On Nov 29, 12:43*pm, Anthony W wrote:
wrote:
To All:

The following is taken from back-channel communications; folks who had
a question but didn't want to ask it publicly.

'I tend to agree with those who believe a .22 pistol and a variety of
bullet types would be a more practical survival weapon.'
And I would tend to agree with you. *Ideally, it would be one of those
9-shot revolvers that were popular in the 1950's. *And you're right
about the loads, too. *.22 Long Rifle Hollow Point, and .22 cal. shot-
shells are available. *If you could find one of the long-barreled
pistols, and rig a skeleton stock to it, you could be reasonably sure
of taking deer-sized game, assuming you could put a .22 Hollow Point
into the animal's kill-zone.

But you're talking some serious money here. *My main reason for
advocating a black-powder pistol was coming upon one -- a classic
'Rusty' -- *I'd acquired last winter, just before I was diagnosed with
cancer. *I hadn't done anything with it, other than to drop it in a
coffee can filled with used motor oil. *When I bought it (for $2.50)
the barrel was blocked and it could not be cocked & fired. *But after
a five month soak in old motor oil I was able to clear the barrel and
cock the thing. *It needs to be taken apart and cleaned but right now
it represents a two and a half pound BALLAST MASS... something I could
build right into the airframe.

The only advantage a black powder pistol might have over a .22 is that
a .44 has the POTENTIAL to deliver more energy, assuming the cap &
powder was still good after being bolted to an airplane for heaven
knows how long.

'How much does such a pistol cost?'
Purchased new, a well-made black-powder revolver can cost hundreds of
dollars. *But that's not the kind of pistol I've *been talking about.