Archive for the 'AR-15s' Category

Understanding Mechanical Offset

BY Herschel Smith
3 months, 2 weeks ago

Shooting Illustrated:

What’s mechanical offset and how do you deal with it? If you have an optic on a firearm, particularly a rifle, the line-of-sight through the scope is higher than the center of the bore, and that difference is what we call offset. In other words, when you take a shot the bullet is going to exit the barrel as much as several inches lower than the line of sight.

[ … ]

To check this out, you’re going to need about 50 rounds of ammunition and a target. I suggest you fire three-shot groups, holding center, from 3, 7, 10, 15 and 25 yards. I think you’ll discover that your rounds are striking somewhere around 2 to 3 inches low at 3, 7 and 10 yards. At 15 yards, the group will still be low, but a little closer to point-of-aim. At 25 yards, point-of-aim and your three-shot group should be pretty close to coinciding.

Next, try shooting those same three-shot groups at 3, 7, 10 and 15 yards again, but this time hold high to account for the offset you observed the first time around (remember, the 25-yard group should be close enough to the center to not warrant significant correction). If you hold correctly, you should end up with centered hits at each of the distances. One quick example might be holding 3 inches high at 3 yards. Continue to practice getting used to the various mechanical offsets by shooting snaps—one shot standing from ready—at each of the various ranges until you thoroughly understand your offset holds.

Travis Haley refers to this as “height over bore” in the Magpul Dynamics “Art of the Tactical Carbine,” which is a very good video series.  I highly recommend it.

If this matters to you in CQB, you should check out your correction on a short range.

Eugene Stoner: The Man Behind The Gun

BY Herschel Smith
4 months ago

If you don’t do anything else today, watch this video entirely.  It’s well worth your time. There is also information presented by Stoner that doesn’t fit the narrative, so it’s a good history lesson.

Do you think it would have been fun to have worked with him? I do.

Bullet Pressure Wave Effects On Incapacitation Time

BY Herschel Smith
4 months, 1 week ago

Reader =BCE56= links Ballistic Pressure Wave Contributions To Rapid Incapacitation In The Strasbourg Goat Tests.

Chamberlin observed damage remote from the wound channel he ascribed to the hydraulic reaction of body fluids [CHA66]. Tikka et al. showed that ballistic pressure waves originating in the thigh reach the abdomen. Wounding and delayed recovery of peripheral nerves have been reported [LDL45, PGM46]. Pressure waves cause compound action potentials in peripheral nerves [WES82], and ballistic pressure waves have been shown capable of breaking bones [MYR88].

This shows that, all other factors being equal, bullets that produce pressure waves of greater magnitude incapacitate more rapidly than bullets that produce smaller pressure waves. The Strasbourg test data convincingly supports the pressure wave hypothesis and allows (perhaps for the first time) the fast response time to be modeled as a function of peak pressure wave magnitude.

[ … ]

The trend in bullet design over the last decade has drifted toward bullets with little fragmentation and a higher percentage of retained mass. Bullets that both fragment and meet minimum penetration requirements create larger pressure wave magnitudes and offer improved incapacitation potential.

There is much more at the link.  I find it especially interesting that the authors use a 4*pi()*r^2 model for pressure wave solid angle (as with sound, light and radiation, unattenuated [or scattered] and unreflected).  The pressure wave isn’t forward peaked.

I often claim I have the best readers on the internet.  I really mean it.  This is a good example of that.

And this analysis goes to the heart of the design of the 5.56mm round, which is to induce a pressure wave due to high velocity (KE = 1/2 * m * v^2) and then fragment into shrapnel with multiple wound tracks.

Thanks to reader =BCE56= for that great read.

Bizarre Cartridge Complaint

BY Herschel Smith
4 months, 1 week ago

Remus notes something he calls astonishing.

I’ve seen a lot of pistol shootings, much more than US police would ever see, and much more than experienced by most medics deploying solely with US personnel. And yet, I have zero, not one single experience, where a single gunshot wound from a 9X19 NATO round killed someone prior to them being able to return fire or flee. This includes people shot in the chest, back, back of the head (one hit behind the left ear) the neck and the face. None…

Unfortunately, the same goes for the 5.56 NATO round. I have yet to witness a single shot quick kill with this round… On the flip side, having a patient who was shot by a 7.62X51 NATO or larger round was a rarity. Dead people aren’t patients, they are a supply issue.

