User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 12:26:23 AM EDT
[#1]
Wowza
I saw the jet a few times down near Fountain. Interesting scene |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 12:34:29 AM EDT
[#2]
Balls... that pilot has them.
Dead-stick and falling out of the sky, and he stayed with it to keep it from lawn darting into apartment buildings. Punched out at a 'lower than recommended altitude' as a result. I don't know how much those guys are paid, but it ain't enough |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 12:55:59 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Balls... that pilot has them. Dead-stick and falling out of the sky, and he stayed with it to keep it from lawn darting into apartment buildings. Punched out at a 'lower than recommended altitude' as a result. I don't know how much those guys are paid, but it ain't enough Yup. The pilot's an absolute hero. And yet it isn't an isolated case - there are a number of similar stories where the pilot steered a stricken plane away from houses etc before crashing or ejecting. -K |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 1:19:34 AM EDT
[#4]
I'll look up the safety report when I go into work tomorrow. One of the risks of flying single engine airplanes is, well, you only have a single engine. Pointing the jet away from populated areas before pulling the handles is commonly briefed. I had heard the rumors that the dude ran out of gas because Obama was running behind schedule. If the throttle malfunction is the real cause, it sounds like this dude did alright.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 2:05:41 AM EDT
[#5]
Any word on the Blue Angel that crashed on the same day? That pilot died, iirc.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 2:07:51 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Any word on the Blue Angel that crashed on the same day? That pilot died, iirc. Yep. He attempted a split-S with too high a starting airspeed and not enough altitude. Flew his plane into the ground. ETA - A split-S is a simple aerobatic maneuver where you perform a 180 degree roll, placing your aircraft in an inverted attitude. You then pull the nose of the aircraft through 180 degrees of travel in the vertical plane. It's basically the back half of a loop. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 2:13:33 AM EDT
[#7]
The board did laud Turner for staying with the plane to low altitude in order to steer it away from homes. The board found that Turner ejected at a lower-than-recommended altitude because he wanted the jet to crash in an open field. If I recall correctly, then several years back there was a Blue Angel pilot who also stayed with his plane too long into a malfunction because he was trying to avoid crashing into civilian homes. He was not as fortunate as Major Turner, and was killed in the crash, as I recall. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 2:17:58 AM EDT
[#8]
What happened to the theory of him running out of fuel because Barry spoke too long at the Air Force Academy graduation?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 2:20:02 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What happened to the theory of him running out of fuel because Barry spoke too long at the Air Force Academy graduation? According to the article he had half a ton of kerosene on board. I didn't know F-16s ran on kerosene, but whatever. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 2:31:33 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
According to the article he had half a ton of kerosene on board. I didn't know F-16s ran on kerosene, but whatever. If I had to guess, it was loaded with JP-8. Not quite kerosene, but a similarly low octane. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 2:35:19 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If I had to guess, it was loaded with JP-8. Not quite kerosene, but a similarly low octane. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
According to the article he had half a ton of kerosene on board. I didn't know F-16s ran on kerosene, but whatever. If I had to guess, it was loaded with JP-8. Not quite kerosene, but a similarly low octane. The AF switched from JP-8 to Jet A a couple years ago. http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/547593/air-force-completes-historic-fuel-conversion.aspx?source=GovD |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 2:42:22 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Balls... that pilot has them. Dead-stick and falling out of the sky, and he stayed with it to keep it from lawn darting into apartment buildings. Punched out at a 'lower than recommended altitude' as a result. I don't know how much those guys are paid, but it ain't enough There were no apartment buildings to avoid, just a lot of open space just beyond 2 neighborhoods, one of them being mine (it landed a few thousand feet north of our house and about 2 miles short of the runway, just off to the side of a long straight road). There are a lot of places to park a plane near there, and it has happened several times - one a 737 that did nosedive and just miss an apartment building about a mile to the west. G |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 2:48:55 AM EDT
[#13]
Some CDI(guy who inspects maintenance actions) is getting the long dick of of the AF.
