quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Not sure what is sadder . . . having to pump $1000-2000 into a Sabatti to make it functional (on mine I had to add some weight, put on a decent recoil pad, rework the triggers and have the solder at the end of the barrel touched up) or buying a $12,000-18,000 double and having issues with it (I have had a bad safety, rough chambers that needed to be polished, regulation issues). I guess at the Sabatti level you sort of expect that some work might be required. At the other end, it makes you wonder about the quality control at some of the larger, more well known modern double rifle manufacturers.

No doubt quality control needs to be improved on new DRs. They SHOULD arrive in 100% condition. My issue with Sabitti as a comparison, resolves around what happens when they do show up with issues. Does the company, importer, retailer stand behind the product and correct it properly, or do they take a drill to the muzzles to make it "print" properly on the paper.

Again, my example: New bespoke VC showed up shooting 3.5" to 4" between the two barres at 25 yards. Didn't matter what ammo it was fed. Options for the factory or importer: send it in and break out the dremmel to put one over on me or have it re-regulated properly by adjusting the wedge. It was addressed by the latter method.

Should it have been 100% from the start? You bet! Why wasn't it? Good question. But in the end, they stood behind their product. The difference being who pays when it has an issue. With Sabatti, you "expect" to pay more to correct it. With reputable DR makers, you expect THEY will make it right if it arrives with an issue.

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:


I spent 24 years as a USAF pilot

I think we just found the problem!


Air Farce pilot vs Naval Aviator! One of us actually received formal flight training! Hell, who CAN'T land on 3 miles worth of runway, especially when that strip of concrete is always in the same place where you took off!

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:


I spent 24 years as a USAF pilot

I think we just found the problem!


Air Farce pilot vs Naval Aviator! One of us actually received formal flight training! Hell, who CAN'T land on 3 miles worth of runway, especially when that strip of concrete is always in the same place where you took off!

...................................................................

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:


I spent 24 years as a USAF pilot

I think we just found the problem!


Air Farce pilot vs Naval Aviator! One of us actually received formal flight training! Hell, who CAN'T land on 3 miles worth of runway, especially when that strip of concrete is always in the same place where you took off!

I don't ever remember the Navy having any real aviators. Every time a conflict got serious they'd bring in the USAF. Maybe because that was because the Navy was always worried about how well it's pilots could land while the USAF focused on how well its pilots employed aircraft in combat?

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:


I spent 24 years as a USAF pilot

I think we just found the problem!


Air Farce pilot vs Naval Aviator! One of us actually received formal flight training! Hell, who CAN'T land on 3 miles worth of runway, especially when that strip of concrete is always in the same place where you took off!

I don't ever remember the Navy having any real aviators. Every time a conflict got serious they'd bring in the USAF. Maybe because that was because the Navy was always worried about how well it's pilots could land while the USAF focused on how well its pilots employed aircraft in combat?

LOL. Seems to me the first thing a President always asks when conflict erupts isn't which O'club the Air Farce jockies are hanging out in, but rather "Where are the Carriers"! Once we did our number on the bad guys, we left the crumbs to you boys!

Don't feel bad though. I thought about applying to the Air Farce as well. I was advised by the recruiter that I didn't stand a chance once he found out my mom and dad were married, giving me a legitimate last name!

LOL!!! A carrier battle group has to be the ultimate self-licking ice cream cone. You need a carrier, destroyers, subs, supply ships, and fleet defense aircraft to protect the carrier--all so 18 F-18s with a limited bomb load can attack something on shore. That's fine for punching somebody in the nose, but if you want to fight a war you need the Air Force. F-22s and Strike Eagles and B-1s and B-52s and F-16s, not to mention C-5s, C-17s, C-130s, and tankers. And other stuff......

BTW, to all non military types. What you are now seeing is friendly inter-service rivalry, appropriate ONLY for current and former military. If any civilian takes a poke at our Navy or Marines or Army or Coast Guard, this former USAF officer will take great umbrage to that.......

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:
LOL!!! A carrier battle group has to be the ultimate self-licking ice cream cone. You need a carrier, destroyers, subs, supply ships, and fleet defense aircraft to protect the carrier--all so 18 F-18s with a limited bomb load can attack something on shore. That's fine for punching somebody in the nose, but if you want to fight a war you need the Air Force. F-22s and Strike Eagles and B-1s and B-52s and F-16s, not to mention C-5s, C-17s, C-130s, and tankers. And other stuff...... like O'Clubs and Golf Courses!!!


