summer patriot, winter soldier

those busy muslims ... if they are not killing people in france, they are killing them in nigeria ... just pick a country, hell, make it your neighborhood ...

this, from cnn.  nigerian muslims kill an english and an italian hostage.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/11/world/europe/italy-nigeria-hostages-killed/index.html?iref=obinsite .  

nigerian authorities intended to rescue the hostages when they learned their location, but before troops could arrive and attempt the rescue the hostages were murdered.

oh, those poor muslims.  worried what people will think.

it doesn't seem to stop them from killing people the world over, does it?

coming soon, to a neighborhood near you.

john jay @ 03.22.2012

my guess as to the french shooter ...

update:  the same gun was used to kill the soldiers, and the jewish children & rabbi.  the rabbi died trying to protect two of his own children.

 http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/19/10753032-four-shot-dead-at-jewish-school-in-france-gun-used-in-earlier-attacks .  

police and politicians are now attributing a racist motive to the attacks, but, so far as yet, no religious motivation has been ascribed to the shootings, or apparently even openly considered.  a security camera at the jewish school captured some of the things that happened, and it appears that in one instance the attacker chased a girl down, and shot her in the head at close range.  he is motivated to kill, not just to frighten or mame, and the french authorities have begun to understand the killers determination to kill, and to do it most heinously.  end update, 03.19.2012.

start of original post.  a senior non-commissioned officer from the ranks, from the montauban area, who is angered by younger soldiers straying from islamic discipline, in both their sexual conduct and in fraternizing with the froggies.  perhaps a man who has tried to discipline younger soldiers, and who has been rebuffed as not being progressive or "with it."

he is angered on religious, doctrinal and personal grounds.  he is angered enough to exact discipline to theology and retribution for personal slights.

and, having killed, most likely muslim apostates, he has look within himself and said, well, if i can kill my fellow muslims, even damned ones, it is certainly up to me to kill those jews i can reach before i am captured or killed.

i do not think he will give up without a fight.  when the froggie police come for him, they had best be loaded for bear.  we'll probably see an old model 36 sniper rifle w/ an old military scope deployed.

he will have made his point with his fellow muslims in the military.  he will strike the jews again, and most likely another school with young children, as that is where he can be the most savage, the least restrained, and that is where he can make his most gruesome points.  and, that is where he can escape so that he can kill once more.

in short, i do not think that we have seen the last of him.

you may choose to agree or disagree, but this is my thinking, and i don't think it raw speculation.  we'll see.

john jay @ 03.19.2012

 

related, and with links to news accounts on the three previous assaults:  http://wintersoldier2008.typepad.com/summer_patriot_winter_sol/2012/03/hey-you-pious-dead-dicks-at-daily-kos-barth-notes-and-little-green-footballs-.html

p.s.  i will not be surprised in the least if he has not read of major malik nadal hasan, and perhaps even have read his treatise "on workplace violence", giving him the rational as a matter of faith and conviction for the killing of his fellow co-religionists, lapsed or otherwise or somewhere in between.  he will have needed no education on why to kill jews, this having been steeped into him from the time of his conception, and during every waking moment as a muslim.

you will note that the soldier who was shot, and then shot three more times at point blank range, had a girlfriend who was 7 months pregnant.  my guess, not north african, and not muslim.  "muslim rage boy," indeed.

 

charlie reese's final column at the orlando sentinel ....

545 vs. 300,000,000 People - By Charlie Reese

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The President does.

You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

Politician is a dirty word.  We need statesmen.

 

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The President can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the Housenow? He is the leader of the majority party. He and fellow House members, not the President, can approve any budget they want. If the President vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.

If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.

If the Army & Marines are in Iraq and Afghanistan it's because they want them in Iraq and Afghanistan ...

If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.

There are no insoluble government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.

They, and they alone, have the power.

They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses. Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees... 

/s/  Charlie Reese

 

ineptocracy ...

from irwoodguy over the email.  i don't know to whom to attribute this, but, it is genius at work.--

ineptocracy


new word:

can't find it in my old webster's. google says it's a recently coined word found on a t-shirt on ebay. read this one slowly and carefully to absorb it fully!


ineptocracy 

(in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

finally, a word to describe our current political situation.

"when injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty."

thomas jefferson said that.

tell me if you think it wrong.

john jay @ 03.16.2012

the ."270 savage short" by drew458@barking-moonbat.com ... a short treatise on intermediate cartridge design ...

http://www.barking-moonbat.com/index.php/weblog/so_where_were_we/ .

the link above is to a very interesting & thought provoking post at barking moonbat, with regard to a cartridge design of an "intermediate" infantry round.  the cartridge is designed to work in the magazine well of an ar-15 sized rifle, and as such the designer has to give due recognition to overall cartridge length, which is limited to 2.260 inches.   drew has limited his cartridge length to 2.25 inches, (including bullet), whereas i feel that you can exploit this somewhat if your magazines will allow you.

a very interesting dimensional drawing is rendered, and it is computer generated.  if you've read my recent posts on some of my efforts at cartridge design, including http://wintersoldier2008.typepad.com/summer_patriot_winter_sol/2012/03/whodda-thunk-it-but-the-280-brit-ends-up-being-ridiculously-easy-to-duplicate-sorta-.html , you'll notice that i have taken a slightly less analytical approach as compared to drew's very precise draftsmanship and notation.

case design.  he decided on his 1.300" inches to the shoulder by science, while i simply sawed off the shoulder and neck of an existing 6.8mm remington spc cartridge and measured the resulting length at 1.310" in length.  scientific analysis versus the utilization of the dremel tool.  