I was a CDI and I would probably be CM or kicked out through NJP if that was me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 3:12:41 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Some CDI(guy who inspects maintenance actions) is getting the long dick of of the AF. I was a CDI and I would probably be CM or kicked out through NJP if that was me. So.... blame the enlisted guy? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 3:14:37 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So.... blame the enlisted guy? Basically yes. In the navy they will try to blame the maintainer at all costs. But if the maintainer followed all pubs then they will be fine. But it's a trial though fire if it does happen. Basically guilty until proven innocent. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 12:53:41 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So.... blame the enlisted guy? No. The pubs are fucked up. Pilots don't operate the aircraft using maintenance publications. They use the "dash one" manual. Not pilot or maintainer fault. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 1:33:49 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yep. He attempted a split-S with too high a starting airspeed and not enough altitude. Flew his plane into the ground. ETA - A split-S is a simple aerobatic maneuver where you perform a 180 degree roll, placing your aircraft in an inverted attitude. You then pull the nose of the aircraft through 180 degrees of travel in the vertical plane. It's basically the back half of a loop. I think the final report was pilot fatigue, ie insufficient crew rest. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 1:48:32 PM EDT
[#18]
Interesting that the article cited confusing and contradictory statements in the maintenence manual.
Even after all these years of flying them there are still things like this that can pop up. Complex machines and the systems in which they operate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 1:55:07 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
According to the article he had half a ton of kerosene on board. I didn't know F-16s ran on kerosene, but whatever. All jet fuel is essentially kerosene. Some anti-congealing compounds added. That is what the K in KC-10/KC-135 originally stood for. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 1:56:37 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Interesting that the article cited confusing and contradictory statements in the maintenence manual. Even after all these years of flying them there are still things like this that can pop up. Complex machines and the systems in which they operate. One might argue that the demo teams fly an envelop that a normal pilot/mission does not so the maintenance procedures might not be right for both of them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 2:04:33 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
One might argue that the demo teams fly an envelop that a normal pilot/mission does not so the maintenance procedures might not be right for both of them. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Interesting that the article cited confusing and contradictory statements in the maintenence manual. Even after all these years of flying them there are still things like this that can pop up. Complex machines and the systems in which they operate. One might argue that the demo teams fly an envelop that a normal pilot/mission does not so the maintenance procedures might not be right for both of them. That's what interests me more than anything else. I love incident investigations because you tend to find those little nuggets. Nothing near as complex or life/death but at a former workplace we found that an SOP which contained language from a manufacture's manual was wrong after 13 years of it being followed. Even the manufacture didn't realize they had published it incorrectly and the best part was that wasn't even the root cause of the incident just a tertiary finding. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 2:09:33 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's what interests me more than anything else. I love incident investigations because you tend to find those little nuggets. Nothing near as complex or life/death but at a former workplace we found that an SOP which contained language from a manufacture's manual was wrong after 13 years of it being followed. Even the manufacture didn't realize they had published it incorrectly and the best part was that wasn't even the root cause of the incident just a tertiary finding. Reading this one it seems like the pilot fully retracted the throttle during flight causing an engine shutdown Is that something that would be done in a normal sortie? I don't know. Not a pilot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 2:18:36 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Reading this one it seems like the pilot fully retracted the throttle during flight causing an engine shutdown Is that something that would be done in a normal sortie? I don't know. Not a pilot. In normal engine operation, pulling the throttle all the way back would but the engine in the idle setting. With the throttle cutoff trigger malfunctioning as the report says, pulling it back all the way would go past the idle stop to engine cutoff. Sad way to kill an F-16. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 2:21:44 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
