Jump to content

Whiteout

Member
  • Content Count

    72
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    %

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Whiteout

  • Rank
    ASF Citizen
  • Birthday 07/01/1971

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    WA State
  • Interests
    Too many. Reading, archery, pistol and rifle, animals, military history, horror movie trivia (and pointing out holes in plots), hunting, hiking, climbing (ice and rock), snowboarding, driving too fast on an oval dirt track in a half-stock, recovering from accidents acquired while driving too fast on an oval dirt track, hand-loading ammunition, HAM radio....

Previous Fields

  • Airsoft Replicas Owned
    So far a JG M4 clone to be handed down as a "spare" or for one of my boys to use, a purchased G&P new style M4/CAR-15, waiting to arrive, 2 KWC Jericho "baby eagle" CO2 non-blowback pistols, leaper holsters, normal hunting gear with home made camo outer shells (I can make my stuff to blend better than commercial patterns, at less cost)...basically stock or semi-stock guns and home made or modified equipment for purpose-specific use.
  1. No, you would not find mention of "Jungle Boots", you would find mention of "tactical boots" and "desert boots"...which are exactly the same boots, in different color. Same materials for sole, same patterns for sole, same weave sides (materials are no longer raw canvas, as the original jungle boots were, but it's still a heavy-duty breathable fabric weave), and same sole and ankle re-enforcement. I HAVE a pair (and they're good boots for spring/summer/early fall hiking and climbing). I purchased them because my old jungles finally blew a seam. Know where I got hold of them? I have a cousin on the Chicago PD who purchased them from uniform supply on her PD discount. Believe me, I stay current on issue equipment. Hard not to, when you have family who uses it on a day to day basis, in various areas...a CPD cop, an SAR/Fire pilot in Montana (ex USAF cousin, mentioned elsewhere), two current close relatives (son of a cousin and cousin) in the Navy and Marines, a recently ETSd son of a cousin from the US Army, and a brother-in-law who retired as a Lt Col less than 5 years ago, with his butter bar years, and both CO stints in combat arms (and a tour in the dusty and in the rocky since 2003, as well as having been a butter bar with an armored cav unit in Storm). I might be 17 years discharged, at this point in my life, but I regularly talk to family still in, or more recently separated, than myself. Nor are they my only contact in the services (hard NOT to be friends with at least a few servicemen when you live on the edge of the Puget Sound. 3 naval bases, a combined air force/army base, and a NAWS base all within 90 minutes of me. The nearest naval base less than 15 minutes from me, actually) or various local police forces (you get first name basis with a fair number when you're heavily into local live steel culture, archery culture, and hunting. I happen to practice pistol at the same range the local SP barracks, the town I'm in, plus three closest "local forces", and the county sheriffs use for practice and qualification.) As many cops have a military background, if you still doubt me, go find yourself a senior officer, someone nearing retirement, who will have done their military time around the same time I did...and ask him. You'll get the same thing I've been trying to tell you.
  2. I was speaking to winter gear about layering. But loose clothing isn't the heatstroke hazard you paint it to be (haven't even had heat exhaustion using such methods, even being in the field all day in Texas brush country summer. Hydrate. Which you want to do in ANY weather.) As for snagging issues, depends on terrain and material used. I have very little issue with snaggage, even going through blackberry thickets, wearing loose outers made of ripstop nylon or working trade "canvas". Best source for ripstop nylon clothing? Army/Navy surplus or summerweight work coveralls. You are entirely wrong about "high speed guys in modern combat gear" abandoning combat style boots. They go to reinforced canvas side boots of the type that was called "jungle boots" in the Vietnam era, and is now referred to as "tactical weave" or "desert issue". If you're playing in muck in the colder weather, as the OP was asking about, you want waterproof, so you go away from weaves. Summer, they will probably do the job. But a decent ankle reinforcement is still preferable. As for the "looking pretty in formation" note...100% wrong. In formations which appearance is at all considered, uniform is low-quarter shoes and your greens. In BDU formation, standards aren't "pretty" at all, as it is acceptable in such formations to show up with an uncreased, unstarched uniform with no wrinkles actually ironed into it, and a pair of boots without obvious streaks in the wax. And that's exactly how most soldier show up for BDU formations...those are our "working duds", not our "show-off clothes".