but, i should say that it pleases me no end to see that "seat-of-the-pants" results in a very similar cartridge as arrived at by science.  the "270 short savage" and "jj's brit" end up being very similar cartridges.  mine is a bit longer because i wanted a little longer neck, just cuz.

propellant.  this is where i have to take my hat off to drew.

both cartridges will have exceedingly similar case capacities because the fact that the shoulder lengths are functionally identical, and the circumference of the case at the should will be within several thousands of an inch, when i get done fabricating mine.  parallel thinking, here.

but, when it comes to calculating cartridge chamber pressures, weights of propellants, and resultant velocities drew is worlds ahead of me.  as for me, i sawed off a .308 sized case at the same point, 1.310" length, as the 6.8mm case's shoulder determined in my "development."  i think measured the different "case capacities," and noted the larger case held about 20% more powder than the smaller.

this is where my quantitative worked ended, and seat of the pants took over, entirely.

and, this is precisely the point at which drew's quantitative & rather scientific and analytical work began.  

he is a devotee of a computer program called "quick load," obtained only at http://www.neconos.com/ , which is designed precisely to look at case volumes, bullet weight, and actual usable powder charges in order to calculate internal chamber pressures, pressure wave analysis, bullet muzzle velocities and gas pressures at the muzzle upon the exit of the bullet.

i have a friend who also avails himself of quick load's analytical tools in loading his rifle cartridges, and it does some amazing stuff.  it issues forth amazing little charts which set forth peak chamber pressures and pressures in the barrel length over time as the bullet passes through it, and calculates resultant muzzle velocities.

drew did this with the "270 savage short," and unless we are both mistaken, when and if he develops his round, he will not be overly surprised by performance levels.  i, on the other hand, sort of eyeballed my sawed off case, placed it in some caliper jaws set at 2.260", placed my intended projectile on the kitchen table besides it, and "guesstimated" how much the bullet's heel mind impinge projecting into the interior of the case volume might impinge upon powder capacity.

based on that "eyeball" calculation, i sorta guessed at a powder charge, and "guesstimated" at velocities.  i think that maybe i will be pretty "ball park" about the whole thing, but, i can assure you, that if drew undertook the same exercise he would probably be within 50 feet per second on muzzle velocities, at a given pressure level.

his thinking and discipline are pretty amazing to watch and read about, so i would suggest you scrurry right over to barking moonbat and look at his work.  i will also tell you that he has favored me with a very lengthy analysis on all this, and i have favored him with the same, about these matters.

in the end, we have both striven mightily and issued forth cartridges that are very similar.  i will admit, that i have a heightened fondness for the .277 bore in cartridges of this type, especially the 27 caliber 115 grain boat tail (he favors the hornady version, for a little better flight characteristics, i like the sierra because it is tough as nails and is not perturbed by the "jump" to the lands, another topic), as do i.

he took his route because science and ballistics determined it.  i took my route, because i can fabricate mine by the very simple expedient of grinding some material off already existing 7mm-08 remington loading dies, as manufactured by rcbs.  i think his round better than the "jj's brit" because it is most likely ballistically superior, while i think my approach realizes a pretty good product at a far more practical method, and one that is far cheaper and more attainable.

there is virtue in both approaches, i feel.  i do like the pure intellect of the "all-other-approaches-be-damned" manner in which drew has proceeded, i must admit.  i like that i can accomplish my ends, to this point, at the "mutilation" of an rcbs die set.

i have written most extensively on the debate between fans of the 6.8mm remington spc, to include me, and those who favor the 6.5mm grendel, another fine "intermediate infantry" round.  i think the "270 savage short" at least in theory, better than all of them, including the "jj's brit."

i think mine easier by quantum steps to make and fabricate.  we'll see.  i am sending a pair of rcbs dies, sizing and bullet loading, off to have .255" in length lathed off the opening.  i expect to make my first trial run cartridges within a couple weeks, and dummy rounds just that quickly.

drew has designed a better cartridge.  i have designed one far easier and quicker to make, and considerably cheaper, at least at this stage.

and, you can bet your bippy i will ask him to do some more detailed propellant analyses for me.  laughing.  such are the burdens of his technical expertise.

john jay @ 03.17.2012

p.s.  i am told that fn of america did similar exercises to this, in designing and testing cartridges during the fabrication of the fn scar rifles.  it cost very many millions.  i destroyed about $1.50 in cartridge cases, and did some reading.  i don't know what drew spent on his quick load programs.

personally, a good case can be made that fn might have been better advised to have emailed both of us.  laughing.

and, oh yeah, lots of people enjoy this sort of thing.

hey, you pious dead dicks at daily kos, barth notes and little green footballs ...

update:  all four (4) of the soldiers shot and killed in france were black, and identified as north africans, and all sappers from an elite air borne unit.  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17397354 .  the french have absolutely no clue as to what the motives of the shooter are.  my good lord, they must think the rest of the world quite thick to swallow that.

it has nothing to do that all the soldiers were black?

not word yet from the shits at little green footballs, barth notes or gailey dose deploring the violence.  maybe if it turns out to be a white french nationalist we'll hear some word from them?  suppose they are hedging their bets for find out?

i doubt it.  .45 acp is not a froggie style weapon.  end update, 03.17.2012.

update:  my apologies are extended to johnson, barth and kos for the use of the phrase "... pious dead dicks ... ."  i got to thinking about it, and it should have been " ... impious dead dicks ... ."  that says it better, i think. so, i apologize.  and, "... impious dead dicks ..." it is, and so it shall ever be with those dick heads.   end update, 03.16.2012.  

