Forum Replies Created
James HarveyMemberJanuary 28, 2013 at 9:31 amPost count: 1130
Steve Graf wrote: It’s not that I want to hunt. I need to hunt. I have no choice in the matter (not picking on you L. Just saying how I am). And for myself, grocery stores are not an option. Industrial “food” is canned cancer.
That sounds exactly like a choice. And if you live in any part of the developed world, it’s a choice afforded to you by the vast bulk of the population choosing otherwise.
I applaud you for that choice by the way, sounds like an admirable way to live. But a choice none the less.
Steve Graf wrote: Industrial “food” is canned cancer.
I challenge you to support such a bold claim with evidence. In anticipation of your reply, here is my rebuttal:James HarveyMemberJanuary 28, 2013 at 7:13 amPost count: 1130
Mate, I reckon bang for your buck, it’s hard to go past the old US LC-1 alice frame packs..
They can stow quite a lot of volume and weight but are pretty small all strapped down. The best thing is how light they are. Something like 3 pounds. As a reference, my fancy mystery ranch assault pack (worth about $350) can only carry half the volume and weighs almost 6 pounds.
They’re pretty popular in the Aussie Army because they are so light. The only failure I’ve ever seen in them is the frame breaking on para drops as they’re made of aluminium not steel.
Value for money, best pack in the world in my humble opinion.James HarveyMemberJanuary 26, 2013 at 8:27 pmPost count: 1130
Here’s the link I think:
Something of a Taj Mahteepee 😛James HarveyMemberJanuary 25, 2013 at 6:29 amPost count: 1130
lyagooshka wrote: A 240gr .44 Remington Mag cannot compare to a 55gr 5.56 traveling at 3X the speed.
That’s not a fair comparison! Those .44 magnum slugs are like shooting a coin at someone, no wonder they just slap the skin and bounce off 😛
Compare the zipping 5.56 to the 7.62 short, twice the weight at 2/3 the speed carries only about 15% more energy but it does a whole lot more going through things and killing. I’ve never hunted animals with rifles, but our experience in Afghan has been that you can fill a guy full of 5.56mm holes and he keeps fighting, but you put a 7.62 hole in his torso and he is done.
IMHO the selling points of 5.56 are mostly administrative, not direct combat effects.James HarveyMemberJanuary 25, 2013 at 5:04 amPost count: 1130James HarveyMemberJanuary 23, 2013 at 9:38 pmPost count: 1130
David – that’s really unfortunate to hear. I always assumed because the bulk of book cost is in print/distribution, with those costs cut away an ebook selling at 50% of it’s tangible equivalent would still result in higher royalties for the author. Your case is genuine theft. But thank you for letting us know.
Jim.James HarveyMemberJanuary 23, 2013 at 8:48 pmPost count: 1130
David Petersen wrote: no tree stands allowed.
Hah. I’ve never met anyone in Australia that uses them, but I understand they’ve very popular up your way. I was a bit shocked to read a whole story centred around them in the latest mag (maybe that’s commonplace but I only started reading the TradBow mag this Christmas).James HarveyMemberJanuary 17, 2013 at 2:59 pmPost count: 1130James HarveyMemberJanuary 16, 2013 at 12:50 pmPost count: 1130
sinawalli wrote: QuickClot should only be used as a last resort. Can be very damaging to a wound, and the ER doctor will have the job of removing it.
I understand what you’re saying, but I would like to clarify on your choice of words. I would say use it as a first resort on a wound you assess as deserving.
I understand the powdered variety creates heat and can burn the skin, get blown into your eyes etc. The treated gauze variety does not have any of those issues. You will probably widen the wound in applying it (as youve really got to stuff it in there) and a doctor will have the tricky job of removing the clot along with the gauze when she’s fixing you up. But if that wound bleeding freely is a serious problem I’d rather a doc in an ER deal with that than me out in the bush.
Those are just my thoughts. I’m no medical professional.James HarveyMemberJanuary 16, 2013 at 2:45 amPost count: 1130
David Petersen wrote: While I could live and hunt in areas lacking big scary predators, it would be like drinking tea instead of bourbon.
Hah, I think there a couple of down to earth species of snakes in Oz that have higher kill counts than your rather glamorous big predators. But they certainly don’t actively hunt us!