Actually, we Hornet drivers preferred the "throat punch" to the nose punch. Then we'd get em on the ground, beat em senseless, and turn em over to you guys AFTER we knocked all the fight out of em!




BTW, to all non military types. What you are now seeing is friendly inter-service rivalry, appropriate ONLY for current and former military. If any civilian takes a poke at our Navy or Marines or Army or Coast Guard, this former USAF officer will take great umbrage to that.......

You're damned skippy on that one Pardner!!

PS, F/A-18's only need limited bomb loads. We were in the habit of hitting what we aimed at on the fist pass through the target zone!

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:
LOL!!! A carrier battle group has to be the ultimate self-licking ice cream cone. You need a carrier, destroyers, subs, supply ships, and fleet defense aircraft to protect the carrier--all so 18 F-18s with a limited bomb load can attack something on shore. That's fine for punching somebody in the nose, but if you want to fight a war you need the Air Force. F-22s and Strike Eagles and B-1s and B-52s and F-16s, not to mention C-5s, C-17s, C-130s, and tankers. And other stuff......

BTW, to all non military types. What you are now seeing is friendly inter-service rivalry, appropriate ONLY for current and former military. If any civilian takes a poke at our Navy or Marines or Army or Coast Guard, this former USAF officer will take great umbrage to that.......

I see our civilian counter parts in the air farce and whinning again.

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:


I spent 24 years as a USAF pilot

I think we just found the problem!


Air Farce pilot vs Naval Aviator! One of us actually received formal flight training! Hell, who CAN'T land on 3 miles worth of runway, especially when that strip of concrete is always in the same place where you took off!

I don't ever remember the Navy having any real aviators. Every time a conflict got serious they'd bring in the USAF. Maybe because that was because the Navy was always worried about how well it's pilots could land while the USAF focused on how well its pilots employed aircraft in combat?

Oh really? take a look at kill ratios from WWII to the present and especially in Vietnam.

quote:

Originally posted by jorge:

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:


I spent 24 years as a USAF pilot

I think we just found the problem!


Air Farce pilot vs Naval Aviator! One of us actually received formal flight training! Hell, who CAN'T land on 3 miles worth of runway, especially when that strip of concrete is always in the same place where you took off!

I don't ever remember the Navy having any real aviators. Every time a conflict got serious they'd bring in the USAF. Maybe because that was because the Navy was always worried about how well it's pilots could land while the USAF focused on how well its pilots employed aircraft in combat?

Oh really? take a look at kill ratios from WWII to the present and especially in Vietnam.

While the kill-ratios from both sides obviously vary depending upon the source, the Air force initially had a kill-ratio only slightly better than 1:1 against the VPAF MiGs. However and incredibly, that kill ratio actually dipped below 1:1 as the war progressed. Not good.

Compare that with the US Navy’s kill-ratios. Initially it was 3.7:1. However this low ratio prompted the establishment of the Navy Fighter Weapons School (aka Topgun) in 1969. So when President Nixon lifted the bombing halt in May 1972, with its newly trained Topgun pilots, the Navy’s kill ratio soared to 13:1!

Get him Jorge!!!

We civilians on the line can clap, cheer & laugh!

LOL!

In Vietnam the USAF carried a much greater combat load than the Navy, but who really cares about ancient history? Let's look more recently, at the Gulf War. Don't see too many USN kills compared to the USAF in the modern age.......

http://jpgleize.perso.neuf.fr/aces/gulus.htm


More to the point, what are you taking any of this seriously Jorge?

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:
In Vietnam the USAF carried a much greater combat load than the Navy, but who really cares about ancient history? Let's look more recently, at the Gulf War. Don't see too many USN kills compared to the USAF in the modern age.......

http://jpgleize.perso.neuf.fr/aces/gulus.htm


More to the point, what are you taking any of this seriously Jorge?

Lets look at the Gulf war shall we? I was there, flying my trusty "throat punch" F/A-18!

