US Air Force survival gun?

One of my secondary duties was oversight of our Global Survival Kits
carried in our F102s. Since we sometimes crossed the northern US
border (even in winter - brrrr!) the contents had to meet some
stringent requirements. One of the pilots said all he needed was a
dime for a phone call. (Long time back!) I laughed and replied 'And if
you break a leg on landing in your chute at night?' Lots of empty
territory up there in the Northern spaces. We had the M6 - ISTR along
with a 50-round pack of 22 Hornet and a dozen 410 shells. The M6
wasn't as fancy as the LW gun but a) it worked well and b) the USAF
needed a LOT of them, roughly one per crew position, at a guess around
10,000. And it didn't weigh a dozen pounds as most drillings did (do).
Walt BJ

On 21 Apr 2004 22:47:01 -0700, (robert arndt) wrote:

Alan Minyard wrote in message . ..
On Tue, 20 Apr 2004 19:11:54 -0400, "Bruce W.1" wrote:

The US Air Force used to put a gun in their pilot survival packs, the
M-6 Scout. See: http://www.milesfortis.com/church/akc13.htm

Does anyone know what the Air Force uses today?

I'd really like to know because I'm looking for a survival gun to take
into the woods while backpacking. It must be as light in weight as
possible.

Thanks for your help.

Kel-Tech makes a nice 9mm or 40S&W (your choice) folding carbine.
I would guess that it weights about three pounds (unloaded).

Al Minyard

What pieces of crap. In WW2 Luftwaffe air crews had the incredible
Sauer Drilling that featured two shotgun barrels and a .375 mag rifle
combined. Add to that the 27mm Leuchtpistole that also fired grenades,
flares, sounding rounds, and Luftminen. Now that's firepower and
utility!
The US by comparison postwar had that ugly, ****ty M-6 scrap metal
survival gun and now they carry either compact 9s/40s/45s/or various
M-16 compact rifles depending on the crews and mission.
You would think they would do better than that.

Rob

The Sauer drilling had a 9.3X74R rifle barrel, not a .357 Magnum. It also
weighed about 15 pounds and could not be carried in aircraft other
than bombers. It was wooden stocked, commercially built, desperation
weapon issued to bomber crews on the Eastern front.

Was it a nice drilling, sure. Was it an effective survival weapon?
Not by any stretch of the imagination. It was way too heavy, would
not fit in a survival kit, used ammunition unique in the German military,
etc. No one in their right mind would consider it any sort of military
weapon, much less a "survival" gun. Of course Goering was not in
his right mind :-)

Al Minyard

Alan Minyard wrote in message . ..
On 21 Apr 2004 22:47:01 -0700, (robert arndt) wrote:

Alan Minyard wrote in message . ..
On Tue, 20 Apr 2004 19:11:54 -0400, "Bruce W.1" wrote:

The US Air Force used to put a gun in their pilot survival packs, the
M-6 Scout. See: http://www.milesfortis.com/church/akc13.htm

Does anyone know what the Air Force uses today?

I'd really like to know because I'm looking for a survival gun to take
into the woods while backpacking. It must be as light in weight as
possible.

Thanks for your help.

Kel-Tech makes a nice 9mm or 40S&W (your choice) folding carbine.
I would guess that it weights about three pounds (unloaded).

Al Minyard

What pieces of crap. In WW2 Luftwaffe air crews had the incredible
Sauer Drilling that featured two shotgun barrels and a .375 mag rifle
combined. Add to that the 27mm Leuchtpistole that also fired grenades,
flares, sounding rounds, and Luftminen. Now that's firepower and
utility!
The US by comparison postwar had that ugly, ****ty M-6 scrap metal
survival gun and now they carry either compact 9s/40s/45s/or various
M-16 compact rifles depending on the crews and mission.
You would think they would do better than that.

Rob

The Sauer drilling had a 9.3X74R rifle barrel, not a .357 Magnum.

The 9.3mmX74mmR cartridge was equivalent in POWER to a .375 H&H
Magnum- ask any gun expert.

It also
weighed about 15 pounds and could not be carried in aircraft other
than bombers. It was wooden stocked, commercially built, desperation
weapon issued to bomber crews on the Eastern front.

Which was superbly made and quite effective in stopping enemy
personnel and light armor.

Was it a nice drilling, sure.

Krieghoff still makes outstanding Drillings for $2-5K!

Was it an effective survival weapon?

Not really, but it came in handy on the Russian front for killing.

