, will you? The US got the lion's share of advanced German
technology including all those funny "black project" triangles, discs,
and cylinders flying around using EM propulsion systems.


Haven't seen a single one at an airshow.


They may be ugly but they work, they are light and small enough to carry

and
ARE carried. Given the choice of a heavy, bulky "super weapon" left

behind or
one of those "ugly weapons" in my kit guess which one is more effective

when
needed?


Gee, I don't seem to recall ANY stories of success with that butt-ugly
M6.


Have you looked?

At least the German bomber crews used the Sauer Drillings in
combat on the Russian front as well as the 27mm
Leuchtpistole/Kampfpistole/Sturmpistole.


Why are bomber crews engaging in ground combat when they ought to be flying
bombers?

Tell you what, put on a flightsuit. How many pockets do you have? How

much can
you carry? Now put on your survival vest and address the same questions.

OK,
part of your bailout kit has all kinds of wonderful things, how much can

you
put in the aforementioned pockets? Unless the kit bag makes a

comfortable back
pack you will get rid of it if you have to go cross country. A basic

rule of
thumb is it's better to wear what you need than carry it. You survival

vest has
a holster for a pistol. How long will you carry that wonder weapon you
described?


Quite a few SF aircrews today carry the HK SOCOM pistol.


Oh, you mean the Robocop Gun. Pray tell, what does it do that a Glock 21
doesn't?

I'd be
willing to bet they would carry the new HK MP-7 PDW if they could
procure one.


Doesn't square with the aircrew I've talked to: but then they're only
actually flying the missions, what do *they* know?

I *have* heard of US aircrew drawing M16s and M4s as personal weapons for
high-risk ops, which makes a lot more sense, but then they seriously
considered the risk of being forced down somewhere very unfriendly.

If you need a combat weapon, take a combat weapon and accept the weight and
bulk. If you need a basic survival weapon, get something as light and
compact as possible. Don't haul a heavy, overpowered, break-action weapon
around and insist it's wonderful: it's too big to get out of an aircraft
with, too heavy to carry, too powerful for small game and too slow-firing
for a firefight.

--
Paul J. Adam


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Boeing Boondoggle Larry Dighera Military Aviation 77 September 15th 04 02:39 AM
Highest-Ranking Black Air Force General Credits Success to Hard Work Otis Willie Military Aviation 0 February 10th 04 11:06 PM
us air force us air force academy us air force bases air force museum us us air force rank us air force reserve adfunk Jehad Internet Military Aviation 0 February 7th 04 04:24 AM
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools RT Military Aviation 104 September 25th 03 03:17 PM
Air Force announces acquisition management reorganization Otis Willie Military Aviation 0 August 21st 03 09:16 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.