update:  o.k., let's be serious for this.  the separate shootings of the four soldiers in france have apparently been linked forensically.  http://edition.cnn.com/2012/03/16/world/europe/france-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t3 .  the story quotes a french police official as saying that " ... an 1143 ..." weapon was used in the shooting.  in europe, the .45 acp is identified as the 11.43x23mm, so the official probably was referring to a .45 acp weapon as being used in the killings.  whether this was based upon recovered bullets, or shell casings, or both, was not made clear.  

still no call from little green footballs, barth notes nor the gaily dose condemning the violence, perpetrated no doubt by the left or islam or both.  either that, or it involved a large whist or drinking debt.  the number of persons involved would seem to rule out romance issues.

the first soldier killed was riding a motor bike, and he was not in uniform.  to me, this implies that all of these men were purposefully targeted, and were actively tracked: i don't believe much in coincidence, so i don't think any of theshootings involved "accidental targets," or "targets of opportunity."  someone is purposefully killing soldiers, and it seems more political than personal.  time will tell, but for now, i am thinking the muzzies are behind this.

a very high percentage of french soldiers are arabs, and many are muslims.  muslims in the ranks exerting a little "influence," perhaps?  i have long maintained that the froggies have little to protect themselves from mutiney in the ranks by their muslim soldiers?  interesting, but, so far, no word on the ethnicity of the victims, nor of the alleged shooter.   end update, 0316.2012.  

update, 03.18.2012.  another shooting in southern france, this time in toulouse.  this, about 50 miles from where the three soldiers were shot just days ago.  details are sketchy, but reports indicate at this time that four persons were killed in a jewish school: the reports do not say whether adults, teachers or children.  more were wounded.  it is bound to be horrible.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/19/world/europe/france-shooting/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn . 

and, better coverage, here ...  http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/19/10753032-at-least-four-killed-in-shooting-at-jewish-school-in-france .

the french police are doing their level best to appear baffled & befuddled, and again have offered little insight.  they note it is the same m.o., and that the murderer was riding a scooter and used pistols.  they ventured no opinion, apparently, as to what is going on, not even a description of the killer.

in the shooting outside the military base in montauban the killer pushed an older woman out of the way to have clear access to shoot the soldiers, all black, as they got cash from an a.t.m.  after being shot, one of the victims attempted to crawl away, and the killer went to him, turned him over on his back, and shot him an additional three times at very close range.  now, the weapon used in the shooting has been identified as an 11.43 millimeter pistol, which is froggie speak for the .45 acp caliber.  once more might have been sufficient w/ a .45 acp, don't you think?  three additional shots indicates an incredible level of malice, and hate, and disdain.  i can tell you, the poor soldier's body was in pitiful shape after being shot at close range like this.

it is evident from these shooting that the killer is not killing indiscriminately, and that he is extremely purposeful and determined to kill his chosen victims.  the first soldier killed was out of uniform when the killer rode up on him while he was stopped on a motorbike, and then shot him: it would appear safe to conclude that the victim was followed, and that the victim was identified & known to the killer before the shooter.  the first killed was black, as well.

the shooter has an agenda, and he is supremely motivated to carry it out.

it must be asked, what is that agenda?--

all the soldiers killed were north african.

now a jewish school is targeted.  there is little doubt in my mind, though i do not know for a certainty, that the victims will be predominately children.  that is simply the most horrible conduct to be imagined.

there is still room for this to be an ultra right wing nationalist, with animosity towards blacks and jews.  but, my vote is that the killer is a muslim, who has targeted jews, and that in all likelihood if we accept this premise, that the soldiers who were victims were targeted because they were "not muslim enough" for the killer's "sensibilities."  time will tell.  end update, 03.18.2012. 

 p.s. to update.  still, nothing from johnson, barth or the daily dose condemning this outrage.  time will tell.  end p.s.

four soldiers shot and killed in france in the last little bit, three in one day, by some unknown assailant(s)on a motor scooter.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/9146491/Three-French-soldiers-shot-dead-at-ATM.html .

where is the expression of outrage over this violence, eh?

now, it is the moose limbs up to it, don't you figure?

well, it's a bit of simple deduction.  european leftist radical terrorist assassins prefer street bikes and crotch rockets for their motorized assassination, ala the baader-meinhoff and that bunch.  (aka, "the red army faction," read lewis feuer in the "conflict of generations.") they come from the pampered wealthy classes, and can afford a little style and panache in their murderous rampages.  expensive leather jackets and pants, and scarfs, and high profile weapons.  some caviar and crackers w/ champagne, afterwards.  a little dancing and a frolic to top off the day's excitement.

a motor scooter?

that is a second generation north african muslim at work.  too damned poor living on welfare to have a proper ducati or bmw bike, too broke-dicked to have a leather jacket, so it's a vespa to do his dirty work, and a quick dash back into the ghetto's that have laid siege to paris and other cities.  a little hash, afterwards, eh?  take off the edge of killing.

come on daily kos, barth, johnson, ... , you all thrilled at reading the exploits of carlos the jackal, so you are expert in this stuff.  why the silence?  where's the outrage?

oh, i know, it's just soldiers out on a lark, at an atm, probably on leave and not even armed.  (socialist leftist radical terrorists never pick on anyone who is armed, do they?)  since it's just soldiers, maybe you cannot work up any outrage over it.

after all, its probably your boys doing the dirty work, the wet work, on this one, isn't it?

john jay @ 03.14.2012

p.s.  dickheads.  the whole sorry lot, including all of you.

