For the most part I use iron sights. For the AR-15 platform, I did install red dots.
I do have a single pistol with a red dot.
I never intended to get into scoped optics, but I was sort of forced into it.
Many years ago I made my first firearm purchases. The requirement was to have multiple firearms in calibers that would be easy to resupply after the inevitable fall. To me, at the time, this meant 5.56×45, 7.62×51 NATO, 9mm parabellum, .45ACP, and 7.62×39.
The 5.56 was relatively easy; it was an AR-15 platform. Unfortunately, this was the height of the AWB, and that required some strange design choices. Regardless, it is still a beautiful safe queen.
The 9mm was a Glock, and the .45ACP was a Kimber. After shooting the Glock, the Glock was supplemented with an H&K which I could actually hit my target with.
The 7.62×39 was an AK-47 of some sort, long since traded for other stuff. I was required to take out a box of trash for the price a paid. Can you imagine my surprise when that box of trash included 3 30-round magazines and some furniture to restore that AWB abomination into something that actually looked like an AK? The things people throw away.
This left the 7.62×51 NATO. My platform of choice was a Remington 700. Fully bedded, just a beautiful rifle.
I was excited to get to the range, a difficult thing to do in Maryland. I finally got there, setup, put my beautiful rifle on its bipod, got ready to take my first shot, and noticed something.
No iron sights. Nothing. Smooth as a baby’s behind.
I still sent a few rounds “that way” because I refused to pack up and not take a shot.
Back to my LGS to laugh. I ended up getting some Nikon glass. Gorgeous. My LGS mounted the scope and bore sighted it. I then took it to the range and dialed it in.
I can remember punching primers out of shotgun shells at 100 yards.
Great then. Great now?
I took my first deer with that rifle. It was a long shot. I put the crosshairs right where his heart was, then slowly elevated the sight until the crosshair was about 6 inches above his spine and pressed the trigger.
He got about 50 yards from where he was hit. The entry wound was a little high, going through both lungs.
I had no idea of the range; it was just a guess. I had no idea of the ballistics of that round; it was just a guess. I had no idea how much elevation I was putting on; it was just a guess. I got lucky.
The simple crosshair is good, but there are better reticles today.
The glass on that old scope is likely better than any scope I can purchase for under $2k today. But the reticles make a difference.
Vortex EBR-7C(MOA)
The scope I picked is very nice. 5-25 with a much more complex reticle.
It has a built in BDC. I’m sure it can be used for finding distances. It is going to take me a bit to understand everything it does, but it will eliminate much of the guesswork in allowing for distance and windage.
I’m at that stage where I don’t know what I don’t know.
Three men were abducted by aliens. A mathematician, a physicist, and an engineer.
When they woke up, they were on one side of a room, and on the other side was a beautiful blonde with a pistol beside them.
A disembodied voice says, “You are allowed to move half the remaining distance across the room each time you move. If you can make it to the other side, you can do what you will with the blonde, and you will be set free. If you don’t make it to the other side, you can either kill yourself or be taken for the probings.”
The mathematician sits and thinks for a little, calculates a bit more, then says, “It is impossible; no matter how many steps you take, there will still be more to go.”
With that, the mathematician picks up the gun and shoots himself.
The engineer and physicist sit in shock for a moment before the physicist speaks up.
“You know that mathematicians are stuck in their numbers. They have no real-world experience. I’m going to test his hypothesis.”
So he does; on the first move he makes it halfway, on the second he is 3/4s of the way, and on the next move he’s 7/8s. He’s making progress, but he realizes he will never make it all the way.
He returns to his side of the room, picks up the gun, and offs himself.
The engineer is nearly in shock. He looks at the two bodies and then gathers himself up. He starts the process of crossing the room.
After over 50 moves, he reaches out, grabs the blonde, yanks her into his arms, and says, “Good enough for all practical purposes.”
For All Practical Purposes
During the age of steam, engineers developed a working idea of how steam engines worked and how to measure them. These men were not dumb; they understood nature, and they understood Newtonian physics. They developed formulas to guide them as they designed new engines.