Not by any stretch of the imagination. It was way too heavy, would
not fit in a survival kit, used ammunition unique in the German military,
etc. No one in their right mind would consider it any sort of military
weapon, much less a "survival" gun. Of course Goering was not in
his right mind :-)

Al Minyard

Rob

On 22 Apr 2004 23:35:05 -0700, (robert arndt) wrote:

Alan Minyard wrote in message . ..
On 21 Apr 2004 22:47:01 -0700, (robert arndt) wrote:

Alan Minyard wrote in message . ..
On Tue, 20 Apr 2004 19:11:54 -0400, "Bruce W.1" wrote:

The US Air Force used to put a gun in their pilot survival packs, the
M-6 Scout. See: http://www.milesfortis.com/church/akc13.htm

Does anyone know what the Air Force uses today?

I'd really like to know because I'm looking for a survival gun to take
into the woods while backpacking. It must be as light in weight as
possible.

Thanks for your help.

Kel-Tech makes a nice 9mm or 40S&W (your choice) folding carbine.
I would guess that it weights about three pounds (unloaded).

Al Minyard

What pieces of crap. In WW2 Luftwaffe air crews had the incredible
Sauer Drilling that featured two shotgun barrels and a .375 mag rifle
combined. Add to that the 27mm Leuchtpistole that also fired grenades,
flares, sounding rounds, and Luftminen. Now that's firepower and
utility!
The US by comparison postwar had that ugly, ****ty M-6 scrap metal
survival gun and now they carry either compact 9s/40s/45s/or various
M-16 compact rifles depending on the crews and mission.
You would think they would do better than that.

Rob

The Sauer drilling had a 9.3X74R rifle barrel, not a .357 Magnum.

The 9.3mmX74mmR cartridge was equivalent in POWER to a .375 H&H
Magnum- ask any gun expert.

They have similar power levels, but the 9.3X74R is NOT a 375 Mag. Try
firing a 9.3X74R round in a 357 Mag, but stand very, very far away.

It also
weighed about 15 pounds and could not be carried in aircraft other
than bombers. It was wooden stocked, commercially built, desperation
weapon issued to bomber crews on the Eastern front.

Which was superbly made and quite effective in stopping enemy
personnel and light armor.

And was a terrible survival weapon.

Was it a nice drilling, sure.

Krieghoff still makes outstanding Drillings for $2-5K!

Was it an effective survival weapon?

Not really, but it came in handy on the Russian front for killing.

Not by any stretch of the imagination. It was way too heavy, would
not fit in a survival kit, used ammunition unique in the German military,
etc. No one in their right mind would consider it any sort of military
weapon, much less a "survival" gun. Of course Goering was not in
his right mind :-)

Al Minyard

Rob

Al Minyard

Alan Minyard wrote in message . ..
On 21 Apr 2004 22:47:01 -0700, (robert arndt) wrote:

Alan Minyard wrote in message . ..
On Tue, 20 Apr 2004 19:11:54 -0400, "Bruce W.1" wrote:

The US Air Force used to put a gun in their pilot survival packs, the
M-6 Scout. See: http://www.milesfortis.com/church/akc13.htm

Does anyone know what the Air Force uses today?

I'd really like to know because I'm looking for a survival gun to take
into the woods while backpacking. It must be as light in weight as
possible.

Thanks for your help.

Kel-Tech makes a nice 9mm or 40S&W (your choice) folding carbine.
I would guess that it weights about three pounds (unloaded).

Al Minyard

What pieces of crap. In WW2 Luftwaffe air crews had the incredible
Sauer Drilling that featured two shotgun barrels and a .375 mag rifle
combined. Add to that the 27mm Leuchtpistole that also fired grenades,
flares, sounding rounds, and Luftminen. Now that's firepower and
utility!
The US by comparison postwar had that ugly, ****ty M-6 scrap metal
survival gun and now they carry either compact 9s/40s/45s/or various
M-16 compact rifles depending on the crews and mission.
You would think they would do better than that.

Rob

The Sauer drilling had a 9.3X74R rifle barrel, not a .357 Magnum.

The 9.3mmX74mmR cartridge was equivalent in POWER to a .375 H&H
Magnum- ask any gun expert.

It also
weighed about 15 pounds and could not be carried in aircraft other
than bombers. It was wooden stocked, commercially built, desperation
weapon issued to bomber crews on the Eastern front.

Which was superbly made and quite effective in stopping enemy
personnel and light armor.

Was it a nice drilling, sure.

Krieghoff still makes outstanding Drillings for $2-5K!

Was it an effective survival weapon?