First day of the war, two F/A-18s from the USS America, operating out of the Red Sea, conducted an attack on the H2 airfield in Northern Iraq. Not a coastal target by the way. On the way into the target, they took down two Mig-21s, THEN put bombs on target, scoring 100% BDA! Aaauuuurrrrraaaahhhh!!!

After the third or fourth day of the fracas, the Iraqis refused to fly combat missions against us. The only flights conducted on their part were attempts to escape and preserve their aircraft by defecting into Iran. I chased an Iraqi F1 into Iranian airspace after intercepting him trying to sneak out to our ship by flying a mile or so in trail of one of our returning strike packages! Would have loved to pop him but he was outside of missile range by the time I got turned around on him. Unfortunately, I was single aircraft CAP that day due to a mech issue with my wingman's jet. This on day 3 of the war.

Once again, we see the Navy was first on the scene, knocking the fight out of the bad guys, then letting you AF types mop up the crumbs!

lol

I love reading the aviation forum! Sabatti must be the top secret name of a plane.
Cal

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
I love reading the aviation forum! Sabatti must be the top secret name of a plane.
Cal

I would be less subtle, they don't get it!

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
I love reading the aviation forum! Sabatti must be the top secret name of a plane.
Cal

Sabatti does sounds like a pizza of some sort. With or without anchovies isn´t mentioned. Darecare to buy one?.

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:
In Vietnam the USAF carried a much greater combat load than the Navy, but who really cares about ancient history? Let's look more recently, at the Gulf War. Don't see too many USN kills compared to the USAF in the modern age.......

http://jpgleize.perso.neuf.fr/aces/gulus.htm


More to the point, what are you taking any of this seriously Jorge?

Different missions and different "Route Packages". Todd answered the Gulf War stats so no sense going over that again. But here is the fundamental difference and having trained both USN and USAF officers in Pensacola (I lasted exactly ONE flight with the USAF and the way the conduct business in the cockpit): The Air Force has an entire library of "how to" procedures, tactics, flight regimes, etc. If its not in there, then you can't do it. The Navy on the other hand, has one rather thin book called 3710 and if it's NOT addressed in there, then you can do it. Oh, and I "get it" alright, just consider yourself in awe in our presence...

And I spose all your weapons were "OK" for the "entry level" Driver hahahaha

and I do have bout 1400 combat hours over this gun-

This has to be one of the most humorous threads I have read in quite some time. On a serious note, Todd makes (at least) one very good point. When there is trouble in the world that requires a US response, the first question the President (yes, even our current one) asks is "Where are the carriers ?". "How long will it take the Air force to get there" is also asked, but there is often a substantial time lag involved. I take my hat off to you guys who engage in very personal air to air combat, regardless of Service. As a Submariner, the concept of a "fair fight" has no meaning for me. Why would anyone in wartime wish to engage in such a thing when you can sneak up behind another ship, shoot it in the back of the head, and then skulk off to shoot another one? As an SSN Commanding Officer, I equated our stealth to that of a leopard in the bush - only we were invisible until we struck!.....and I liked to think of my four torpedo tubes as a matched set of 21" double rifles!

well I don't know if I am going to go out & buy a Sabatti now,I don't even know if it's a pizza,a gun,a F18 or a chopper ha ha ha ha
At 3895$ for a 450 NE O/U? I had thought maybe a new toy to fend off boredom ,it's fun reading this thread,actually interesting to hear you guys who have served our country talk about experiences,I for one salute your service

I see what just happened; Dad just go home from work and sent you both to your rooms for bad behavior!

quote:

Originally posted by subsailor74:
This has to be one of the most humorous threads I have read in quite some time. On a serious note, Todd makes (at least) one very good point. When there is trouble in the world that requires a US response, the first question the President (yes, even our current one) asks is "Where are the carriers ?". "How long will it take the Air force to get there" is also asked, but there is often a substantial time lag involved. I take my hat off to you guys who engage in very personal air to air combat, regardless of Service. As a Submariner, the concept of a "fair fight" has no meaning for me. Why would anyone in wartime wish to engage in such a thing when you can sneak up behind another ship, shoot it in the back of the head, and then skulk off to shoot another one? As an SSN Commanding Officer, I equated our stealth to that of a leopard in the bush - only we were invisible until we struck!.....and I liked to think of my four torpedo tubes as a matched set of 21" double rifles!