musings on the fn scar 17, the remington r-15, ... , and, interesting cartridge choices ...

one of the chief limitations on the use of cartridges bigger/more powerful than the .223 remington in the ar-15 family of rifles is the bolt face size.  for example, when the 6.8mm remington spc hit the ways, there were teething problems associated w/ vendors trying to use .223 bolts w/ the bolt face simply reamed out to a larger diameter.

it didn't work.  this left the extractor mortise in the bolt too deep, and it didn't allow the extractor to snap over the rim of the 6.8mm.  i know this from personal experience, because i had to purchase an enhanced bolt in 6.8mm rem spc from lewis machine and tool to make my ar work.  (good people, lewis machine and tool.  you want quality stuff, visit there.)

and, the fact is, in ar-15 size rifles, the bolt face simply doesn't have enough size and/or material to allow enlarging the bolt face to .473" in order to accomodate the considerable family of cartridges with that case head diameter.  you wanted an ar to handle the short .473" case head rounds, you had to go up to an ar-10 sized platform, adding considerable bulk and another 2.5 lbs or so: the ar-15 can be a bit heavy, and the ar-10 is a porker.  (a hollywood starlet sort of a deal, ... , a substantial difference between the early 20's and mid 50's platforms, though technically the same model.  so to speak.)

until now.

with the advent of the r-15 remington ar-type rifle, and the entrance onto the market of the fn scar 17 rifle, you have rifles comparable in size & weight  to the ar-15 that will handle with absolute aplomb the .473" case head.

cartridge musings.

you like the 7.62x39mm model 43 russian, but are not totally enamored of the ak-47 or sks rifles?

might i suggest to you that you acquire a remington r-15 or an fn scar 17 (very shooter chic right now, doncha know), and have it accoutered in either frank barnes's .308x1.5, or the 7mm remington bench rest.  in either cartridge you have a case with a .473" diameter case head, giving you an inexhaustible supply of brass in that size, with boxer primers, and suitable for concocting any sort of load you can come up with.

and, keep in mind, that such a cartridge will remain true to the "intermediate infantry" round concept, but will absolutely beat the sox off of the 7.62x39mm ballistically, easily delivering 200 fps more muzzle velocity throughout an entire range of usable bullets.  and, since there is .760" of magazine space available to accommodate the length of the loaded bullet in such an arrangement, you have an "entire range" of bullets available to load.

no, you won't have even a junior grade .308 winchester or a 7mm-08 remington on your hands when you are done, but that is the whole point, isn't it.

you want a little more oomph, then while not give my version of the venerable .30/280 brit a go?  you'll still have a full 1/2 inch to accommodate bullet seating, and as previous blog posts have indicated, as a happy coincidence a perfectly wonderful 130 grain bthp match king from sierra just shoe horns in, quite nicely.  heavier bullets than the .280 brit in an ar-15 sort of strains good sense, because they would seriously impinge upon available powder capacity inserting so far into the case, but the 130 grain bullet seems rather tailor made for the .280 brit, so where's the difficulty.

but, the 1.5" variations on the .308 winchester family of cases (let's see, to be found in commercially produced factory ammunition, e.g., lots of brass, we have cartridges in .243, .264, .284, .308, .338 and .358 caliber, ... , and, wildcatting has gone on with cartridges in .257, .323 and .277 calibers as well) are limited only by ones imagination.  all might have certain applications to satisfy certain perceived needs.

plus, it would be fun just messing around, now, wouldn't it?

and, from about .264 to .308 caliber all would have application within the context of the "intermediate infantry" rifle application,  with bores above those dimensions having application as suitable short range deer calibers in situations heretofore limited to the venerable winchester 94 and marlin 336 model lever actions.

certainly, as frank barnes notes in his observations on his .308x1.5" in his tome "cartridges of the world," all would have a marked superiority over the .30-30 winchester, the king of the deer woods for generation upon generation.

and, as noted, you are limited only by your imaginations for the possible applications for such cartridges.

john jay @ 03.14.2012

p.s.  bullet musings.  berger is at www.bergerbullets.com .  i had trouble signing in with this morning using both "google" and "internet explorer," so maybe they are having connectivity problems.  but, they make very long, and very accurate, bullets for caliber.

now, with all the room in a ar-15 magazine when using a 1.5" cartridge case, why not indulge yourself with a very long bullet for weight, just to have some fun.  in the .308x1.5" case, say give a 165 or 168 grain bullet a chance, and see how fast you can make it go, and how long you can stretch a reasonable trajectory.

just saying.

just google "berger bullets," and you'll get a host of vendors marketing these very useful and interesting bullets. 

have fun.

whodda thunk it, ... , .280 brit, ... , p.s., reaming the chamber ...

update, 03.14.2012:  years ago i succeeded to a whole mess of .243 winchester once-fired brass.  it just so happens that the .243 win. is based upon the .308 winchester case, just like it's cousin the 7mm-08 remington.

it turns out to be something of a coincidence that the .243 winchester has a case neck more or less .255" long.  do you see where this is going?  if you simply get your trusty little dremel tool out, and cut off the case neck right at the junction with the sloping shoulder (or maybe leave just a little tit to go over the expander plug), and then run that right up into the 7mm-08 sizing/depriming die, modified by having .255" milled or ground off the entrance as discussed at the below link, what will issue forth is gonna be very close to my "duplicated" .30/280 british case.  all you need do then, is simply run the sized case through a trimming lathe, (hand powered & bench mounted, such as a forster), and trim to 1.760".  you may trim to 45 mm, if you prefer.