That isn’t so much astonishing as it is just bizarre to me.  First of all, I dislike it when someone begins their post with bona fides.  The data is the data, the analysis is the analysis, regardless of your bona fides.

But then the claim makes no sense.  My youngest son had absolutely no complaints about his weaponry when he deployed to Iraq, not did he when he came home.  He was quite pleased with the lethality of the 5.56mm round in CQB and urban combat (MOUT).  He used both his SAW and an M4, and actually both during room clearing operations.

Then there is the issue of what we know about the lethality of the round even at distance.  Everyone recalls the video that made Travis Haley famous, and it’s worth watching again just to demonstrate that in the hands of a competent individual, the round can be lethal out to 600 yards or beyond.

Then there is this picture of an insurgent who was shot with a 5.56m round in Afghanistan at 200 meters.

You think he was able to mount a counterattack?

One final video demonstrates what the 5.56mm round is capable of in the hands of a qualified marksman.

Discussion On Custom AR-15 Barrels

BY Herschel Smith
4 months, 1 week ago

Shooting Sports USA:

Custom barrel manufacturers like Obermeyer, Krieger, Lilja, Hart, Douglas, Schneider and other companies which go by the maker’s last name, are your best assurance of good quality. That’s not to say that other maker’s barrels―let’s call them “semi-custom”―don’t shoot as well, but it is to suggest a lower element of risk involved in your satisfaction. I think it’s wise to request a stainless steel barrel since they will, on average, shoot a little better for a little longer.

It would be nice if a materials engineer and/or a highly experienced gunsmith would weigh in on this, but that’s not my understanding.  My understanding (which might be flawed) is that a SS barrel will be more accurate out of the box, but that whereas another barrel might last for 25,000 rounds, a SS barrel will last for 15,000 rounds before needing to be replaced.  Again, if my understanding is wrong on this, it would be good to know it.

The chambering option that probably gets the most thought about and worry over is throating. Throating, let’s say here for simplicity, controls the distance of a bullet; bearing surface to the origin of the lands of the rifling. Almost always, a rifle shoots best when a bullet at least starts near the lands, if not on them. If the bullet has to travel through space before engaging the rifling, that’s called “jump,” and that’s an issue of concern. Since there is such a difference in comparing length of short range and long range bullets for this rifle, some compromise has to be met. Essentially, getting less jump for the shorter 68- to 77-grain bullets fired from magazine-length rounds means that the longer 80-grain bullets used at 600 yards will be seated more deeply into the case (which will reduce powder capacity). Short or long? Either, or anything in-between for that matter. It doesn’t really seem to matter. Why even talk about it? Why not? Everyone else does. What they’re not really talking about, though, is who’s shooting what scores with various ideologies. That’s because AR-15s shoot just as well at 200 and 300 yards with all the different “magazine” bullets, regardless of where those bullets are sitting with respect to distance from the lands. What matters to 600-yard performance is that the shooter knows how to experiment and adjust the amount of jump the 80-grain bullets have, and that discussion is for another article.

Someone care to elaborate what’s he’s talking about here?

The Government Profile Barrel Is Dumb

BY Herschel Smith
4 months, 1 week ago

I was doing some research on barrels and was a bit puzzled to find that so many top flight manufacturers (e.g., Daniel Defense, BCM, etc.) are still putting “government profile” barrels on their guns.  The best research I can find on why such a thing exists shows the idea to be extremely dumb.

Marine Lt. Col Dave Lutz was the program manager for the M16A2 project from 1980 to 1983. He was later the VP for Military Operations at Knights Armament Company. Some years ago he shared the story of the government profile barrel on

It all started with a drop gauge test. The gauge wouldn’t pass through the bore, so the assumption was that the barrel was “bent.”

We (Marines) were replacing a lot of “bent” barrels that were determined to be “bent” because the Armorer’s Bore Drop Gauge would not freely pass through some barrels during Ordnance Inspections (LTI’s). So the Logisitcs people had “Barrels Bending” on their list of “M16A1” things to “Improve” right after listing “Handguards Breaking.”