  3. Family tradition, eh? My family has a tradition of service, but there aren't many of us who went "hardcore" in the last few generations. Me with the 75th, my father in law, who extended 3 times after his first tour in Vietnam, doing all the extensions as Recon, and a grandad who did the Pacific Theater in subs. The rest of them...well, I can't really blame one cousin. She's a she, and couldn't get into combat arms, so was a crewman for F-15s. She and I are the only ones from our generation. Have another cousin, who wasn't even born when I went in, who's USMC right now...on "make pretty" duty at the embassy in Poland, and a second cousin who just made PO1 in communications. My own father (the shame of it) joined the USAF to avoid being drafted into the Army or USMC, and used as a self-propelled sandbag, and his dad, though having participated at Normandy, spent his time as an engineer--not a combat engineer, even (I have respect for those guys.."can do" isn't an on-paper motto for them, neither is the unofficial "first we dig 'em, then we die in 'em"). Simunition--is it the same wax-and-paint that used to be the stuff under that name, or have they made it any better? Ruined barrels pretty fast, but it sure gave everyone an interest in avoiding getting hit, rather than having so many guys who wanted to goldbrick let someone tag them in the laser gear, so they could sit back, and do whatever (face it, you won't find a grunt, ANYWHERE, who won't find a way to goldbrick at every opportunity, if what's being done isn't something he actively enjoys) Syria/Jordan kind of makes sense (but bodes poorly for our political situation), but why would we be strengthening forces in Kuwait? Unless it's going to be used as a stepping stone for Syria or Iran? Keep your head down, out there, bud. Most Americans like to laugh it off, but Iran and Syria are the only militaries in that area that are actually reasonably competent.
  4. Two ways to go on boots...find someplace that sells the OLD Army style combat boots (the "speed lace" type), and wax and polish the bejeezus out of them. As long as I didn't step in water deeper than my boot-top, my feet stayed dry through 4 years of wearing those, in georgia clay, central american jungle, and a not-so-dry desert, plus various FTX environments. They're fairly inexpensive, but get them from a reputable surplus dealer. They'll run between $30 and $99 a pair, depending on source, and whether they are old surplus, or new boots simply made in the same way. The old surplus are usually cheaper, because the shop bought job lot crates at government auction, in unmarked crates, and got boots...but since that means the leather is older, oil it, let the oil soak in, a few times, THEN wax/polish. And put a new coat of polishign wax on them after every cleaning (just a buff shine works well...smear black shoe polish, which is wax, on the boot, snap a cloth diaper across the surface a few times, and you're done) Second option is go for brand. Think hard on getting plain old hunting boots. I use Irish Setter's Ridgehawk. About $150 a pair, gore-tex lined, waterproof, good track, breathe well enough for summer, spring, and early fall wear, warm enough to spend half a night traipsing through snow to get to a late fall or winter season tree stand. And they come in Mossy Oak pattern standard But Irish Setter is one of about a dozen brands of high quality gore-tex lined hunting boots that provide the ankle support, foot protection, traction, and so on that makes them desirable. Little edit* If you go with Setters, you have to break them in WELL, the soles are thick, and they stay rather stiff for a while. Army boots break in in about two days of full-day wear.
  5. LOL! Old goats all sound the same, on one side, or another. Either we're grumpy old curmudgeons who just don't want to be told what to do, or they're folks who went throughout life so sheltered that they could afford to think that telling other people how they HAVE to do things, and why they CAN'T do things is the "right" way to be. Personally, I prefer the grouches. They make better neighbors.
  6. Not just USMC, that's standard Army infantry, as well, for both mech and leg active units (don't know about airborne, was run through the school, and off to RIP, who don't use the same team layout). But yes, I agree, if you have the manpower, get an actual SAW replica going, otherwise the self-winding sound activating drum on M4/M-16 platforms (never seen a big self-winder for AK in action) is an intimidator, and very effective.
  7. Possibly. Probably, even. Like I said, an experiment purely out of curiosity (you forgot an important factor, though. Titanium is "self lubricating" to an extent) that I don't have huge hopes for. I'll still have the original G&P set to replace them with :)
  8. Did I miss that detail? LOL. Too right. Cotton against the skin is disaster in cold or wet weather. Wool, or one of the wicking/breathable artificial fabrics, such as the one Underarmor is made of. And wet wool gets heavier than my mother-in-law. So unless you're Scottish or Welsh and have a thing for sheep, the Underarmor as the layer closest to the skin is most comfortable and effective.