Not really, but it came in handy on the Russian front for killing.

Not by any stretch of the imagination. It was way too heavy, would
not fit in a survival kit, used ammunition unique in the German military,
etc. No one in their right mind would consider it any sort of military
weapon, much less a "survival" gun. Of course Goering was not in
his right mind :-)

Al Minyard

Rob

In article ,
wrote:

What pieces of crap. In WW2 Luftwaffe air crews had the incredible
Sauer Drilling that featured two shotgun barrels and a .375 mag rifle
combined. Add to that the 27mm Leuchtpistole that also fired grenades,
flares, sounding rounds, and Luftminen. Now that's firepower and
utility!
The US by comparison postwar had that ugly, ****ty M-6 scrap metal
survival gun and now they carry either compact 9s/40s/45s/or various
M-16 compact rifles depending on the crews and mission.
You would think they would do better than that.

Rob

The Sauer drilling had a 9.3X74R rifle barrel, not a .357 Magnum. It also
weighed about 15 pounds and could not be carried in aircraft other
than bombers. It was wooden stocked, commercially built, desperation
weapon issued to bomber crews on the Eastern front.

He did say .375, not .357

used ammunition unique in the German military,

The 9.3 X 74 is more like the .35 Whelen and is and was very popular all
across Europe for hunting. Not a military caliber, let alone unique.

BTW, the 9.3 X 74 in NOT a magnum caliber, but it is powerful and
has hefty recoil.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur

From: (robert arndt)

snip

What pieces of crap. In WW2 Luftwaffe air crews had the incredible
Sauer Drilling that featured two shotgun barrels and a .375 mag rifle
combined. Add to that the 27mm Leuchtpistole that also fired grenades,
flares, sounding rounds, and Luftminen. Now that's firepower and
utility!


Rob

Let's see, you guys didn't issue 357 magnums during the war, better check again
on the pistol caliber. The piece in question was heavy and bulky and rarely
carried for those reasons.

Flare pistols launching grenades is a non starter even for you.

With all the crowing you have done in the NG about your superior weapons and SS
super brains you still LOST that war. Get over it.


The US by comparison postwar had that ugly, ****ty M-6 scrap metal
survival gun and now they carry either compact 9s/40s/45s/or various
M-16 compact rifles depending on the crews and mission.
You would think they would do better than that.

Rob

They may be ugly but they work, they are light and small enough to carry and
ARE carried. Given the choice of a heavy, bulky "super weapon" left behind or
one of those "ugly weapons" in my kit guess which one is more effective when
needed?

Tell you what, put on a flightsuit. How many pockets do you have? How much can
you carry? Now put on your survival vest and address the same questions. OK,
part of your bailout kit has all kinds of wonderful things, how much can you
put in the aforementioned pockets? Unless the kit bag makes a comfortable back
pack you will get rid of it if you have to go cross country. A basic rule of
thumb is it's better to wear what you need than carry it. You survival vest has
a holster for a pistol. How long will you carry that wonder weapon you
described?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

(B2431) wrote in message ...
From: (robert arndt)

snip

What pieces of crap. In WW2 Luftwaffe air crews had the incredible
Sauer Drilling that featured two shotgun barrels and a .375 mag rifle
combined. Add to that the 27mm Leuchtpistole that also fired grenades,
flares, sounding rounds, and Luftminen. Now that's firepower and
utility!


Rob

Let's see, you guys didn't issue 357 magnums during the war, better check again
on the pistol caliber. The piece in question was heavy and bulky and rarely
carried for those reasons.

As stated earlier in reply to Als post, the 9.3mmX74mmR cartridge was
equivalent in POWER to a .375H&H Magnum! Check with a gun expert on
that.

Flare pistols launching grenades is a non starter even for you.

You obviously don't know **** about the
Leuchtpistole/Kampfpistole/Sturmpistole. 279,000 of them were issued
in WW2 and all the grenade ammo was used up for them. They were put to
good use and there long before the strap-on GLs we use today on our
rifles.

With all the crowing you have done in the NG about your superior weapons and SS
super brains you still LOST that war. Get over it.

**** off, will you? The US got the lion's share of advanced German
technology including all those funny "black project" triangles, discs,
and cylinders flying around using EM propulsion systems. Wright
Patterson had the German discs, MacDill AB did, and Area 51 did. No
alien reverse-engineering required... just a few thousand German
scientists and technicians from the SS Technical Branch
Einwickstellung IV, Peenemunde, AVA Gottingen, etc...