What were they interested in? They wanted an efficient engine that produced enough work to make it worthwhile.
What is efficiency in a steam engine? How much steam it consumes. A boiler is only capable of producing a limited amount of steam. That is based on the amount of heat put into the system along with how efficient the boiler is at transferring the heat into water to force a phase change.
The more efficient the boiler, the less fuel it took to run. Coal and wood cost money.
An inefficient steam engine consumes more steam, which requires the boiler to produce more steam, which means more fuel.
The work that an engine produces is defined as brake torque and brake horsepower. Torque is how much rotational force is being produced, while horsepower is force of distance. Steam engines produce good torque over the entire range of supported speeds.
They had methods of measuring torque and horsepower. They could also measure the pressure of the steam. They knew the size of the piston they were using. They needed an expression for determining torque and horsepower before they designed an engine, much less built it.
The formula was P.L.A.N., which is pressure times length of stroke in feet times area of the piston face times the number of power strokes per minute.
They can easily measure stroke length, piston area, and power strokes per minute; those are simple things that can be measured with a ruler and a counter over time. But how do you measure the pressure?
The pressure changes over the time of the power stroke. At the start of the stroke, the cylinder has not yet filled with steam; it is still entering, so it is lower than the source. As the cylinder begins to fill, the piston starts moving, increasing the volume while reducing the pressure. The cutoff takes place, and now no more steam is being allowed to enter, and the steam that is there just expands, decreasing the pressure even more.
At every moment of that cycle there is a different pressure in the cylinder. With advanced math, you might be able to calculate it at every step then integrate over time.
These guys stuck some sort of pressure gauge on the cylinder and somehow measured the average (mean) pressure.
This is the value they used. The Mean Effective Pressure or MEP.
This is good enough for all practical purposes.
What is the starting pressure
If you have a closed system, the pressure at every point is the same. A steam engine is not a closed system. There is always steam being vented to the outside, either directly to the atmosphere or into a condenser.
This produces a sequence of pressure drops. The pressure is then built up as new steam flows from the boiler. All of this happens very rapidly, but it does take time. To reduce the amount of pulsing that hits the boiler, we use a steam reservoir, which is part of the steam chest.
When the flow of a fluid is stopped rapidly, it causes a “hammer” effect. Opening and closing the valves, allowing steam to flow into the cylinder and then stop can do just this.
The following video explains the water hammer phenomenon.
By putting that reservoir closer to the valves, we can stop that phenomenon from hammering on the boiler.
But how do we know what the pressure is in the steam chest? We might assume it is the same as the boiler, but it takes time for the steam chest to fill. The amount of time it takes to fill and stabilize is dependent on the size and shape of the piping from the boiler to the steam chest.
We need to measure or otherwise determine what the effective pressure in the steam chest is.
So we have a basic idea of what the pressure might be.
How much does it cost
Steam travels from the steam chest into the cylinder via a steam passage. The shape, wall texture, and size of the steam passage affect the speed at which the steam enters the cylinder. In addition, we have the mass of the fluid (air/steam) that is in the passage when we start pressurizing it.
We need to measure how long it takes to reach the cylinder port and how long it takes to fill the cylinder. The smaller the passage, the more velocity you lose and the longer it takes to fill the cylinder. If it takes longer to fill the cylinder than the admission stage of the cycle then we are not getting full power from the engine.
Sometimes these passages are drilled and plugged or covered. Other times they are cast into the cylinder body. If cast, the quality of that core determines the texture/smoothness of the walls of the passage. Other times, they are drilled in a straight line to intersecting passages. Regardless of how they are made, they are a complex shape that causes turbulence and can cause other issues.
We need to know how much we lose, the cost, of getting steam from the steam chest into the cylinder.