it's just a happy coincidence that the .243 winchester makes it all so very, very easy.

http://wintersoldier2008.typepad.com/summer_patriot_winter_sol/2012/03/whodda-thunk-it-but-the-280-brit-ends-up-being-ridiculously-easy-to-duplicate-sorta-.html .

now you have only to chamber a .284 bore & groove barrel, and develop a load, and you have yourself my version of a .30/280 brit.  hey, you've gone this far, it should be a piece o' cake.  end update.  

comment:  if you happen to have an em-2 hanging around the house, you have only to shorten the 7mm-08 sizing die another .080", in order to get a case 43 millimeters long, &  to massage the shoulder a bit to the original chamber specification.  then, you have a shooter.  this is no hill for a climber, as we say out n.e. oregon way.  just saying.  for those of you who reside w/in the commonwealth, make sure this is legal.  laughing.  i doubt it, but you never know.  end comment.

2nd update, 03.19.2012:  just shipping a set of 7mm-08 sizing dies off to a retired friend and he is going to pop them in a lathe, and shorten them as discussed in the main text below, probably just a bit too thoroughly.  so, last night, i got out the calipers and was just checking some things over, and found out the calipers more dependably detected the beginning curve of the bullet's ogive, which is the curve that forms the pointy part at the front.  not to be too technical about it.  the shank of the bullet is mostly cylindrical, and of even diameter, while the ogive is of diminishing diameter as the bullet narrows to the tip.  on the shank, the neck grips the bullet evenly.  get part of the ogive under the neck, and it doesn't grip well, which is undesirable.  problem was, i put part of the ogive in the neck, so had to ask my gunsmith friend to move the shoulder and neck back to the rest of the case, shortening it, so that the bullet would be gripped properly.

so, the dies will have 0.305" removed, so as to cause the shouler of the case to be located 1.2950" from the case head.  in other words, i asked my friend to take an additional 0.050" inches from the die, to shorten the case a like amount, and to leave the overall length of the case at 1.710", instead of 1.760".  this will, of course, expose another 0.050" of the bullet out from under the case neck.  the overall cartridge length will remain the same at 2.260".

now, all of the portion of the bullet held by the neck will be the straight shank of the bullet, e.g., a cylindrical part of the bullet of uniform dimension.  this is good.  so, ...   end of comment, 03.19.2012.

comment.  this is the part that costs nothing, except postage.  we'll see whether the "exchequer" can fund the rest of the development of the round, in the next year or so.  fuel pump in the car, u-joints on the torque tube this week, and a front tire and distributor/rotor/points job sometime this summer.  as marcus whitman said, "all my plans require time and distance."  at my age, it all is getting short.  end comment.  

3rd update, 03.31.2012.  just received word the other day that my friend has machined the dies, (taking off another 0.0250" inches, for a reason that must have been good), and that they are on the way home, courtesy of sam's snail mail.   well, i've got some .243 winchester brass courtesy of a fellow who left them on the ground at the local shooting range, and we'll find out shortly how convenient and/or practicable it is to form the .280 brit from them in my little contrivance.

soon, ... , triumph, or egg on the face.  we shall see.  end update.

 

oh, yes, there is the little matter of reaming the chamber in a barrel that will utilize my design thinking.

there are no chamber reamers to be utilized, excepting those cut on a custom (and need i add, very expensive) basis, by a very good tool and die maker who specializes in this sort of work.  right?

well, actually, there is a very inexpensive way to make the chamber that i am talking about.

and, that is to use a standard reamer designed to cut a 7mm-08 remington chamber.  you just don't run it into the barrel/barrel chamber the "final" .255" inches of the "normal" cut.  anybody who runs a lathe should be able to figure that out, and establish the correct head space with a little care.

and, if you don't have a lathe that enable you to do so without too much effort, or, your pencil is a little dull the day you do this, then simply make a .255" thick collar and fit it over the reamer, so that you cannot run the reamer in for the standard distance.

for those rifles using a flat breach face, this should present no difficulty at all.  for rifles with cone breaches, and such like, simply hand turn the reamer for the final cuts, taking care to use "go" and "no-go" gauges to establish head space.

seems pretty simple to me, unless i have missed something here.

as noted in the main article, case wall taper should present no difficulty.

john jay @ 03.13.2012

p.s.  if you can come up with $2500 plus, you won't even have to rebate case rims to run the case in an ar-15 sized platform.  you can buy an fn scar 17 rifle, and re-barrel it to the .30/280 brit, and chamber the round in it.  the standard bolt in that rifle uses the .473 case head, entirely compatible with the brit.

or, for slightly yes, you can use an ar-15 rifle manufactured by remington, with uses a bit of a hybrid system so that it can utilize a standard .473" bolt face for its remington ar-30 cartridge, from which people are "staying awaying" in droves.  i don't know why, it is a good cartridge.  go figure?

a .30/280 brit in that rifle would be a wonderful thing.  tell remington i told you so, ... , i will be expecting the roses from them, the next couple weeks.  laughing.

the .30/280 brit was a better infantry round when the united states bullied the brits into adopting the 7.62x51mm nato so many years ago.  it remains a better infantry round today.  i hope some of you will do my little project, and start shooting the round.

it is a positive tragedy that it has been moribund these many years.  it was a better round than the .276 pedersen, and it remains a far superior intermediate infantry round to anything in use in the world to this day.  right now the united states scrambles for an infantry round for the 4 to 500 yard plus battlefield, such as presented by long range engagement in afghanistan.  it is precisely within this context that the .30/280 brit excelled, and would excel in today.