The US by comparison postwar had that ugly, ****ty M-6 scrap metal
survival gun and now they carry either compact 9s/40s/45s/or various
M-16 compact rifles depending on the crews and mission.
You would think they would do better than that.

Rob

They may be ugly but they work, they are light and small enough to carry and
ARE carried. Given the choice of a heavy, bulky "super weapon" left behind or
one of those "ugly weapons" in my kit guess which one is more effective when
needed?

Gee, I don't seem to recall ANY stories of success with that butt-ugly
M6. At least the German bomber crews used the Sauer Drillings in
combat on the Russian front as well as the 27mm
Leuchtpistole/Kampfpistole/Sturmpistole. Case closed.

Tell you what, put on a flightsuit. How many pockets do you have? How much can
you carry? Now put on your survival vest and address the same questions. OK,
part of your bailout kit has all kinds of wonderful things, how much can you
put in the aforementioned pockets? Unless the kit bag makes a comfortable back
pack you will get rid of it if you have to go cross country. A basic rule of
thumb is it's better to wear what you need than carry it. You survival vest has
a holster for a pistol. How long will you carry that wonder weapon you
described?

Quite a few SF aircrews today carry the HK SOCOM pistol. I'd be
willing to bet they would carry the new HK MP-7 PDW if they could
procure one.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Rob

From: (robert arndt)


(B2431) wrote in message
...
From: (robert arndt)

snip

What pieces of crap. In WW2 Luftwaffe air crews had the incredible
Sauer Drilling that featured two shotgun barrels and a .375 mag rifle
combined. Add to that the 27mm Leuchtpistole that also fired grenades,
flares, sounding rounds, and Luftminen. Now that's firepower and
utility!


Rob

Let's see, you guys didn't issue 357 magnums during the war, better check
again
on the pistol caliber. The piece in question was heavy and bulky and rarely
carried for those reasons.

As stated earlier in reply to Als post, the 9.3mmX74mmR cartridge was
equivalent in POWER to a .375H&H Magnum! Check with a gun expert on
that.

Flare pistols launching grenades is a non starter even for you.

You obviously don't know **** about the
Leuchtpistole/Kampfpistole/Sturmpistole. 279,000 of them were issued
in WW2 and all the grenade ammo was used up for them. They were put to
good use and there long before the strap-on GLs we use today on our
rifles.

I know the Kampfpistole series and I know we were discussing aircrew survival
weapons for which it would be extremely impractical. I know they made a lot of
them and that the users rarely used the grenade round since it had very little
usable effect. I also know aircrews would not likely be issued grenades of any
type other than smoke. This leaves its only use to an aircrew would be as a
flare pistol. In which case it wouldn't be very high on anyone's list as
something you want to grab on the way out.

I also know it is possible to argue a point without the vulgarity.

Why do you even bring up "strap on GLs?" I assume you are referring to the
bloop tubes mounted under the M-16 series. What does it have to do with aircrew
survival weapons?

A survival weapon has to serve other purposes than killing the enemy.

With all the crowing you have done in the NG about your superior weapons
and SS
super brains you still LOST that war. Get over it.

**** off, will you? The US got the lion's share of advanced German
technology including all those funny "black project" triangles, discs,
and cylinders flying around using EM propulsion systems. Wright
Patterson had the German discs, MacDill AB did, and Area 51 did. No
alien reverse-engineering required... just a few thousand German
scientists and technicians from the SS Technical Branch
Einwickstellung IV, Peenemunde, AVA Gottingen, etc...

Please note you say we got all that stuff 60 years ago and not ONE of those
wonder weapons has been successfully fielded. The only response you have ever
made to this is "it's classified" as if you actually have had access and no one
else has. One of the many reasons you lost the war was because of the waste of
money and time spent on those dead end projects.


The US by comparison postwar had that ugly, ****ty M-6 scrap metal
survival gun and now they carry either compact 9s/40s/45s/or various
M-16 compact rifles depending on the crews and mission.
You would think they would do better than that.

Rob

They may be ugly but they work, they are light and small enough to carry
and
ARE carried. Given the choice of a heavy, bulky "super weapon" left behind
or
one of those "ugly weapons" in my kit guess which one is more effective
when
needed?

Gee, I don't seem to recall ANY stories of success with that butt-ugly
M6. At least the German bomber crews used the Sauer Drillings in
combat on the Russian front as well as the 27mm
Leuchtpistole/Kampfpistole/Sturmpistole. Case closed.

Case closed? Where are your cites?

Please note the very limited ammunition issued for either "weapon" so what they
were doing was committing suicide.