  9. Would be if it stopped on the surface, like dropping it into thick mud. Dropping it into deeper water will cause the splash to magnify under the surface. .45 does that (better than a 9), but the math's still the same...magnify that "splash" in bodily fluids (and blood is a big victim. A huge portion of the less viscous liquid in the body is blood, so it carries such impact further and faster, where the sudden jump in pressure doesn't just burst the vessels) If this wasn't true, the .45 wouldn't have such a shot/kill ratio in practical use, nor would its knockdown power be so praised. But you earlier agreed that these were things a .45 possessed in greater proportions than a 9mm. So now we're just arguing on the "why"...lol.
  10. Agreed, expensive as all get out. So is paintball, hunting, archery, shooting for "the fun of it" on a regular basis. But it still stands that you don't need to make it more expensive. Put the money in the stuff that's vital (guns, functional accessories, upgrades, high end ammo), and make the rest founded on a strong high end base. I'll "for instance" here. I bow hunt and rifle hunt. On 4 way tags every year (deer, elk, bear, cougar), plus spring bear and cougar, plus turkey. On the face of it, I would need sets of hunting camo for fall evergreen forest of two wights, clearcut logging land, winter evergreen of heavier weight, winter high desert grassland, and spring evergreen and high desert. For good commercial hunting camo you'll spend around $500 minimum for each setup (more expensive than gaming camo because you can't use any cotton-based blends, nor most fabrics other than wool for anything other than your outer shell. They all reflect "white" in the IR range, while the dyes don't reflect at all). On top of that, I have a bow that was $1,100 stock, about $300 worth of gear on it, $150 worth of arrows, $40 in hunting heads, plus the gear I need for an animal no matter what weapon I take it with (skinning and capeing knives, suspension rigs for bleeding, all of that), running about $200. Plus the gear purchased for camping that is used in a deer camp. So early season bow cost me $1,590 before buying camo that doesn't really match my surroundings, and not counting the stuff that's "shared" with other situations. Add a normal commercial camo base for early fall season, that's over $2,000, at least. High end camo setups might cost up to a thousand. Add something suitable for late season (small white patterns over predominately brown or black), even if it's light-weight shell, there's another $250 if you go just with a commercial overshell. Winter weight on this side of the mountains would be another $500+, if I didn't just make my own shell, and high desert and spring evergreen outfits would be another $500 each. Instead, I have a top quality bow, top quality arrows, top quality arrowheads, do my own fletching (mounting of vanes (feathers)), which ensures higher quality and quality control, and ONE set of very high end camouflage that's waterproof, windproof, and has a good base pattern to allow for a thinner home done shell to work. And that outfit serves all seasons, all areas, with customized to specific location/season patterns, meaning that, as camo, it works better. Now if you are playing for a living, or, even more likely, have sponsors *throwing* this stuff at you, in order to make better sales, spending this kind of money makes sense. If you're going to use this stuff for a dozen different things, for each outfit, spending like this makes sense. If you're doing it for one specific activity that is a part time hobby, it doesn't. The money you DON'T spend on this stuff is money you CAN spend on better guns, more guns, upgrades, time on commercial fields. All of the equipment that really makes a serious difference.
  11. And in the end, that is truly the key, isn't it? Knowing how and when people will move, knowing what draws they eye, and confuses it. You have those down, you're 3/4 to being a "live field" soldier. Which makes the difference between "Ma Bell" (anyone remember those commercials? "reach out, reach out and touch someone!") and "a bunch of friends and I get together and laugh ourselves silly while throwing plastic at each-other, not really caring about "win" and "lose"" Call it a competitive streak, but I don't buy into the "everyone who plays is a winner" mindset. If you go out to do something competitive, the idea is to cut the other guy's heart out, not to work up a sweat to no great purpose. Which is part of why I like playing with my boys, and their friends. They have the physical advantages of being young, relatively fit, and energetic to a fault. I have the advantages of knowing strategy and breaking morale by constantly using those strategies.
  12. Yup...and a bigger "splash" in the body cavities is the most effective way to do it...crushed, disrupted, or torn organs, and torn veins/arteries caused by that "splash". Plus, you're more likely to not only damage the heart directly (among other organs), but to also create the same sort of physical shock an electric defibrillator can. While ripping the major blood carriers around it. Isn't as damaging to lungs, of course. But most organs are "soft", and will spread the damage, as well as taking more, themselves. Again, look up kinetic energy statistics...if it was purely "bleeding them out", a .380 would be every bit as effective as a 9mm, the rounds are almost identical, outside of the weight and length of the bullet itself. Close to identical width, penetration, close range through and through statistics (anything further than 15 feet away, the 9 is far more likely to punch all the way through, but as you get closer, they come closer to matching). The 9 creates a much heavier "splash" as it goes through...heavy enough to make people consider a 9 and a .45 as about equal in pros and cons, and usually agree that the .40 is a great compromise between the two.