And what happens in the cylinder
As stated before, the cylinder volume is constantly changing. The volume is decreasing when we start allowing steam into the cylinder. This lead steam acts like a cushion or spring to help start the piston back in the other direction. Remember that we are not only using energy to create power/work, we are also using energy to reverse the direction of the cylinder.
With a standard 4 stroke engine, we have four stages: Intake, where we suck a fuel air mixture into the cylinder. Compression, where the fuel air mixture is compressed for maximum efficiency. The power stroke, where the fuel has burned and the expanding gas is driving the piston. Finally, we have the exhaust stroke, where the expended gases are pushed out of the cylinder.
Only the power stroke puts energy into the system. The other three strokes are wasted. The energy to move the piston comes from other cylinders or energy stored in a flywheel.
With the steam engine, as the volume is decreasing, the expended steam is being pushed out the exhaust port. In simple engines the exhaust port is the same as the inlet port. Just before top dead center, steam is allowed back into the cylinder, pushing against the piston. This slows the piston as it reverses direction. The steam pushes the piston away from the cylinder head, causing the volume to increase.
Before we reach bottom dead center, the inlet is cut off. The steam continues to expand, continuing to push on the piston. Finally the piston reverses direction, and the used steam is exhausted to the atmosphere.
We need to integrate the pressure at the surface of the piston over the entire cycle.
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)
I have studied Finite Element Methods (FEM). CFD is a different from FEM but has many similar aspects. The gist is that we create a mesh of a volume. We set the initial conditions of every surface or point. The initial condition is the pressure and a velocity vector.
We then define some formulas that describe how the fluid acts. From this we propagate the initial conditions through the mesh to a “stable” result. We can then use that result as a new set of initial conditions and iterate another time step.
With this we can see pressure waves, velocities, and just about everything we need to know about the flow of the fluid through the mesh.
The great thing is that there are good, free CFD packages out there. I’m using OpenFOAM because I am using FreeCAD as my modeling software.
With FreeCAD you can build a “body” or “part”. A part is a single item. It can be created by additive or subtractive means. It could be a rough or machined casting or something made from bar stock.
The bodies are combined into “assemblies”. An assembly is a collection of parts that are connected with joints. Joints can be fixed, sliding, rotating, and a few others.
I’ve been able to take the parts of the steam engine I’ve modeled and create assemblies, which have shown me that I misread the prints. Meaning I’ve had to go back and redo the body/part which sometimes required redoing the assembly. An iterative process.
With a body, I should be able to create a negative of that body, representing the domain of for the CFD, which is what gets meshed.
I can use the CfdOF workbench to create meshes, set initial conditions, set the properties for the fluid, refine the mesh, and a dozen other things before passing the actual analysis off to OpenFOAM.
OpenFOAM runs for a long time and then produces results that I should be able to visualize. That has not been working all that well.
From this, I should be able to calculate what MEP is at every location and step of the system.
And I’m stuck here. Not totally stuck, but more of the I know I don’t know something, I’ll have to figure it out.
But what about the rest
All of the above is just to get a cylinder that will produce the power I need or want.
From there we move into the mechanical world. Here we have to design the components to meet the requirements of the cylinder.
How big should the piston rod be? It has no rotational or angular forces applied to it, just tension and compression. This is an FEM calculation or uses simple analytical calculations.
The connecting rod gets more complex. The big end is connected to the crankpin, which moves in a circle. The small end is attached to the end of the piston rod. It moves in a linear motion. We need to evaluate the forces in play on the crosshead pin and the crankpin to make sure they are strong enough but not overkill. We need to design for reduced mass because mass changing directions takes energy.
We also have to worry about the vibrations we get from throwing the crankpin in a circle.
If you want to design a vibrating thing, just put a weight off-center on a spinning thing, and you get vibrations. We balance the wheels of our cars to remove that type of vibration. We have to balance the crank to remove as much of the vibration as possible.
But we have to know what the forces in play are at every stage of the cycle to know how to cancel them. Painful.
We need to know the size of the driveshaft. My small models use a 1/4 inch shaft. For my 1/2 HP engine, I doubt a 1/4 will be strong enough.