All jet fuel is essentially kerosene. Some anti-congealing compounds added. That is what the K in KC-10/KC-135 originally stood for. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
According to the article he had half a ton of kerosene on board. I didn't know F-16s ran on kerosene, but whatever. All jet fuel is essentially kerosene. Some anti-congealing compounds added. That is what the K in KC-10/KC-135 originally stood for. Ive heard that before but I believe it's a myth. I think it's just the end result of looking for an unassigned identifier. Obviously, the K signifies that it's a tanker. Normally they go with the first letter of the word they're trying to identify to use as it's identifier. F=fighter, C=cargo, D=drone, O= observation, R=reconnaissance, W=weather reconnaissance... The T was already used for Trainer. A was already used for Attack and later modified to Ground Attack. N has always been reserved for Special Test Permanent aircraft. Next came K. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 2:26:28 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
All jet fuel is essentially kerosene. Some anti-congealing compounds added. That is what the K in KC-10/KC-135 originally stood for. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
According to the article he had half a ton of kerosene on board. I didn't know F-16s ran on kerosene, but whatever. All jet fuel is essentially kerosene. Some anti-congealing compounds added. That is what the K in KC-10/KC-135 originally stood for. An interesting thought on the history of why the mission letter is K, but the JP-4 that the tankers gave from the KB-29 until the 90's was a wide cut fuel about 50/50 gasoline/kerosene. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 2:54:34 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ive heard that before but I believe it's a myth. I think it's just the end result of looking for an unassigned identifier. Obviously, the K signifies that it's a tanker. Normally they go with the first letter of the word they're trying to identify to use as it's identifier. F=fighter, C=cargo, D=drone, O= observation, R=reconnaissance, W=weather reconnaissance... The T was already used for Trainer. A was already used for Attack and later modified to Ground Attack. N has always been reserved for Special Test Permanent aircraft. Next came K. I got it from a source document early 50s. I don't remember which. It may be an urban legend, but its one dating to the 50s at least. nevertheless Jet-A, Kerosene, and JP-8, JP-4 are essentially identical outside of additives. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 2:58:49 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I got it from a source document early 50s. I don't remember which. It may be an urban legend, but its one dating to the 50s at least. nevertheless Jet-A, Kerosene, and JP-8, whoops. quite a bit of difference there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 3:00:42 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'll look up the safety report when I go into work tomorrow. One of the risks of flying single engine airplanes is, well, you only have a single engine. Pointing the jet away from populated areas before pulling the handles is commonly briefed. I had heard the rumors that the dude ran out of gas because Obama was running behind schedule. If the throttle malfunction is the real cause, it sounds like this dude did alright. The safety report is Executive Privileged info. Dont spout it here....but you know that I hope. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 3:57:05 PM EDT
[#29]
Post Fail.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 3:59:44 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If I recall correctly, then several years back there was a Blue Angel pilot who also stayed with his plane too long into a malfunction because he was trying to avoid crashing into civilian homes. He was not as fortunate as Major Turner, and was killed in the crash, as I recall. Lt Commander Kevin Davis. Met him at an airshow at MKC, he gave me a numbered Blue Angels challenge coin. Flew combat sorties in an F-14 in the early days of the fighting in Afghanistan. He was a great American. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 4:03:33 PM EDT
[#31]
Allowed the pilot to turn the plane off? Like a stall?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 4:06:31 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