as much as i like my 6.8mm remington spc, neither it nor the 6.5mm grendel hold a candle to the brit.  not even close.  and, the venerable old 7.62x51 mm nato round, as good as it is, doesn't have the capability or versatility of the brit.

you watch the british pathe videos of the trials between the brit and the .308/7.62mm nato.  you'll be very taken aback at what you are seeing, if you are a die-hard fan of the 7.62mm nato.  very surprised, indeed.

you can look it up.

whodda thunk it, but the .280 brit ends up being ridiculously easy to duplicate ... sorta ...

i have written in these pages before of the sad fate of perhaps the best "intermediate infantry" cartridge ever developed, the .30/280 british.  the .30/280 was adopted along with a companion bull pup rifle capable of selective fire for a short while, but american insistence that n.a.t.o. adopt an infantry round of .308 caliber led to the british government dropping both the cartridge and the rifle, and adopting the fn fal in 7.62x51mm instead.

what the british were hoping to accomplish with the .30/280 and the bullpup rifle was to give the infantry a rifle capable of being used both as an infantry rifle, and a squad support type rifle capable of "machine gun" fire all in one weapon, and with one cartridge.  the dream vanished with the adoption of the fn fal in 7.62x51, as the round proved simply too powerful to control in full auto fire in the relatively light weight fn fal and the american m-14.

no infantry round since has really approached the virtues possessed by the .30/280 brit, in terms of light weight, manageable recoil, and a wonderful balance that gave it sufficient power and efficient ballistics.  update:  a very good history of the em-2 & the .30/280 brit, from the redoubtable russian, and links in his post to some history on the fn fal.  this guy is a good read.  http://world.guns.ru/assault/brit/enfield-em-2-e.html  end update.

it is a pity that it was never adopted by an allied power, and it is god's beneficence that it was not adopted by the communist block, because it was a clearly superior round in terms of being friendly to weapons design, ballistics and logistics.

(and, americans turn your heads, it was simply ballistically superior to the 7.62x51mm nato.  and, kicked far less.)

well, as it turns out, producing a round that duplicates the .30/280 british, if not replicating it exactly, turns out to be ridiculously simple, or so it appears at this vantage.

please allow me to digress, just a bit.--

i have an ar-15 rifle in 6.8mm remington spc, a .277 caliber weapon as opposed to the .284 caliber of the brit.  the 6.8mm is a good round, and along with the very similar 6.5mm grendel, is clearly ballistically superior to both the 7.62x39mm model 43 russian, and the 5.56x45mm nato rounds.  and, as it turns out, it has a very similar trajectory to that of the 7.62x51mm nato.

but, i have toyed with the idea of trying to get make a rifle in .30/280 brit, ... , well, just because.

just to see if i might be able to make a round that would fit into an ar-15 magazine/magazine well, and have a little more "oomph," i decided to compare the case capacity of the 6.8mm remington spc with that of the 7.62mm nato round.  now, it's clear the .308 winchester/7.62mm nato  are bigger cartridges: one need only hold them side by side.  i knew that if i simply weighed/measured the water of capacity of each, that the larger cartridge would have more volume.

duh!!

the 6.8mm is already a fair performer, so i wanted to see if any discernible performance increase would justify going to all the trouble to recreate the .30/280 brit.  i mean, why bother, if there were to be no return on the, ... , well, bother.

so, what i did was get my little dremel tool out, a remnant of a previous existence, and i cut the should and neck section of the case off, leaving just a bare cylinder at the juncture of the case and shoulder:  this left a cylinder about 1.31" long, including the head of the case.

i reasoned (imagine that!!) that if i were to stuff a larger case into the magazine well, it would have to be about the same length as the 6.8 case, and that to conform to the requirement, the shoulder of such a case could not extend much past the shoulder of the 6.8mm.  so, i got a .308 case, and i cut it just at 1.31" in front of the face of the case head.

so, i had to truncated/cut cases, both about 1.31" long, the 6.8mm being approximately .373" inside diameter at the shoulder, the 7.62mm case being approximately .418" inside diameter at a point well below the shoulder.

now, i used hodgdon h-322 powder in my 6.8mm.  i load about 28.2 grains of the stuff behind a 115 grain bullet.  not surprisingly, when i fill the 6.8mm's cylinder to where it was cut off, the powder charge weighed 27.5 grains.  likewise, when i filled the truncated/chopped off 7.62mm case with powder to its abbreviated length, the powder charge weighed 35.5 grains.   

performing the same exercise with hodgdon's h-335 powder, i got about 30.5 grains of powder in the 6.8mm case, and 38.0 grains in the shortened 7.62mm case.

so, it appears to me, that if we compare the case capacity of a 6.8mm case as is, and anticipate the gains in case capacity of a 7.62mm nato case shortened to the same length as the 6.8mm case, but with the advantage of a considerably larger interior diameter, we might expect to achieve a greater powder capacity in the shortened 7.62mm nato of approximately 20% or so, maybe even along the lines of 25% or so.

as a general rule of thumb, first commented on by julian hatcher nearly 60 years ago in "hatcher's notebook," if you increase powder capacity in a cartridge chamber by a given percentage, you can expect a proportionate velocity increase in the realm of 1/4 of the percentage of powder increase.  that's not very elegant, but what it means, is that if you increase the powder by 20%, you can expect a 5 to 6% increase in velocity.

my 6.8mm gets a bit over 2550 fps from the present case.  increase the powder and get a 6% increase in velocity, and that translates into an increase of 153 fps, or just a tad over 2700 fps with the same bullet, at least in theory.  stuff a little more powder into the newly created case, and maybe you get a little more than that.