The shaft must ride in bearings that can withstand the reciprocating forces as well as the axial forces.
But why?
The answer is never simple, but for me I want to be able to enter a desired HP rating and torque rating and have a custom designed steam engine modeled.
I currently have an integrated spreadsheet with my 3D model. You can select or set the desired brake power you want at a given boiler pressure and a given RPM. This feeds into several formulas, which then drive the model.
Change the stroke in the spreadsheet, and everything from the cylinder through the final assembly changes to match that cylinder. It even goes so far as to define the number of screws or bolts in the cylinder flange, the size of those screws and bolts, as well as the proper torque values for those screws and bolts.
The next step is to get the steam passages correctly designed and sized. This will drive the steam chest which will drive other components.
In the end I should be able to have the system give me patterns for casting.
For some reason last year moved more rapidly than I expected. There are so many things I didn’t get done that I needed to. Yet we are here.
The big thing to me is how the culture battle changed.
2 years ago, I would not have imagined talking about birthright citizenship. We all knew that whelping a baby on American soil meant another anchor baby, another family of immigrants, and another strain on our resources. Today we are arguing if there is such a thing as birthright citizenship for illegal aliens.
2 years ago, I would not have imagined we would be talking about massive ICE enforcement actions. Today we are talking about over a million illegal aliens who have self deported.
2 years ago, I would not have imagined we would be actually fighting a war on drugs. Today we are arguing about due process for narco terrorists that have just been blasted out of existence.
2 years ago, I would not have imagined peace breaking out in so many places. Today we are arguing about a ceasefire being broken while the peace is happening in so many places.
A year ago I was hoping for an end to the war in Ukraine. Today I see that we are no longer sending dollars, but we are supporting.
Finally, a year ago I knew that there was corruption in my government. I knew money was being wasted by the millions. Today I’m watching massive fraud being detected, and it looks like action is being taken.
It was a good year.
We wish you and yours a wonderful new year. We are glad you are hear.
I’ve been having difficulty “doing” things in my office. Two big reasons: one, it is freaking cold. The other, optics.
Our basement is unheated, and we lose way to much heat through the floor into the basement. One of the things that I need to do is to make sure the basement is properly sealed and then to look into insulating it a bit.
With dead shoes, my feet were cold. My hands were cold. My head was cold. It isn’t uncommon to enter my office, which is isolated from the woodstove-heated parts of the house, to see 52° on the thermometer. I have a silent oil-filled heater. Over the course of about an hour the temp will come up to around 63°. On a good day, it might climb over 65°.
That issue was mostly solved by good, fur-lined moccasins.
What I didn’t realize was that my optics were failing me.
Back in the 80s, while at university, I would drive my friend around to different places because he was legally blind. He would tell me street names from memory. And I would miss turns all the time.
It took a couple of trips before I found the right place to turn. I had to find landmarks. I was not driving by street names; I was driving from landmark to landmark.
If you want the epitome of this, just ask a New Englander for directions: Turn left on School Street; it is just past where the machine shop used to be. Yeah, I’ve become that guy.
Regardless, I knew where I was but couldn’t name the street I was on. Then I did something weird: I got my eyes examined and new glasses.
Suddenly I was driving by street names. Why? Because I could actually see the damn street signs before I was driving past them.
Well, my prescription for driving appears to be good. My progressives are not. I need new glasses.
How does this affect working at my computer? Umm, I’m embarrassed to admit, but I put on my computer glasses tonight to see if it makes a difference.It does. I can actually read what’s on the screen.
So when we are talking about optics, remember that they start with the optics that you wear on your face.
The process to get a case to the Supreme Court is difficult and expensive. For Eva Marie Gardner, she has done it with no visible help.
In January 2021, Eva Gardner was driving her car on I-270 in Maryland. This expressway extends out of D.C. to Frederick, MD. From there it is just a short distance into PA. It is one of the feeder highways for people that work in D.C. but who can’t afford to live in or near D.C.