  13. Agreed, just thought the waiting period law was federal. Wrong. He was tackled after a civilian with a CCW shot him. Read the articles again. Also, I can't find the post now, but someone claimed pistol rounds of a heavier caliber penetrate better than a lighter caliber. Not at all true, look up some table comparisons from G&A or half a dozen other publications. A .45 is superior in STOPPING POWER, not penetration. That is to say it transfers more kinetic energy to the body it hits. because it is heavier, it is going slower (often slow enough it doesn't exit, so it transferred ALL of its energy to the body). A 9mm, which is smaller than 5 other "common handgun calibers", has the best penetration rating of any pistol round. A .380, a little "lady's purse gun", usually, has more penetration at normal pistol ranges than the .38, despite being shorter, having less powder charge. And its bullet is the same diameter (shorter though, and I mean bullet, not cartridge). This is because an automatic delivers better seal than a revolver, so the round is going quite a bit faster, short range, and has quite a bit more ability to penetrate, as a result, even if the compared weights means the wheelg7un round has more total kinetic energy. That just means the .38 is more likely to go all the way through than the .380 is. But what's MOST important in pistol calibers is a phenomenon called "hydrostatic shock". Go to the nearest lake, or even a deep puddle. Take three rocks of similar weight and size, but each slightly smaller and lighter than the last (small difference is what's wanted). Drop the biggest and heaviest round in the puddle, and judge the size of the splash, and how far the more pronounced rings spread. Now take the medium one, and toss it a few feet in the air, to land in he water, and watch the same things. Now pitch the smallest on straight down into the water fairly hard, and see what it does. This is "hydrostatic shock", the body is high in water content, so when the bullets hit, they cause the same sort of "splashing" in cavities and organs. The round with the strongest and biggest splash is the one you want at close range. Because it's the one that will "splash" inside the human body, disrupting fluids, sometimes shattering organs, often tearing major veins and arteries. The round with the greatest hydrostatic shock is the one least dependent on you hitting a vital organ directly, and the least dependent on hitting an organ smaller than your fist to get an almost-instant kill.
  14. True enough, I suppose, but not prosecuted as a primary charge, and not in cases of non-statutory consensual sex. Which means the law is already de facto not being enforced. Not hardly. I just have a rabid sense of liberty and responsibility. Freedom comes with responsibility, and both should be hand in hand, legally. But individual responsibility should be limited to immediate damages such as hurting someone or destroying their property in a way immediately detectable, and having law re-enforce the responsibility of exercise of freedom. In other words, I as a person shouldn't be liable if you get lung cancer, even if you can absolutely prove it was the smoking of myself and other individuals that caused it (ABSOLUTE proof), however a legal entity (like a corporation) should be held responsible for long term damages caused by its products, since it wouldn't exist at all without the production of those products, AND the allowance of such entity to be formed is based in part on its accrued responsibility unprotected by Constitutional law, only by statutory or admiralty law (to clarify that...if I'm born, I enjoy all the rights and freedoms applying to any person in the united states. For a company to exist, it has to be licensed, so does not enjoy those same rights, and must shoulder greater forms of responsibility). To give an example of one of my more unpopular stances: If a girl gets pregnant, and keeps the baby, against the will of her partner, he is responsible for part of the associated medical bills, and for partial support of the baby for 18 years. If he wants to keep it, and she doesn't, he has no recourse. Inequality. If she doesn't want it, but he does, and you're going to be equal, she should be required (if health issues aren't involved) to have the kid, relinquish parental rights and responsibilities, and never have any further requirements. 9 months of completely invasive time is a fair trade in equality for 19 years of responsibility in the form of time spent to earn support payments. One or the other. If he can be held responsible that way, so should she. If she can't, neither should he.
  15. There isn't a handgun wait? Thought that was a fed law, these days. I only know there is one in WA, AZ, and UT, from experience (Arizona is surprisingly tough on actual gun laws, despite loose laws on carry).
×
×
  • Create New...