Friendly intercontinental banter aside, I can’t help but be jealous. There is a distinct lack of ‘threat’ if you stay away from water around here. Funny given that dehydration probably kills more people than anything on this dry brown land.
David Petersen wrote: But great white sharks … BRRRR! Something about being eaten by a fish while at the same time drowning is just incomparably scary.
My better half is a marine biologist and often reminds me that where I swim you can just about guarantee a ‘man eater’ shark within a kilometre of me. He’s just choosing not to eat me. You can’t help but take a rather fatalistic philosophy when confronted with that. But I haven’t been eaten yet, not even once.
Thanks again for the pics mate. There is something terribly romantic and thrilling about sharing space with genuine predators.James HarveyMemberJanuary 15, 2013 at 10:47 pmPost count: 1130James HarveyMemberJanuary 15, 2013 at 2:23 pmPost count: 1130
David Petersen wrote: Ausjim (and others), I just ordered a QuickClot online.
You won’t regret it David. The stuff is magic for a deep flesh wound.
Another item I always take out field (if I’m going for multiple nights) that is not a life saver but rather useful is superglue. I use it on little cuts, particularly on your hands where band-aids or tape are hard to use. It’ll hold a small cut closed and seal it to the outside world. In about a day the glue flakes off and your cut is healed up. Just make sure you keep it in a zip seal bag, I had a tube explode in my FA kit once. Rather inconvenient.James HarveyMemberJanuary 15, 2013 at 1:35 pmPost count: 1130
One night in north Queensland, which is usually pretty hot I had an Antarctic breeze blow all the way across the continent just for my benefit. I had left my main camp earlier in the day with nothing but trousers, shirt and hat for clothes. In an act of desperation I took my knife and cut a big heap of the long dead grass on the hill and packed it tight into my shirt for insulation. It made me slightly less miserable and took my mind off freezing for a little while at least. There’s nothing worse than being wet and cold, but that dry night with grass stuffed in my shirt always stands out as ‘simple’ 😛James HarveyMemberJanuary 14, 2013 at 5:10 pmPost count: 1130
lyagooshka wrote: ausjim,
“High and tight” for sake of erring on the side of caution is ok, but make sure there is some common sense as well. You see someone lose a foot at the ankle, a tourniquet to the groin will work, but so will one at the knee, and one at the ankle. Someone please correct me if I’m wrong, but my training was always the opposite. It was always as close to the wound as possible (“up-stream” of course).
Again, my understanding is that the ‘as close as possible’ was taught because of concern that you may lose tissue below the tourniquet.
So we were taught that as first aiders our only consideration was saving a life until real medical aid could be secured. If someone has an arterial bleed, seconds count, so an advantage of ‘high and tight’ means you aren’t wasting time assessing once that bleed is identified. Another advantage of high and tight is you dodge a lot of the very compressible large muscles and get a good strong clamp on the femur/humerus. Finally if you have to move the person, a CAT up in the groin/armpit is better protected. More than one soldier has bled out while being moved because a CAT has come undone before anyone noticed.
All that being said, I’m no medic so if you’ve been taught different, I’m not suggesting you throw that out the window. I can only share what I’ve been taught 😉
Really good point about the beacon.James HarveyMemberJanuary 14, 2013 at 2:29 pmPost count: 1130
pothunter wrote: a word of caution if you have not done so find out just when these should be used as there is no turning back if they are improperly applied.
Yeah, I understand they were out of favour for a long time because of the risk of losing any part of the limb below the tourniquet. I can’t talk technically as I’m rather uneducated in the medical field, but what I have been told by those who do know is that a CAT can be applied for hours and the limb saved, and a wound deserving a CAT would likely kill in minutes so you’re better off minus a leg than a life anyway.
For interests sake I have been trained to apply it as high and tight as possible on the damaged limb (e.g. right up in the groin on the leg) regardless of how low the amputation/arterial bleed is (e.g. below the knee). The docs are that confident they can save the tissue below the tourniquet. I guess they’re also confident a dumb first aider like me isn’t going to accurately assess how far the severed artery is going to draw back into the limb, so better make sure I get it up high.