While driving, an unlicensed driver “forced” her off the road with the use of a “PIT” maneuver. Both the other driver and Ms. Gardner exited their vehicles. Ms. Gardner stated that she displayed her handgun to deter him.
When the cops arrived, the alleged assailant spoke to them comely. The assailant was unable to provide a valid driver’s license, “proof of car ownership” which I take to mean registration, nor proof of insurance. Note, Maryland is a state that requires you to have car insurance.
Having listened to the two parties, the police let the alleged assailant depart, never to be heard from again. They arrested Ms. Gardner for violation of Maryland Criminal Law § 5-203, carrying a firearm without a Maryland permit.
She would have had an attorney for her criminal trial. She then went through the appeals process pro se, meaning without a lawyer, representing herself.
She had a valid Virginia CCW. If I’m reading her petition correctly, PA doesn’t recognize her VA permit either.
How common is this?
This type of case happens way to often. I refer to the state south of me as “Mordor.” If I were to accidentally carry a shell casing into that state, I would be committing a felony under MA state law. You are required to have a permit to own ammunition or ammunition components, much less an actual firearm.
Post Bruen, it takes around 9 months to get a non-resident CCW, which includes in person interviews.
People violating reciprocity laws is very common. There is a mall that is famous among CCW holders; there are parts of the mall that exist in freedom and others where you are subject to the crown of MA. You can be walking through a store, legally carrying your firearm, take a step over and suddenly you have committed a felony.
There is a scene in the movie Sergeant York where he is at the bar, orders a drink, and goes to sit down with it. The barkeep stops him because he would have crossed the county line into a dry county. He could drink whiskey all day long on one side of the room, but not the other.
That is what it is like. There is no path you can take out of VT, NH, and ME where you don’t have to pass through a gun hating state. MA to the south, NY to the west, and Canada to the north.
I would guess this sort of violation of imaginary lines on a map happens 1000s of times a day.
What makes this case interesting?
Absolutely nothing. This was a pro se case. The Supreme Court sees hundreds, if not a few thousand, pro se cases a year. Most are submitted by jailhouse lawyers. Most are summarily denied cert.
Ms. Gardner is likely a felon for this single stop. She’s no different from all the rest.
The case is so uninteresting that the state of Maryland officially declined to submit a response. This was submitted on an editable PDF. In other words, they couldn’t be bothered to even type something up. Somebody filled in the blanks in the PDF and sent it off.
The petition for writ of certiorari was filed on 2025/10/22. Maryland said “Not interested” on 2025/11/03. The case was distributed for conference 3 days later. (That’s fast).
On 2025/11/12 the Supreme Court “requested” a response from Maryland by 2025/12/12.
On 2025/11/19 the panic had set in. Maryland asked for a 45 day extension, claiming they had not looked at the case and were busy with 7 other important cases, two of which were also Second Amendment Cases.
The extension was granted.
Yes, the Supreme Court told the country, “Pay attention to this case”.
That simple request set the wheels in motion. The request was picked up in the weekly orders. People said, “Huh, what case is this?” and looked it up.
What happened?
Word got out in the Second Amendment legal community. Washington Gun Law mentioned it, then did a video on it. So did Mark Smith and a few others.
This means that on 2025/12/11 the first of the reinforcements showed up.
First up was the Second Amendment Foundation with NRA backing via the California Rifle & Pistol Association (CRPA) and more. The basic argument is that this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation made exceptions for travelers when travelers were in locations demanding permitting or licensing.
The Heller Foundation points out that Supreme Court precedents permit only modest, ministerial burdens on visitors. Maryland’s “preclearance regime” is not modest. They point out that Maryland is forcing travelers to forgo one right for another. And that Maryland’s regime is an outlier.
Thank all the constitutional carry states for that bit.
Ted Cruz and his fellow Senators spoke up. Their contribution might be the better statement of the question. It will be interesting to see what the question SCOTUS presents when they grant cert.