+1

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by jorge:

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:
In Vietnam the USAF carried a much greater combat load than the Navy, but who really cares about ancient history? Let's look more recently, at the Gulf War. Don't see too many USN kills compared to the USAF in the modern age.......

http://jpgleize.perso.neuf.fr/aces/gulus.htm


More to the point, what are you taking any of this seriously Jorge?

Different missions and different "Route Packages". Todd answered the Gulf War stats so no sense going over that again. But here is the fundamental difference and having trained both USN and USAF officers in Pensacola (I lasted exactly ONE flight with the USAF and the way the conduct business in the cockpit): The Air Force has an entire library of "how to" procedures, tactics, flight regimes, etc. If its not in there, then you can't do it. The Navy on the other hand, has one rather thin book called 3710 and if it's NOT addressed in there, then you can do it. Oh, and I "get it" alright, just consider yourself in awe in our presence...

Not true. The FIRST part of every USAF flight manual explains how the procedures contained are NOT to be used a substitute for sound judgement. They are considered guidelines and best practices under most circumstances. The USAF does expect its pilots to know all the rules, AND know when they don't apply. That would certainly make a Navy pilot's head spin.

I know when we'd get students trained by the Navy for basic pilot training, they struggled to keep up with their USAF trained classmates in advanced. I remember one kid who would have never made it through USAF training that the Navy happily passed. Add to that how the Gulf War kill ratio for the USAF was 48 to 0, and you can see why I'm just not feelin' the awe around you Navy guys......

quote:

Originally posted by subsailor74:
This has to be one of the most humorous threads I have read in quite some time. On a serious note, Todd makes (at least) one very good point. When there is trouble in the world that requires a US response, the first question the President (yes, even our current one) asks is "Where are the carriers ?". "How long will it take the Air force to get there" is also asked, but there is often a substantial time lag involved. I take my hat off to you guys who engage in very personal air to air combat, regardless of Service. As a Submariner, the concept of a "fair fight" has no meaning for me. Why would anyone in wartime wish to engage in such a thing when you can sneak up behind another ship, shoot it in the back of the head, and then skulk off to shoot another one? As an SSN Commanding Officer, I equated our stealth to that of a leopard in the bush - only we were invisible until we struck!.....and I liked to think of my four torpedo tubes as a matched set of 21" double rifles!

Admiral,

That is one thing I have to admit the USAF leaned from the Navy (being sneaky) and the result is the F-22. I honestly wish they could make a carrier version of the Raptor vs what they are trying to pawn off on everyone now (F-35).

Hey Admiral,

Glad to see you jumping in here!

One thing though, a fighter pilot's creed is: If you're not cheating, you're not trying hard enough! That's the 1st rule.

Second is: Lie, deny, and make counter accusations!

Lastly: Never ask a guy if he's a fighter pilot. If he is, he'll tell ya! If he isn't, why embarrass him?





Back to INTJ's comment about Navy guys in advanced. You do realize you're advanced syllabus was the equilivant to our intermediate course, right? We completed all the things in our advanced course that you guys put off until the RTS! How does I know these things? I was an advanced jet instructor for 2 years. You don't find too many USAF types flying Tactical Navy jets! The wash out rate was high enough amongst our own top dogs. Can't imagine what it would be with a bunch of spam in a can AF monkeys!

I provided quite a few aggressor missions against the Eagle guys at Tyndall. Never had one behind my 3-9 line.




Parting shot: Only AF types would name a base Seymour Johnson ... pronounced "See More Johnson"!

quote:

Originally posted by buckstix:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
I love reading the aviation forum! Sabatti must be the top secret name of a plane.
Cal

I would be less subtle, they don't get it!

Who gives a rats ass. We get it just fine. Sabatti is a POS. Well established at this point. We're just having a bit of fun now. Go back to your "light loaded" doubles and let the grown ups play!

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Who gives a rats ass. We get it just fine. Sabatti is a POS. Well established at this point. We're just having a bit of fun now. Go back to your "light loaded" doubles and let the grown ups play!

grown ups ? ? what wonderful contributons you have made to this post ? ?