According to the article he had half a ton of kerosene on board. I didn't know F-16s ran on kerosene, but whatever. That's not exactly a full bag of gas when fuel consumption is 3,000-8,000 pounds per hour without the reheater. Caveat: I'm not a pilot, so may be way off base. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 4:18:29 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I got it from a source document early 50s. I don't remember which. It may be an urban legend, but its one dating to the 50s at least. nevertheless Jet-A, Kerosene, and JP-8, JP-4 are essentially identical outside of additives. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Ive heard that before but I believe it's a myth. I think it's just the end result of looking for an unassigned identifier. Obviously, the K signifies that it's a tanker. Normally they go with the first letter of the word they're trying to identify to use as it's identifier. F=fighter, C=cargo, D=drone, O= observation, R=reconnaissance, W=weather reconnaissance... The T was already used for Trainer. A was already used for Attack and later modified to Ground Attack. N has always been reserved for Special Test Permanent aircraft. Next came K. I got it from a source document early 50s. I don't remember which. It may be an urban legend, but its one dating to the 50s at least. nevertheless Jet-A, Kerosene, and JP-8, JP-4 are essentially identical outside of additives. I can't help but note that every other aircraft's prefix is taken from their mission role. To suddenly assign an identifier based off of the name of a liquid it doesn't actually carry would be a very strange departure from the norm. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 4:20:10 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I can't help but note that every other aircraft's prefix is taken from their mission role. To suddenly assign an identifier based off of the name of a liquid it doesn't actually carry would be a very strange departure from the norm. Kerosene Cargo actually makes sense. F-Fighter P-Pursuit A-Attack B-Bomber C-Cargo etc etc etc What else should we assume K would mean, taking your statement to its logical conclusion? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 4:55:52 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Kerosene Cargo actually makes sense. F-Fighter P-Pursuit A-Attack B-Bomber C-Cargo etc etc etc What else should we assume K would mean, taking your statement to its logical conclusion? Here's what I've been able to find so far: http://www.driko.org/usdes2.html Air Force started using the K-code for tankers in 1949. Tankers at the time (KB-29's) carried Av-Gas not jet fuel (kerosene). Early tankers didn't use the AF style flying boom setup. That came about in the early 1950's to refuel SAC bombers. By then the KB-29s were being supplemented/replaced with KC-97s, which were then replaced by the KC-135. While they have pumped kerosene/JP fuels for the vast majority of their career, the K-code precedes this. The 1962 tri-service designation system made K-code the standard for tankers. From 1958-62 the Navy/USMC used G as their tanker mission designator. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 5:03:24 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Kerosene Cargo actually makes sense. F-Fighter P-Pursuit A-Attack B-Bomber C-Cargo etc etc etc What else should we assume K would mean, taking your statement to its logical conclusion? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I can't help but note that every other aircraft's prefix is taken from their mission role. To suddenly assign an identifier based off of the name of a liquid it doesn't actually carry would be a very strange departure from the norm. Kerosene Cargo actually makes sense. F-Fighter P-Pursuit A-Attack B-Bomber C-Cargo etc etc etc What else should we assume K would mean, taking your statement to its logical conclusion? Well, again, they're not hauling kerosene. It's a kerosene based fuel just like cool-aid is a water based beverage. But it's no longer water anymore than JP-8 is kerosene. We only refer to jet fuel as kerosene in a tongue in cheek fashion. All KC aircraft are dual role in that they operate as tankers and cargo aircraft. They don't just carry fuel and even if they did, that fuel isn't kerosene. KC-10s have a huge cargo space as did the original tanker, the KC-97. Kc-10 cargo deck:  Attached FileKc-97 cargo deck: 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 5:11:04 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Kerosene Cargo actually makes sense. F-Fighter P-Pursuit A-Attack B-Bomber C-Cargo etc etc etc What else should we assume K would mean, taking your statement to its logical conclusion? Why do we have to assume it means anything? All of the obvious ones were taken. Heck, every other letter of "tanker" is assigned to a mission. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 5:16:00 PM EDT
[#38]
Half a ton of fuel?
Didn't we have a .mil pilot here a week or so ago saying they burn about 1000# in the pattern shooting approaches? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 5:21:12 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Half a ton of fuel? Didn't we have a .mil pilot here a week or so ago saying they burn about 1000# in the pattern shooting approaches? An F-16 holds less than 6000 pounds of fuel internally so 1k isn't a lot but it isn't nothing either. What a little or a lot is depends on the plane. My jet can be off by 4000 pounds of fuel and we are still good to know because we deal in bigger numbers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 5:21:57 PM EDT
[#40]
Well where did the 'M' prefix for 'special equipment' come from? Modified??