This brief focuses on errors in the inferior courts opinions. The inferior courts used footnote 9 from Bruen.
The Cato Institute hammers on the right to travel is a constitutionally protected right. You have to either give up your right to travel or your right to armed self-defense.
Virginia, New Hampshire, and 22 other states provided their input as well.
A core principle of our federal system is that federal constitutional rights do not change when travelling between the several States. See U.S. Const. art. VI. Just as the Fourth Amendment protects every American’s right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures in both Nebraska and California, or the First Amendment protects every American’s right to speak freely in both Delaware and Louisiana, the Second Amendment protects every American’s right to carry firearms for self-defense in both Virginia and Maryland.
Maryland has chosen to ignore that cornerstone of constitutional federalism by prosecuting a law-abiding Virginia citizen for possessing a loaded firearm and displaying it to deter an assailant. Worse, Maryland’s basis for the prosecution was a concededly unconstitutional may-issue licensing regime. Applying this unconstitutional licensing regime to a Virginia citizen with a valid Virginia concealed carry license merely because she was attacked in Maryland flaunts this Court’s precedents and basic constitutional principles. Maryland may not require Virginia citizens to obtain a speech license—granted only to those espousing Maryland-approved viewpoints—before speaking. Similarly, it cannot require Virginia citizens to undergo an unconstitutional licensing process before carrying firearms for self-defense.
What are we hoping for?
First, we are hoping that this case does not become an as applied opinion. We want the case to be granted cert and for The Court to find that CCWs are just like driver’s licenses. It doesn’t matter which state issues your license; it is good in all states.
When you add Constitutional Carry to the mix, this means that citizens of half the states in the Union would be able to carry anywhere in the states with just proof of residence in their home state.
This might also be a stepping stone for ending the bs about buying firearms out of state.
Many years ago my mentor explained to me how the director of the lab had almost gotten himself in trouble. The sort of trouble that ends with “I hereby sentence you to X years.” All because he failed to honor the color of money.
“Color of money” is a term of art within some parts of the government. In this case the lab had a considerable budget. They had been authorized by Congress to purchase a supercomputer. They ordered the supercomputer but were told it would be a while to get it. “A while” was measured in quarters.
The lab needed a supercomptuter now. They were offered a different model that could be delivered and set up within a couple of months.
This is what they decided to do. The problem was they required a few million dollars to buy this second supercomputer. This required another authorization from Congress.
The request was put in, money was coming, it would be there in just a few weeks.
The issue?
That second computer was very popular. There were other people who had cash now to buy it.
The lab director decided he used money that he was authorized to spend to buy the supercomputer. That money was marked (colored) for a different use later in the year.
A few weeks later, Congress authorized money for the second supercomputer, and all the accounts balanced perfectly.
The issue? Using the wrong colored money was technically not allowed. It was the sort of thing that gets you jail time if the powers that be decide they don’t like you.
It appears that this is what happened to Trump
the President relied on 10 U.S.C. §12406(3)
This statue has specific language: unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States..
And that is what happened. The government argues that “the regular forces” means regular federal employees and law enforcement. The courts are saying that “the regular forces” means the military.
Since the administration did not argue that they could not take care of the problem by deploying the U.S. Marines, they had not met the requirement of “unable with the regular forces”.
Now this is where it gets interesting. The court did not address the question of “Can the administration deploy regular forces?”
The Posse Comitatus Act forbids deploying regular forces to enforce laws except under certain circumstances.
But, as Justice Kavanaugh pointed out, there are other statutes the administration can use to authorize the deployment of “the regular forces”.
In other words, it looks like the city of Chicago is about to get what they asked for, good and hard.
I hope you all had an excellent Christmas. That you connected with your family and friends.
Two feasts are done, and it is time to find places for all the new loot.
For me, the two most happy making gifts were a pair of (expensive for my son) fur lined moccasins and a small book, “The Constitution of the United States and Other Founding Documents”
What was the most surprising in a good way gift you received? What was your favorite reaction to a gift you gave?