.

quote:

Originally posted by buckstix:

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Who gives a rats ass. We get it just fine. Sabatti is a POS. Well established at this point. We're just having a bit of fun now. Go back to your "light loaded" doubles and let the grown ups play!

grown ups ? ? what wonderful contributons you have made to this post ? ?

.

HA! When my good USAF friend originally said "self licking ice cream cone", I couldn't help but think about the thread found here:

http://forums.accuratereloadin...561066812#9561066812

As a prior USAF enlisted aviator, I'll always look up to the pilots for getting me back home safe after a mission. Although, I find it fitting to come to the aid of my fellow airman with the following.....

SR-71 Ground Speed Check

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

"self licking ice cream cone"

DRSS
NRA Life
NAHC Life
SCI
DSC

right !

.

When I was looking up the USAFs unmatched 48-0 kill rate from the Gulf War on, one the Navy can only dream of; I came across some very depressing info. I am being serious now.

The US Miltary, all branches, has been decimated. The amount of uniformed personnel is way down and the equipment is old. I read through the whole fiasco where they killed funding for the Navy's advanced tactical fighter--which was to be the equivalent of the F-22 but carrier capable. Now I'm sure the Super Hornet is a fine aircraft but it is not a Gen 5 fighter. Whoever decided the Navy didn't really need a Gen 5 fighter--probably the same knucklehead that decides the USAF needed half the original number of F-22s, should be drawn and quartered.....

quote:

Whoever decided the Navy didn't really need a Gen 5 fighter--probably the same knucklehead that decides the USAF needed half the original number of F-22s, should be drawn and quartered.....

You mean you don't know who is the knucklehead yet!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I will give you a hint his name starts with a capital B and last name with a Capital O and if you still could not figure it out yet, how about his middle name Starts with an H. He used his enabler secretary of state Gates and some top notch wheelers and dealers pentagon top brass.

By the way I salute you both navy and USAF pilots and one more thing stop all that bickering will you. We have to unite and fight a mutual enemy, the Sabatti double rifle.

Malek,

This isn't bickering, it's good natured teasing among former service members. I promise you that when we were active, each of us would have willingly risked our lives to help each other out.

As far as Sabatti, just be prepared to add another $800 for re-regulation and maybe another $500 for stock work if it doesn't work out of the box. Aaron Little does a great job on these rifles, such to the point I should really start calling mine a Salittle or maybe Aaronatti.....

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:
Malek,

This isn't bickering, it's good natured teasing among former service members. I promise you that when we were active, each of us would have willingly risked our lives to help each other out.

As far as Sabatti, just be prepared to add another $800 for re-regulation and maybe another $500 for stock work if it doesn't work out of the box. Aaron Little does a great job on these rifles, such to the point I should really start calling mine a Salittle or maybe Aaronatti.....

Yep, no doubt. Not bickering. Just good natured ribbing.

Unless we're talking about that Buckstix guy.

Some just don't seem to have a sense of humor!

quote:

Originally posted by INTJ:
Malek,

This isn't bickering, it's good natured teasing among former service members. I promise you that when we were active, each of us would have willingly risked our lives to help each other out.

As far as Sabatti, just be prepared to add another $800 for re-regulation and maybe another $500 for stock work if it doesn't work out of the box. Aaron Little does a great job on these rifles, such to the point I should really start calling mine a Salittle or maybe Aaronatti.....

Ive been trying to get my hands on unbarrelled actions from Sabatti through my contacts within the US, no such luck yet. Of course I couldn't sell them near as Inexpensively as Sabatti, nonetheless I think a good box lock double with good barrels regulated properly with English styled stock would sell. I certainly wouldn't call them Sabatti, Salittle, or Aaronatti. T. Williams is a maybe.

quote:

Originally posted by Todd William

Yep, no doubt. Not bickering. Just good natured ribbing.

Unless we're talking about that Buckstix guy.

Some just don't seem to have a sense of humor!

I do have a sense of Humor. That's why I have my own Buck Stix flag.



.

Come on guys. Who really has the biggest c*~k? Prove it.

quote:

Originally posted by mdstewart:
Come on guys. Who really has the biggest c*~k? Prove it.

Why would you be interested in such things? Sounds like something an Air Force guy would be interested in!

quote:

Originally posted by mdstewart:
Come on guys. Who really has the biggest c*~k? Prove it.