Science Daily has a piece on “sea gliders” — unmanned probes that are plying the ocean now, and run on thermal energy for up to 5 years! John Robb has pointed out over at Global Guerrillas the obvious application for smugglers.
16 January, 2010
I hit the firing range today to keep the ol’ skills up and was greeted by one of the guys there with an invite to lay my furry paws on the Fabrique Nationale SCAR-L in 5.56mm. The SCAR is FN’s answer to the military requests for a new battle rifle for US special forces.
First impression — the gun is incredibly light, which is not what I expected with all the plastic on it. The company’s F2000 is a bullpup version of this gun, but feels like it weighs about twice what the SCAR does. The stock folds to the right and does not interfere with the shooter’s grip, nor with operation of the ejection port.
It uses standard AR mags, and the seat easily and drop free when the release is hit. Manipulation of the charging handle (on the left side of the gun) is easy and could be used to chamber a round as easy as the bolt release. Trigger is smooth and felt to be about 5ish pounds. Fold down sights are standard, and there is a Piccatinny rail for optics.
Take down looked to be very easy, and there were a minimum of moving parts. (I only counted four…) The weapon has about the same recoil as my old CMMG piston-driven AR, despite being lighter. This weapon also uses a piston to drive the bolt carrier, and this makes the gun function much cleaner and more reliably. (My CMMG was a delight to clean, compared to my service-issed M16 and M4.) Accuracy for a rifle is hard to assess on a 25 yard range, but the SCAR drilled a single ragged hole in the head of a silhouette target with 10 rounds…so just as good as any AR or P90 at similar distances.
This would be an excellent shooter for the field, without a doubt. However, the $2500 price tag was a bit steep for my blood. (Which would have undoubtedly been spilled by “she who must be obeyed”, had I bought the thing.) There is a .308 version on route sometime later this year.
10 January, 2010
Tanfoglio is an Italian manufacturer of handguns based in the “Valley of the Gun” outside of Brescia (there are several manufactures located there, including Beretta.) One of their primary products is a copy of the CZ-75, called alternately the Combat or the Witness. It is imported into the US by European American Armory and is usually called the EAA Witness. It is available in .22LR, 9mm, .40S&W, 10mm, and .45ACP.
I have not fired the other calibers of this pistol, so we will focus solely on the .45 Witness. Simply put: this is one of the best .45s you can buy for sub-$500 (although prices have climbed some with the recent nonsense.)
The CZ is one of my favorite configurations for a handgun, and the clones of the weapon are highly-controllable, accurate, and reliable. I originally bought my first Tanfoglio in 1997 because it was the closest thing I could get to the old Bren Ten — a fantastic weapon. It was, at the time, a $250 gun and worth every penny. Since then, I have purchased two more of the weapons. None have been a let down.

Quality of build and finish is good. The Witness usually comes in a stainless steel frame and slide, what they call their Wonder Finish. It is low-reflection steel with almost a brushed look to it. The fit of the slide to frame is tight and the slide sits inside the frame, unlike most semiautos. This makes for a more solid feeling weapon, in my opinion. The only issue with the .45 and 10mm versions of the handgun are light recoil springs — the Witnesses ship with 14 pound recoil springs. Make sure you order a Wolff spring in 16 or 18 pounds for the .45, and at least a 20lb for the 10mm. This not only helps with recoil management, but dramatically lowers the beating the frame takes from hotter +P .45s or the high-velocity 10mms.
Speaking of recoil…the Witness .45 has a stout recoil that, like the 1911 series, comes straight back into your hand with a minimum of muzzle flip. Operation of the weapon is single/double action. It can be carried with the hammer down, half-cock, or cocked and locked. Unlike the CZs, the Tanfoglio can be safed in any hammer position, a feature I very much like and wish CZ would adopt. The trigger pull is long in single action and about 8ish pounds, in single action it’s more like 4-5 lbs. and has a bit of play before engaging. Some shooters don’t like this, but I don’t mind a bit of slack, personally.
Sights are fairly basic, adjustable with an Allen wench in most new models, and the weapon is extremely accurate. (Attributed to the minimized play in the slide due to the way it mates to the frame.) The ergonomics are comfortable for most shooters, and even my wife’s small hands, and a friend’s arthritic ones found it comfortable. The wife did have trouble reaching the trigger in SA, but if a person with small mits was carrying, they could do it Condition One and have little problem. The handle is bigger than the 1911, but gives the shooter 10 rounds in the magazine.
