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 » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Pilot shot in head



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old May 7th 05, 01:01 PM
Joe Johnson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"John Galban" wrote in message
oups.com...

Do you think it's wise to encourage the government to label every
criminal a terrorist, just so they can get more mileage on a case?
Frankly, I get a little disturbed when new laws that were specifically
targetted to improve terrorist intervention are used against common
criminals for common criminal acts. The result is that the increase
powers of law enforcement and prosecutors under these statutes are no
longer limited to the actual terrorists. They just slap a label on
anyone and rights begin to disappear.

That's well on the way down the slippery slope that started out by
rationalizing that taking away rights from "terrorists" would be a good
thing.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

I completely agree with you, John. Labeling a suspect a "terrorist" in
order to restrict his/her rights with regard to bail, incarceration,
discovery, deposition of opposing witnesses, etc., logically prejudges
guilt, and should clearly be unconstitutional


  #12  
Old May 7th 05, 01:48 PM
Flyingmonk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thank you John, I completely agree with you.

Bryan "The Monk" Chaisone

  #13  
Old May 7th 05, 02:34 PM
Blueskies
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"John Galban" wrote in message oups.com...

Do you think it's wise to encourage the government to label every

criminal a terrorist, just so they can get more mileage on a case?
Frankly, I get a little disturbed when new laws that were specifically
targetted to improve terrorist intervention are used against common
criminals for common criminal acts. The result is that the increase
powers of law enforcement and prosecutors under these statutes are no
longer limited to the actual terrorists. They just slap a label on
anyone and rights begin to disappear.

That's well on the way down the slippery slope that started out by
rationalizing that taking away rights from "terrorists" would be a good
thing.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)




Well, here is the other end of the spectrum:

http://www.wwmt.com/engine.pl?statio...t_ local.html




  #14  
Old May 7th 05, 03:41 PM
Matt Barrow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Capt.Doug" wrote in message
...
"John Galban" wrote in message
Amazing! Hitting a target in a moving airplane at several hundred
feet with a pistol! The odds are pretty slim. Military pilots call
that the "Golden BB". That one lucky small arms shot that, totally by
chance, ends up occupying the same area of space as the plane.


I dunno, I go shooting with a .44Mag revolver w/ 12" barrel and scope. A
Cessna at low level wouldn't be so hard to hit.


It'd be easier _without_ the scope.


  #15  
Old May 7th 05, 03:47 PM
Matt Barrow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Capt.Doug wrote:
"John Galban" wrote in message
Amazing! Hitting a target in a moving airplane at several hundred
feet with a pistol! The odds are pretty slim. Military pilots call
that the "Golden BB". That one lucky small arms shot that, totally by
chance, ends up occupying the same area of space as the plane.



I dunno, I go shooting with a .44Mag revolver w/ 12" barrel and scope. A
Cessna at low level wouldn't be so hard to hit.

D.



I shoot a Super Blackhawk (no scope) and I think hitting an airplane at
100+ yeards and 80+ MPH would be a pretty mean feat. You'd have to lead
just right, etc. I tend to think the "golden BB" moniker is pretty apt.


It's be tough for a novice, but not for someone who's even a fair marksman.
You'd have to hold only about 10 feet in front of it (130fps for the
150@80MPH, 1400fps (?) for the .44 Mag round). Five feet in front would just
about put the impact at the front of the cockpit.



  #16  
Old May 7th 05, 03:47 PM
Matt Whiting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Matt Barrow wrote:
"Capt.Doug" wrote in message
...

"John Galban" wrote in message
Amazing! Hitting a target in a moving airplane at several hundred
feet with a pistol! The odds are pretty slim. Military pilots call
that the "Golden BB". That one lucky small arms shot that, totally by
chance, ends up occupying the same area of space as the plane.


I dunno, I go shooting with a .44Mag revolver w/ 12" barrel and scope. A
Cessna at low level wouldn't be so hard to hit.



It'd be easier _without_ the scope.



Maybe, but most pistol scopes are pretty low power with a fairly large
FOV. I still think it would be difficult no matter what.


Matt
  #17  
Old May 7th 05, 03:51 PM
Matt Barrow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Matt Barrow wrote:
"Capt.Doug" wrote in message
...

"John Galban" wrote in message
Amazing! Hitting a target in a moving airplane at several hundred
feet with a pistol! The odds are pretty slim. Military pilots call
that the "Golden BB". That one lucky small arms shot that, totally by
chance, ends up occupying the same area of space as the plane.

I dunno, I go shooting with a .44Mag revolver w/ 12" barrel and scope. A
Cessna at low level wouldn't be so hard to hit.



It'd be easier _without_ the scope.



Maybe, but most pistol scopes are pretty low power with a fairly large
FOV. I still think it would be difficult no matter what.