AR-15 lore tells us that GIs were using their rifles as pry bars to open crates, and they were bending the barrels by the muzzle doing it. Another story tells us that aggressive bayonet drills were the source of bending. This is the one that Lt. Col Lutz ascribed to, at least somewhat.

We “experts” thought this bending was from rough handling like during bayonet drills, etc., as an absence of any mid-barrel handguard damage in these rifles made one assume the fulcrum of such bending was the bayonet lug. So we made that part of the barrel thicker because we did not want the excess weight of a full length heavy barrel.

The last line of that quote highlights something interesting. There was internal pressure to make the entire barrel thicker. The Marines have always prided themselves on their marksmanship skills. A lot of their techniques and choices of rifle components have origins in competition. The Marines were the driving factor in the adjustable rear sights of the M16A2 as well.

Lt. Col Lutz and his team realized that a heavy barrel all the way through was not a practical solution for a lightweight combat rifle like the M16. So they made only the front of the barrel thicker to increase strength.

In testing using the bayonet lug as a fulcrum, and applying calibrated mechanical pressure to the muzzle, the new barrel was about 9 times more resistant to bend and take a set than an M16A1 profile. So we went with this “improvement.”

With the problem solved, the new barrel design went into effect. Only later did the team realize the actual cause of the drop gauge failure was something entirely different.

However, soon after I started using a borescope with a video recorder and monitor to inspect “bent” barrels. What I found was a mound of bullet jacket material at their gas ports. This build up was caused by a burr left from drilling/reaming the gas port. This was where the Armorer’s Drop Gauge was getting stuck. When we removed this “mound”, the barrels would all pass the Drop Gauge.

Realizing that the “solution” they presented didn’t actually solve a problem, they tried to course correct. Colt listened, and even put out civilian M16A2 copies that still had the standard lightweight profile. But the government was already too far down the road. The new technical data package was already written and put into effect. There was no going back.

First, I question their testing of the resistance to bending of a “government profile” barrel.  They obviously never got real engineers involved in this problem.  The highest bending moment in a cantilever beam will be where it is pinned, which in this case will be at the receiver.  As best as I can tell, not only didn’t they solve a real problem, they didn’t even solve the pretend problem.

Second, engineering resources would have performed a failure mode and effects analysis of the problem.  A failure investigation team of engineers should have been commissioned, not a military team.

Third, if you believe the problem is that Soldiers or Marines are using their rifles to pry open boxes or crates, then teach them not to do that.  That’s stupid.  I remain unimpressed with folks who try to mistreat, abuse and beat up their guns only to complain when they don’t work.

The second law of thermodynamics says that entropy always increases.  Fatigue, metal lattice stretching and deformation, metal creep, rust, corrosion and a host of other problems will affect any machine.  I once read that someone complained that he had used the butt of his rifle as a hammer for tent stakes and other things, and thus wanted “Milspec” parts so they don’t break.

Listen to me.  Milspec isn’t better.  Milspec isn’t worse.  Milspec means that something was fabricated and built according to a specification, nothing more and nothing less.  Some guns and parts are better than Milspec, and some are worse.  Some are just different than Milspec because the buyer wants a different machine for a different purpose or with different parts simply because that’s what he wants.

The takeaway is this: don’t use your rifle butt as a hammer.  It isn’t a shovel, it isn’t a hammer, it isn’t a pry bar, and as for bayonet charges, you’re not going to do one.  Ever.  If you’re doing a bayonet charge, you failed to do whatever you needed to do to make it a stand-off fight.  Your rifle isn’t a spear.

And the top end AR-15 manufacturers need to get away from fabricating “government profile” barrels.  They’re dumb.

If you think I wrong or don’t know the full history of government profile barrels, you can weigh in with comments.

Training Day With Jerry Miculek

BY Herschel Smith
4 months, 2 weeks ago

New Rifle Light From INFORCE

BY Herschel Smith
4 months, 2 weeks ago


In addition, the top of the mount also incorporates the activation button for the light, providing natural and ergonomic access to the controls, especially for shooters who use a thumb-over grip on their rifle. Tap the switch to turn the light on or off, or hold it to activate momentary on mode. Double tapping the switch engages strobe mode. INFORCE says the light will output approximately 1,300 lumens.