On every Witness I’ve owned, I’ve been able to print 2.5″ groups, free-standing with some speed, out to 25 yards. Ordinarily, I like to try and practice moving and single handed shooting at cans or something appropriately small. The Tanfoglio is a solid can-popper out to 10-15 yards, on the move and point shooting. On an indoor range, the Witness regularly outshoots my friend’s Kimber Pro-Carry (but not another friend’s Yost-bonitz modified Springfield 1911.)
I’ve never had a malfunction in 2000 rounds with my current Tanfoglio, only had a handful of FTF (usually double feeds) on one that was magnaported. (It was a bad magazine.)
They are a handsome, solid (and heavy) weapon with strong accuracy and reliability. It might be a bit hefty for some to carry everyday, but for hiking or duty, the Tanfoglio would be a superb weapon.
10 January, 2010
Got some otaku on your gift list that has all the toys, video games, and self-loathing he can buy? Well, pop on over to the True Companion website for all the technologically advanced sex your eyes can stand!
Here’s a bit on the ‘bot. Good news! If Roxxxxy’s not gay enough for you, there’s also a Rocky model.
All those sci-fi books got the killer ap for robots right, didn’t they?
3 January, 2010
Trailer: Space Battleship Yamato (Star Blazers)
Posted by blackcampbell under Science FictionLeave a Comment
Live action Star Blazers movie…hell to the yes!
28 December, 2009
Everything you’ve heard is true: it’s gorgeous to look at, it’s even engaging for the first half or so. The story is old hat. So, what to add..?
First, if you’re going to bother to go see it, see it in 3D. Instead of using it as a gimmick (oh, they’re shooting an arrow right at you!) Cameron uses it to create stunning depth of field. You don’t feel like the image is a series of plates working on top of each other; the effects make you feel like the screen is more of a window, than a field for images. One of the tricks they use to do this is to put insects, or bits of dust, ash, or what have you floating in the foreground. It works well — there were several times I would have sworn one of these object drifted off the screen. I didn’t notice any headaches, like I’ve heard some have gotten, but did feel like my left eye drifted out of focus a few times.
It works to pull you into the world Cameron is creating. Pandora is stunningly beautiful, and I particularly liked the Roger Dean-esque floating mountains. The flora and fauna is well thought out and well-designed. However, I noted all the animals other than the natives in the piece (the Na’vi), were sextupeds — six limbs, usually four eyes, and breathing gills int he chest area. The Na’vi are blatantly humanoid (most likely to make the love story work…it’s hard to get worked up about a love story between giant slugs, say.)
Following on that, the military technology is superbly thought out, and I wouldn’t be surprised if we see something like the movable displays on the gunships show up in the next iteration of military aircraft. The craft — from the helicopters, to the shuttles, to the combat exos — are well thought out, completely believable, and uber-cool. The super-helo they’re using in the combat sequences has design elements that are obviously cribbed from Aliens. (I haven’t bothered to check, but I would suspect the gear is courtesy of the same design shop on that movie.)
The performances are adequate, with Stephen Lang doing the best job, in my opinion. His Colonel Quaritch is undeniably a “bad ass” characature, but the actor makes him believable. Part of the problem is the actors are emoting through the CGI characters, as well as having to work around the weak dialogue.
The story is old hat. Evil corporate interests, supported by their mercenary army, are mining an unfortunately named “unobtanium” on Pandora, and those darned natives are sitting on the biggest deposit. The unobtanium doesn’t appear to have a direct connection to the floating mountains (but should have!) It’s not far fetched, this conflict, by any means. But considering how touchy-feely many corporations are nowadays, I would expect that the PR nightmare of wiping out an indigenous species would not go over well.
The movie covers that, fortunately. The company tried to educate the natives, provide them with medicines…all for naught. They’re out of patience. Colonel Quatrich, at this point, pushes the military option, leading to the big battle.
The hero, or course goes native. This is the classic guilty white dude saved the natives theme that’s been floating around since the action stories of the 19th Century. He falls for the hot chieftain’s daughter and after learning their ways, goes native. He leads the ten-foot tall Na’vi against the human interlopers, with bows and arrows….not likely. The final victory of the na’vi is about as likely as that of the teddy bears on Endor. (Yes, I know they’re called Ewoks.)
There’s a lot to like about the movie. The visuals are an experience! The gadgets and sci-fi trappings are fascinating. The story is hackneyed and predictable, and the characters are a bit flat. Overall, however, it was worth at least one go ’round in the theater; it will lose a lot in translation to small screen. See it in 3D, if you do.