Tell you what, put on a flightsuit. How many pockets do you have? How much
can
you carry? Now put on your survival vest and address the same questions.
OK,
part of your bailout kit has all kinds of wonderful things, how much can
you
put in the aforementioned pockets? Unless the kit bag makes a comfortable
back
pack you will get rid of it if you have to go cross country. A basic rule
of
thumb is it's better to wear what you need than carry it. You survival vest
has
a holster for a pistol. How long will you carry that wonder weapon you
described?

Quite a few SF aircrews today carry the HK SOCOM pistol. I'd be
willing to bet they would carry the new HK MP-7 PDW if they could
procure one.

I was in spec ops and very few aircrewmen were in a position to need anything
besides a sidearm and we issued those people GAU-5s, M-16s and shotguns. How do
I know this? I was the guy issuing them in the 9th SOS.

As for submachineguns they are really nice for spraying bullets, but need quite
a bit of training to use. Many Spec Ops types would find them handy dandy, but
not aircrews.

Now, about your favourite song, Horst Wessel was a pimp, a bully and a street
thug who died in a common street brawl.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

"robert arndt" wrote in message
om...
(B2431) wrote in message
...
Let's see, you guys didn't issue 357 magnums during the war, better
check again
on the pistol caliber. The piece in question was heavy and bulky and
rarely
carried for those reasons.

As stated earlier in reply to Als post, the 9.3mmX74mmR cartridge was
equivalent in POWER to a .375H&H Magnum! Check with a gun expert on
that.

Seriously overdone for a survival gun. Are these escaping aircrew or elite
paratroopers?

Flare pistols launching grenades is a non starter even for you.

You obviously don't know **** about the
Leuchtpistole/Kampfpistole/Sturmpistole.

Again, for survival after escaping from an unflyable aircraft? The idea is
"not to die of exposure, hunger or angry wildlife", not "stand off all of 3
Shock Army singlehandedly". Every ounce of grenades, heavy-calibre
ammunition, et cetera you carry is an ounce less of food, water, radio
beacon, spare batteries, flares, dye markers and other items that might
actually improve your chances of living until rescue.

279,000 of them were issued
in WW2 and all the grenade ammo was used up for them. They were put to
good use and there long before the strap-on GLs we use today on our
rifles.

And they were thoroughly predated by assorted "rifle grenades" that ranged
from the Heath Robinson to the rather practical.

**** off, will you? The US got the lion's share of advanced German
technology including all those funny "black project" triangles, discs,
and cylinders flying around using EM propulsion systems.

Haven't seen a single one at an airshow.


They may be ugly but they work, they are light and small enough to carry
and
ARE carried. Given the choice of a heavy, bulky "super weapon" left
behind or
one of those "ugly weapons" in my kit guess which one is more effective
when
needed?

Gee, I don't seem to recall ANY stories of success with that butt-ugly
M6.

Have you looked?

At least the German bomber crews used the Sauer Drillings in
combat on the Russian front as well as the 27mm
Leuchtpistole/Kampfpistole/Sturmpistole.

Why are bomber crews engaging in ground combat when they ought to be flying
bombers?

Tell you what, put on a flightsuit. How many pockets do you have? How
much can
you carry? Now put on your survival vest and address the same questions.
OK,
part of your bailout kit has all kinds of wonderful things, how much can
you
put in the aforementioned pockets? Unless the kit bag makes a
comfortable back
pack you will get rid of it if you have to go cross country. A basic
rule of
thumb is it's better to wear what you need than carry it. You survival
vest has
a holster for a pistol. How long will you carry that wonder weapon you
described?

Quite a few SF aircrews today carry the HK SOCOM pistol.

Oh, you mean the Robocop Gun. Pray tell, what does it do that a Glock 21
doesn't?

I'd be
willing to bet they would carry the new HK MP-7 PDW if they could
procure one.

Doesn't square with the aircrew I've talked to: but then they're only
actually flying the missions, what do *they* know?

I *have* heard of US aircrew drawing M16s and M4s as personal weapons for
high-risk ops, which makes a lot more sense, but then they seriously
considered the risk of being forced down somewhere very unfriendly.

If you need a combat weapon, take a combat weapon and accept the weight and
bulk. If you need a basic survival weapon, get something as light and
compact as possible. Don't haul a heavy, overpowered, break-action weapon
around and insist it's wonderful: it's too big to get out of an aircraft
with, too heavy to carry, too powerful for small game and too slow-firing
for a firefight.

--
Paul J. Adam