now, the 6.8mm is .277 caliber.  the .280 brit is .284 caliber.  how fast you can make a bullet go can be a little arcane, but, looking at the matter as simple mechanics, the amount of power/energy/velocity that can be imparted to a bullet is a function of the pressure exerted upon the area of its diameter, or the base of the cylinder upon which the pressure operates.  the pressure being equal (in this case, around 50,000 lbs. per square inch, the operating pressure of the ar-15 series of rifles), the bullet weight being equal or roughly equivalent, the bullet with the larger base area (a function of diameter & circumference) is going to get squirted out of barrels of equal length, faster.

it is as simple as that.

so, a bullet of .284 diameter is going to go a little faster in the scenario.

so, why haven't i just gone out and bought a rifle in .30/280 british, and some .30/280 british ammunition, and just leave all of this alone?  well, it's because they don't make the ammo anymore, and they don't make rifles in that caliber.

and, it is pitifully ridiculous how hard it is to find the equipment from which to fabricate your own.  if i could find the loading dies to make the "brit," they would probably cost a couple hundred bucks, and a case forming die another hundred or so, and the reamer to cut a chamber in a barrel would cost the talents of a die cutter, and the talents of such a man would set you back another 2 or 3 hundred dollars, american.  put it all together, and in labor and materials you are looking $500 to $1000 right square in the face.

if i could find/obtain the dies.  they are no where to be found.

i have looked, and i thought i had found a source for the dies, (but not the chamber reamer), but when i looked again this week the format of the company catalog had changed, and the entry for the .280 had vanished.

but, i have done a bit more reading.

and, it turns out, that the .30/280 british cartridge is going to be relatively easy to duplicate, at least in spirit and in general dimensions.

it turns out that in order to try and placate the americans the english ballisticians and engineers proposed a cartridge called the 7x51mm.  the number "51" caught my eye.  that is the same length in millimeters as the 7.62x51mm nato cartridge.  now the americans and the brits were carrying on cartridge and rifle trials all during this process of choosing a cartridge for nato.  (you can view them in old british pathe films, ... , thank you google, thank you youtube.)

so, there had to be plenty of interchange going on.

the brits finally adopted a cartridge with the same case head as the american experimental t-65 cartridge, at .473" nominal diameter.  the .30/280 brit has a casehead diameter of .473".

so, i got to looking at cartridge drawings and diagrams, with the singular purpose of comparing the dimensions of the .30/280 brit, and the 7mm-08 remington cartridge, a cartridge itself derived from the 7.62x51mm nato round.  what if the 7mm-08 is not so very much different in size from the .30/280 brit, as the existence of a 7x51mm british experimental round suggests?, (it occurred to me).

well, when i compared the case dimensions, several interesting things appeared.--

the distance from the case mouth to the case shoulder on the .30/280 brit, encompassing the case mouth, the neck of the cartridge which actually holds the bullet & and the sloping surface of the shoulder, to that point where the shoulder begins is roughly 13 mm's.

the distance from the case mouth to the case should on the 7mm-08 remington, to the point where the shoulder begins, is roughly 13mm's in length.  the slope of the shoulder from the point where the case cylinder narrows to its juncture with the case neck, is roughly the same on both cartridges.

the diameter of the case, at the point of the shoulder is not so different.

as a matter of fact, the .30/280 brit and the 7mm-08 remington commercial cartridge (it has never been adopted as a military round) are not so different, except for the overall length.

remember the 1.31" length of the two cylinders i made to measure case capacity?

well, i got a .308 case out, and i scribed a line on the side of the case, radial to its length, right at 1.31".   and then, i scribed a line precisely on the point of the juncture of the case shoulder, and the slope of the case to the neck.

and, i measured the distance between them.  that distance is .255", right on the nose.

this is my plan, time and finance permitting, but, in theory it should work.  so, financial constraints being what they are, e.g., "reality," my theory is simply this.--  i will obtain a set of reloading dies, in caliber 7mm-08 remington, from rcbs, and they will cost in the neighborhood of $50 or so, ... , i don't know, for sure, i've not bought anything like that since before my second divorce and quadruple bypass.  laughing.

that's pretty real, eh?

and, i am going to do something odd.  i am going to "destroy" them.  (ponder that word, "destroy."  by doing as i will do, you will destroy the ability of the die to ever function correctly for working with the 7mm-08 cartridge.  you will utterly void any and all warranties, express or implied or inferred by fitness for a purpose associated with the equipment.  you will be out the labor for altering them.  kapish?  a good word, destroy, for you are destroying the utility for which the dies were designed.  now, consider this is the theory of someone you never met, and upon whom your reliance may work to your detriment.  the same goes for my observations on chamber reaming, found in the following post.  you proceed at you own risk.  ponder that word, "destroy.")

i am going to have a machinist mill, surface grind, or lathe, whatever, the dimension of .255" right off the bottom opening of the dies.

the consequence of this will be that a 7mm-08 remington cartridge case will be shoved up into the die .255" more than would the norm, and that the neck and shoulder will be displaced downward on the axis of the case, and the shoulder will begin .255" "sooner" or "earlier", or, closer to the case head than would otherwise be the case.  now, if nothing more were done, we would have a case looking sort of silly, because the neck of the case would now be slightly more than .255" longer than normal, and the shoulder set way back.

so, a die is going to have to have some dimension cut out, and the depriming stem can be removed, so that that excess material can be forced out the end of the die and trimmed to the appropriate length.  then the case will be run through another shortened sizing die, to make the final altered case.