That’s a lot of light.  I’m certain it would be blinding in the dark to an assailant, but the danger is that it’s so bright that it causes dysfunction even in the shooter due to light scattering from walls, ground, etc.  I’d want to see this in the dark myself before buying, although with electronic components there are no returns.  I do like the offset mount.

The INFORCE web site doesn’t show this product yet.  The alleged cost is in the neighborhood of $239, with a $100 switch.  I found the cost of the Surefire M622 (with switch) to be $429.  That’s up a bit from the last time I looked.

David Hogg: “You’re A Terrible Shot” If You Need An AR-15 To Defend Yourself

BY Herschel Smith
4 months, 2 weeks ago

Washington Examiner:

David Hogg: “If you need an AR-15 to defend yourself you need more target practice because you’re a terrible shot.”

First of all, he’s a liar and doesn’t really believe this because he’s not advocating that the police be disarmed of long guns, and has never done so.  He just wants the state to have a monopoly on violence.  It’s always enlightening to run things like this through the grits mill in order to see the hypocrisy of their views.  If you advocate disarming people other than cops, then you’re just a communist.

Second, as for not needing an AR-15 to defend yourself, I think Mr. Stephen Bayezes would beg to differ when he used an AR-15 to defend against multiple assailants in a home invasion.  So would a number of other folks.

However, Hogg is right about one thing.  We all need more practice.  So let’s heed Hogg’s counsel and make sure not to neglect range day.  I think Jerry Miculek said in one video that he has shot somewhere around 7,000,000 rounds downrange in order to get as good as he is.  I know that my son shot well more than half a million rounds in his workup to deployment.

We’ve all got a little bit to go, I suspect.

Bullet Tractability And Barrel Twist Rate

BY Herschel Smith
4 months, 2 weeks ago

Wirecutter has this video up on barrel twist rate.  Go to his place to see it.

I don’t think the author of the video understands the basic concept and what’s going on here.  This is a screen shot of the video I linked on barrel twist rate.

Bullet tractability is the degree to which the nose of the bullet follows the trajectory.  In the screen shot above, it doesn’t.  This can indeed happen if the bullet is overstabilized, something we concluded in our assessment of this.

In the video (screen shot above) it is explained that this doesn’t usually happen at closer distances, but rather towards the end of the flight path.  In the case of the 5.56mm flight path, we’re looking at around 500 yards effective distance.

The author of the video Wirecutter gave us is shooting at 100 yards.  Basically, I’m saying he has proven nothing at all.  He’s a decent shot, but he hasn’t tested what he thinks he has tested.

And by the way, the twist rate, if you’ll remember, of 1:7 was meant to stabilize the tracer round.  But most twist rates for common ammunition should be fine.  The testing conducted by the Army on both older and newer 5.56mm ammunition involved 1:8 accurized barrels.