And why are MV-22's Marine and CV-22's SOF? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 5:32:46 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well where did the 'M' prefix for 'special equipment' come from? Modified?? And why are MV-22's Marine and CV-22's SOF? M is multimission. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 5:36:31 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
M is multimission. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Well where did the 'M' prefix for 'special equipment' come from? Modified?? And why are MV-22's Marine and CV-22's SOF? M is multimission. Realistically the Air Force's should have been MVs and the Marines' CVs but I suspect the Marines designated theirs first and AFSOC didn't want to be a B model of what the Marines bought. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 5:41:11 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Realistically the Air Force's should have been MVs and the Marines' CVs but I suspect the Marines designated theirs first and AFSOC didn't want to be a B model of what the Marines bought. Supposedly, the Marines abandoned the normal mission prefix naming system with the V-22 because they wanted a M in front to stand for Marines. Seems like the services all march to a different beat when it comes to naming prefixes and they don't always march to their own beat very well all the time. Then there's always the possibility for political influence. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 5:44:23 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Supposedly, the Marines abandoned the normal mission prefix naming system with the V-22 because they wanted a M in front to stand for Marines. Seems like the services all march to a different beat when it comes to naming prefixes and they don't always march to their own beat very well all the time. Then there's always the possibility for political influence. My dream job is to be the guy that approves additions to 4120.15-L and I'll hold people to the basic rules of designation as set forth in the tri-service designation system with an iron fist. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 6:12:47 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My dream job is to be the guy that approves additions to 4120.15-L and I'll hold people to the basic rules of designation as set forth in the tri-service designation system with an iron fist. <img src=http://www.ar15.com/images/smilies/smiley_abused.gif border=0 align=middle> LOL. Overnight, you'd have more enemies than you could shake a stick at. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 6:42:27 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Supposedly, the Marines abandoned the normal mission prefix naming system with the V-22 because they wanted a M in front to stand for Marines. Seems like the services all march to a different beat when it comes to naming prefixes and they don't always march to their own beat very well all the time. Then there's always the possibility for political influence. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Realistically the Air Force's should have been MVs and the Marines' CVs but I suspect the Marines designated theirs first and AFSOC didn't want to be a B model of what the Marines bought. Supposedly, the Marines abandoned the normal mission prefix naming system with the V-22 because they wanted a M in front to stand for Marines. Seems like the services all march to a different beat when it comes to naming prefixes and they don't always march to their own beat very well all the time. Then there's always the possibility for political influence. I like that! Just think, it's now the MF-35! |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/16/2016 2:41:21 AM EDT
[#47]
A US ton = 2,0000 lbs
Half a ton is 1,000 lbs. Jet A (NATO Code F-24) weighs in at 6.8 lbs. 1,000 / 6.8 = 147 gallons. Military and civilian turbine powered aircraft do not gauge fuel by gallons, it's done by pounds. The F-16 (intardweb numbers, please feel free to correct me) basic fuel burn numbers- 297.5 lbs per minute in burner. 44.4 lbs per minute in cruise. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/16/2016 2:57:30 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
All jet fuel is essentially kerosene. Some anti-congealing compounds added. That is what the K in KC-10/KC-135 originally stood for. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
According to the article he had half a ton of kerosene on board. I didn't know F-16s ran on kerosene, but whatever. All jet fuel is essentially kerosene. Some anti-congealing compounds added. That is what the K in KC-10/KC-135 originally stood for. K has been the joint designation for tanker since we transferred avgas. (1949) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1924_United_States_Army_Air_Service_aircraft_designation_system |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/16/2016 2:58:42 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In normal engine operation, pulling the throttle all the way back would but the engine in the idle setting. With the throttle cutoff trigger malfunctioning as the report says, pulling it back all the way would go past the idle stop to engine cutoff. Sad way to kill an F-16. The pilot pulled the throttle to the engine stop position, the malfunctioning switch just made it possible. He fucked up, but t-birds pilots are infallible. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/16/2016 3:18:39 AM EDT
[#50]
US Military Aircraft designation systems after 1962.
They use the MDS system. MDS stands for "Mission-Design-Series". First letter before the dash = Basic Mission First number after the dash = Design Number F-16 F = Fighter 16 = Design Number The second letter before the dash = Modified Mission MV-22A M = Multimission V = VTOL/STOL 22 = Design Number A = Series Letter According to the instruction governing military aircraft designations there can't be a third prefix letter, however... ERA-3B E = Special Electronic Mission R = Reconnaissance (In this case it was a photo reconnaissance aircraft) A = Attack 3 = Design Letter B = Series letter If the aircraft is not in normal operational service it can receive a prefix letter in its designation to reflect its current status. YF-22 Y = Prototype F = Fighter 22 = Design Number NKC-135A N = Special Test, Permanent K = Tanker C = Cargo 135 - Design Number A = Series Letter Sometimes a customer requests a special series letter. The F-16N was an "out of sequence" letter. F-16N F = Fighter 16 = Design Number N = Navy TF-16N T = Trainer F = Fighter 16 = Design Number N = Navy C-2A(R) C = Cargo 2 = Design Number A = Series Letter (R) = Reprocure (The Navy bought 39 new C-2A's that were based on the E-2C - The original C-2 was based on the E-2A with a redesigned fuselage - Think Superhornet). |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