now, those of you who have your pencils out will have noted something.  the 7mm-08 remington is basically 51 millimeters in length, while the 6.8mm remington is 43 millimeters in length.  this means that the 7mm08 is .335" longer than the 6.8's 43 millimeters, and also .335" longer than the 43 millimeters of the .30/280 brit cartridge.

i am only gonna trim off .255" in the process described above.  that means that .080" are "unaccounted" for, ... , or, in other words, that the case i am projecting to create through all of this is .080" longer than 43 millimeters.  well, as it turns out, the dimension of .080 is basically about 2 millimeters.  if all this works out as i hope, this means that the case that emerges from all this tweeking is going to be 1.760" long, or 45 mm's long.

and, this is just the exact length of the case for the 5.56x45mm nato cartridge.  that is a major dimension of the cartridge which defined the dimension of the ar-15 magazine well.  and, that is the dimension i must comply with to stuff my "version" of a .30/280 british into an ar-15 rifle.

it just sort of worked out that way.  i really didn't plan it that way, it just sort of happened.  we'll see.

what do i hope to accomplish?

well, it is reported that after wwii the british commission/committee in charge of the cartridge development culminating in the .30/280 brit had a cartridge capable of shooting a 140 grain bullet something over 2700 feet per second.  this is very impressive to me, because the load that i am shooting in my 7mm 08 is a 140 grain nosler, somewhere in the neighborhood of 2800 fps, with a fairly heavy dose of powder.

if i ever develop my little theory, i just don't think that i will be able to get that much velocity out of a case .255" inches shorter, ... , remember, we've removed a section of the case cylinder that is basically .420" of an inch in diameter, and .255" of an inch thick.  i suppose i could weigh the contents of a 7mm-08 case all the way to the shoulder junction, and compare it with the powder charge of the 1.31" cylinder, and make the quantification exact, ... , but, for right now, it is sufficient to note that such amount is a bunch, as we say in n.e. oregon.

i just don't think i have to nerve to load my little creation, if it ever come to that, with that much powder.

nope, here is my goal.  i want to load a sierra match king bthp bullet of .284" diameter (7mm), stock number 1903, that weighs 130 grains, to perhaps 100 fps or so faster than i am am getting out of my 115 grain bullet in the 6.8mm remington spc.  if i could get that, and maybe just a sconcy more, i would be just absolutely ecstatic.

i should live so long.

well, it took me long enough to come to all this.  so, maybe i ain't so smart.  but, i will note that no one else seems to have arrived at a solution that is so, ... , well, just butt wipe simple, and inexpensive, as we say out here in these parts.

(wouldn't you just love to come visit, and listen to people talk this way?  laughing.  you probably think i just make all these little sayings up, doncha?  well, we have lots of time out here, we love to talk, e.g., "bullshit," over coffee, and i know lots of people who really do talk this way.  and, yes, it's fun.)

i think my solution, when you consider it from the dearth of resources available, and potential costs involved in doing it the conventional way, is, well, just pretty damned elegant.

we'll see how it all works out, if it does, and i will keep you posted.

and, if you've a hankering to try it out, give it a whirl.  i don't own the rights to the .30/280 british, the people of england do.  so, have at it.

john jay @ 03.13.2012

p.s.  two observations.  the .30/280 brit had a case shoulder about .449" in diameter, and my case will be about .454" in diameter when it is moved back along the 7mm-08 case the .255" it will be set back.  that shouldn't raise any problems with feeding, as case design sees less & less taper along the cylander of the case as it evolves.

and, one other thing.  the base of the case should not be materially affected by being move farther up into the die body.  at a point just in front of the extractor grove, my 7mm-08/.308 winchester/7.62x51mm natos appear to be about .467" in diameter, and this compare to .467" in diameter at a point .255" in front of the face of the case.  in short, the case is not going to be "squeezed" or "deformed" by being force farther into the die body.

and, one more "one other thing."  i am gonna use hodgdon's h-335, or a powder of similar burn rate, such as h- and/or imr-4895, when and if this theorizing every comes to fruition.  they seem to be used in low weight loads in the 7mm-08 and 7.62x51mm nato cases, and they should work.

it should work.  laughing.

but, that is how you can make a .30/280 brit if you are so inclined.

p.s.s.  did i happen to mention the rebated rim?  to make the .473" diameter case rim of the 7mm-08/.30-280 british fit the bolt face of a 6.8mm remington spc bolt face, which is about .420" in diameter.  piece of cake, no problem, at all.  laughing.

 

friends, please keep in mind viewing this photo, that the cases and bullets are positioned within a set of dial caliper jaws, set at an opening of 2.260":  this is the length of an ar-15 magazine, or clip as you might put it.  the casing nearest the calipers is a .243 winchester, and the bullet beside it is a 130 grain sierra bthp, or match king.  now, were the casing modified as discussed above in the article, the end of the case mouth would be just right at the juncture of the case neck and the sloping surface of the shoulder.  and, the bullet would project out of the case, at that point, some .255" inches more than shown in the photo.  in other words, the entire case neck would hold the bullet at its fullest diameter, before it begins narrowing down toward its tip.   thus, the case modified as i propose in the article is sufficiently long in the neck to securely hold the bullet in place during handling, loading, and during the cycling of the action in firing.  it also fits an ar-15 magazine/magazine well.

the .280 brit is sized as though made for the ar-15.  or, perhaps eugene stoner and melvin johnson, of the johnson rifle, model of 1941 fame, may have designed the ar-15 around the .30/280 brit, perhaps the best "intermediate" infantry round ever conceived.