To have a unique combat uniform, all USAF has to do is wait ten months

Now that the Army is adopting a new combat uniform (tip of the K-pot to Airborne Combat Engineer), there will soon be no other US armed service left using either the woodland pattern BDU or the three-color day desert pattern DCU.

Granted, the Navy will still use BDUs and DCUs in those ashore instances where they need a camouflage uniform, but work with me here. Besides, the Navy can work out a deal with the Marines to use their exquisite MARPATs.

USAF will have the BDU and DCU effectively to ourselves. Then we can just stencil the new USAF brand on the pocket and the cap and call it our own.

The Army redesign effort appears to have gone much farther out of the box in its thinking, run extensive wear-testing in theatre, and is already closed on the deal to the point that they'll begin fielding their new uniform at about the time USAF opens a website to Airmen for comments on their tiger stripes.

We at WUTT! called the following, which the Army adopted---but a bottle of Johnny Walker says USAF will not:

  • Removable rank insignia centered on the jacket front, as on the Gore-Tex parka
  • Angled jacket pockets, easier to reach into than horizontal
  • Pencil pocket separate from the jacket pockets (though the Army put theirs on the sleeve)
  • Tan undershirt, instead of solar-absorption-maximized black

It merits mentioning: the Army's design team was run by NCOs.

More on the male finishing school

I'm not alone in noticing a need for a men's finishing school, as proposed here at WUTT!.

However, the likely beneficiaries of this schooling (rather than the students) assert that most men don't realize they need it. Women will ask themselves, "What am I doing wrong?" but men just shrug and turn back to their ESPN. I assure you, Marilyn, this is not completely true. Some men are deeply introspective about their failures at romance.

It also prompts me to ask: why can't more women take up flyfishing?


Looking for a song

DavidMSC has been looking for a

Well, so am I. "Get Around Girl" by Tommy Tutone. I'm not the best at looking for such things, but I can't even find cold trail on it.

"Wanna build that cloverleaf on I-25? Then push light rail."

From Volokh Conspiracy:
The Supreme Court, though, has long (and correctly) recognized that the government does not have a free hand to impose conditions on grants of benefits. When the government controls 25-30% of the GNP, and has vast regulatory power over the economy, imagine what it could do using conditions. "Want a tax refund? Promise not to spend in on anti-government activity." "Want to buy a chunk of federally owned land to build a home? Promise to let us search your house whenever we like, without any excuse."
"Want a corporate charter? Promise not to criticize the government."

If this is the jurisprudence, then, how can the Federal government Constitutionally attach conditions on the grants of benefits to States? In particular, how can the Feds withhold highway funding from States that prefer not to lower their blood alcohol content threshold for DUI? "Wanna build that cloverleaf on I-25? Then push light rail." What gives corporations preference (other than, perhaps, the position of the
corporation as an individual compared to a State)?

In this case the term "benefit" is not even appropriate; the monies to which the Federal strings are attached should represent, for the most part, return of monies taxed from the citizens of that State in the first place, if not in this year's budget, then from last year's or next year's. There should be no net gain or loss over time between taxes taken from the State and Federal expenditures returning to it.

The usual rebuttal that "who pays the fiddler calls the tune" rings hollow. Granted, the quote above comes from a post about the rights of corporations, but I would assert that States have an even broader right to operate than corporations---States are not considered creatures of the Federal government, they are precursors to it who consented to its creation. The Ninth and Tenth Amendments guarantee that States will have a free hand in governing within their spheres, on the condition that individual rights are protected and the Federal government is held supreme in the enumerated areas given to it to govern.

Note, this is probably the only time WUTT! has ever, or will ever, discuss States' rights per se. I'm a States' powers kind of guy---islands of government power surrounded by a sea of individual rights and all that. But for a State to exercise those powers granted to it, it must have some right to operate without interference from other governments.

Woo-hoo! The VC post just below this one has more.


Dream carbine

Galil parts kits are coming into the country. Such kits are made by dismantling selective-fire 5.56mm rifles, putting the parts into a bag, and cutting the receiver into bits. By US law, the receiver---the frame, if you will, to which all other parts attach---is the firearm. By selling a kit containing all the parts except the receiver, you're selling no firearm, just everything you need if you can get a domestically-manufactured receiver. Building one, though, has some legal complexities involved.

New receivers are being manufactured in the US, without the holes where the selective-fire parts would pin in. Take one of these, with its US-originated serial number, and substitute an arbitrary number of other US-made parts, and it's legal per the Assault Weapon Ban (that will, if we mind our Congress, sunset in just a few months). However, these receivers are steel and might be rather heavy.

Let's get somebody to make an alloy or carbon-fiber Galil receiver. Let's get somebody else to make a carbon fiber-wrapped 6.5mm Grendel barrel at about 18" length. That keeps the weapon's weight down to the range that a Grendel deserves, 'cuz the original Galil (milled steel receiver) was on the heavy side. The carbon barrel should also be immune to point-of-aim shifts as it heats up.

Open up the bolt face and reface the extractor so they take the Grendel's case head.

You might have to tweak the gas system. Emphasize might: the Grendel's developer claims that pressures were very close to those of 5.56mm military cartridges, so a gas system that's reliable with 5.56mm should need little tuning to make it hum with 6.5.

Replace the gas tube with a new one with Weaver rails on top. The front-mounted rails let you mount the modern gizmodified intermediate eye relief optics.

There's WUTT!'s competitor to the AR15 platform, in a damned rugged form factor, firing the most capable cartridge that will fit in that form factor. Fixed and folding stocks available. Tritium sights standard.

Most photos are now moved

There are a few photos located on other computers, that I have to upload to the Comcast site for relinking. But most of them are moved and the links are updated. Sorry for sharing a stupid learning experience with my dozen readers.