I dunno...I can hit a 12" pie plate at 100 yards with a 1911 with standard
sights. I doubt it's be that hard.



  #18  
Old May 7th 05, 05:02 PM
Bob Chilcoat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Very good point, John. I was just commenting that the Feds will probably be
all over him, too. I'm not encouraging that, I just think he deserves
plenty of grief.

A bunch of the neighbors around our airport are pretty irrational (see
http://www.bbbccc.net/ for the most organized group). I would not be all
that surprised if someone took a potshot at one of us someday. I sometimes
feel like a target on short final. I hope I'm wrong.

--
Bob (Chief Pilot, White Knuckle Airways)


"John Galban" wrote in message
oups.com...

Bob Chilcoat wrote:
Not to mention Federal charges for firing at an aircraft. The TSA

ought to
get a shot at him too, for terrorism. This guy's toast, and deserves

every
bit of it.


Do you think it's wise to encourage the government to label every
criminal a terrorist, just so they can get more mileage on a case?
Frankly, I get a little disturbed when new laws that were specifically
targetted to improve terrorist intervention are used against common
criminals for common criminal acts. The result is that the increase
powers of law enforcement and prosecutors under these statutes are no
longer limited to the actual terrorists. They just slap a label on
anyone and rights begin to disappear.

That's well on the way down the slippery slope that started out by
rationalizing that taking away rights from "terrorists" would be a good
thing.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)



  #19  
Old May 7th 05, 08:18 PM
Matt Whiting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Matt Barrow wrote:

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

Capt.Doug wrote:

"John Galban" wrote in message
Amazing! Hitting a target in a moving airplane at several hundred
feet with a pistol! The odds are pretty slim. Military pilots call
that the "Golden BB". That one lucky small arms shot that, totally by
chance, ends up occupying the same area of space as the plane.


I dunno, I go shooting with a .44Mag revolver w/ 12" barrel and scope. A
Cessna at low level wouldn't be so hard to hit.

D.



I shoot a Super Blackhawk (no scope) and I think hitting an airplane at
100+ yeards and 80+ MPH would be a pretty mean feat. You'd have to lead
just right, etc. I tend to think the "golden BB" moniker is pretty apt.



It's be tough for a novice, but not for someone who's even a fair marksman.
You'd have to hold only about 10 feet in front of it (130fps for the
150@80MPH, 1400fps (?) for the .44 Mag round). Five feet in front would just
about put the impact at the front of the cockpit.


Well, I'm a pretty fair shot, but this isn't easy even for a marksman.
Judging 10 feet isn't trivial at that distant and this presumes that you
know the exact speed and distance to begin with. Not many people can
hit a running deer at 100 yards with a handgun and that is a much slower
target. It does bob up and down a little which adds to the challenge
though!

It these shots were as easy as you suggest, then the military would use
single-shot AA guns and save a lot of ammunition. Unfortunately, the
sniper's motto doesn't apply to shooting at aerial targets.


Matt
  #20  
Old May 7th 05, 08:20 PM
Matt Whiting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Matt Barrow wrote:
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

Matt Barrow wrote:

"Capt.Doug" wrote in message
...


"John Galban" wrote in message
Amazing! Hitting a target in a moving airplane at several hundred
feet with a pistol! The odds are pretty slim. Military pilots call
that the "Golden BB". That one lucky small arms shot that, totally by
chance, ends up occupying the same area of space as the plane.

I dunno, I go shooting with a .44Mag revolver w/ 12" barrel and scope. A
Cessna at low level wouldn't be so hard to hit.



It'd be easier _without_ the scope.



Maybe, but most pistol scopes are pretty low power with a fairly large
FOV. I still think it would be difficult no matter what.



I dunno...I can hit a 12" pie plate at 100 yards with a 1911 with standard
sights. I doubt it's be that hard.


So can I. We all make lucky shots occasionally. However, few can hit a
pie plate at 100 yards EVERY shot when shooting off-hand. Actually,
even a machine rest won't do that as the standard 1911's tend to scatter
their hits more than 12" at 100 yards inherently. And if the pie plate
is moving at 80 MPH, the odds get MUCH worse.

I don't think Doug Koenig could do that with any consistency and he's a
lot better shot than you or me.


Matt
 




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
CFI without commercial? Jay Honeck Piloting 75 December 8th 10 05:17 PM
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) Rich Stowell Aerobatics 28 January 2nd 09 03:26 PM
Diamond DA-40 with G-1000 pirep C J Campbell Instrument Flight Rules 117 July 22nd 04 05:40 PM
Diamond DA-40 with G-1000 pirep C J Campbell Owning 114 July 22nd 04 05:40 PM
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools RT Military Aviation 104 September 25th 03 03:17 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.