Prior: AR-15 Ammunition And Barrel Twist Rates

26th MEU (10)
Abu Muqawama (12)
ACOG (2)
ACOGs (1)
Afghan National Army (36)
Afghan National Police (17)
Afghanistan (679)
Afghanistan SOFA (4)
Agriculture in COIN (3)
AGW (1)
Air Force (34)
Air Power (9)
al Qaeda (83)
Ali al-Sistani (1)
America (17)
Ammunition (78)
Animals (37)
Ansar al Sunna (15)
Anthropology (3)
Antonin Scalia (1)
AR-15s (180)
Arghandab River Valley (1)
Arlington Cemetery (2)
Army (72)
Assassinations (2)
Assault Weapon Ban (27)
Australian Army (6)
Azerbaijan (4)
Backpacking (2)
Badr Organization (8)
Baitullah Mehsud (21)
Basra (17)
BATFE (79)
Battle of Bari Alai (2)
Battle of Wanat (18)
Battle Space Weight (3)
Bin Laden (7)
Blogroll (2)
Blogs (16)
Body Armor (18)
Books (3)
Border War (10)
Brady Campaign (1)
Britain (38)
British Army (35)
Camping (4)
Canada (2)
Castle Doctrine (1)
Caucasus (6)
Center For a New American Security (8)
Charity (3)
China (10)
Christmas (10)
CIA (27)
Civilian National Security Force (3)
Col. Gian Gentile (9)
Combat Outposts (3)
Combat Video (2)
Concerned Citizens (6)
Constabulary Actions (3)
Coolness Factor (2)
COP Keating (4)
Corruption in COIN (4)
Council on Foreign Relations (1)
Counterinsurgency (216)
DADT (2)
David Rohde (1)
Defense Contractors (2)
Department of Defense (143)
Department of Homeland Security (22)
Disaster Preparedness (3)
Distributed Operations (5)
Dogs (12)
Donald Trump (21)
Drone Campaign (3)
EFV (3)
Egypt (12)
El Salvador (1)
Embassy Security (1)
Enemy Spotters (1)
Expeditionary Warfare (17)
F-22 (2)
F-35 (1)
Fallujah (17)
Far East (3)
Fathers and Sons (2)
Favorite (1)
Fazlullah (3)
FBI (29)
Featured (180)
Federal Firearms Laws (18)
Financing the Taliban (2)
Firearms (1,007)
Football (1)
Force Projection (35)
Force Protection (4)
Force Transformation (1)
Foreign Policy (27)
Fukushima Reactor Accident (6)
Ganjgal (1)
Garmsir (1)
general (15)
General Amos (1)
General James Mattis (1)
General McChrystal (43)
General McKiernan (6)
General Rodriguez (3)
General Suleimani (7)
Georgia (19)
Google (1)
Gulbuddin Hekmatyar (1)
Gun Control (1,052)
Guns (1,508)
Guns In National Parks (3)
Haditha Roundup (10)
Haiti (2)
Haqqani Network (9)
Hate Mail (8)
Hekmatyar (1)
Heroism (4)
Hezbollah (12)
High Capacity Magazines (13)
High Value Targets (9)
Homecoming (1)
Homeland Security (1)
Horses (1)
Humor (20)
ICOS (1)
IEDs (7)
Immigration (83)
India (10)
Infantry (4)
Information Warfare (2)
Infrastructure (2)
Intelligence (23)
Intelligence Bulletin (6)
Iran (169)
Iraq (379)
Iraq SOFA (23)
Islamic Facism (61)
Islamists (91)
Israel (18)
Jaish al Mahdi (21)
Jalalabad (1)
Japan (2)
Jihadists (80)
John Nagl (5)
Joint Intelligence Centers (1)
JRTN (1)
Kabul (1)
Kajaki Dam (1)
Kamdesh (9)
Kandahar (12)
Karachi (7)
Kashmir (2)
Khost Province (1)
Khyber (11)
Knife Blogging (4)
Korea (4)
Korengal Valley (3)
Kunar Province (20)
Kurdistan (3)
Language in COIN (5)
Language in Statecraft (1)
Language Interpreters (2)
Lashkar-e-Taiba (2)
Law Enforcement (3)
Lawfare (7)
Leadership (5)
Lebanon (6)
Leon Panetta (2)
Let Them Fight (2)
Libya (14)
Lines of Effort (3)
Littoral Combat (8)
Logistics (50)
Long Guns (1)
Lt. Col. Allen West (2)
Marine Corps (258)
Marines in Bakwa (1)
Marines in Helmand (67)
Marjah (4)
Media (42)
Memorial Day (5)
Mexican Cartels (33)
Mexico (46)
Michael Yon (5)
Micromanaging the Military (7)
Middle East (1)
Military Blogging (26)
Military Contractors (4)
Military Equipment (24)
Militia (5)
Mitt Romney (3)
Monetary Policy (1)
Moqtada al Sadr (2)
Mosul (4)
Mountains (25)
MRAPs (1)
Mullah Baradar (1)
Mullah Fazlullah (1)
Mullah Omar (3)
Musa Qala (4)
Music (16)
Muslim Brotherhood (6)
Nation Building (2)
National Internet IDs (1)
National Rifle Association (61)
NATO (15)
Navy (22)
Navy Corpsman (1)
NCOs (3)
News (1)
NGOs (2)
Nicholas Schmidle (2)
Now Zad (19)
NSA (3)
NSA James L. Jones (6)
Nuclear (57)
Nuristan (8)
Obama Administration (218)
Offshore Balancing (1)
Operation Alljah (7)
Operation Khanjar (14)
Ossetia (7)
Pakistan (165)
Paktya Province (1)
Palestine (5)
Patriotism (6)
Patrolling (1)
Pech River Valley (11)
Personal (58)
Petraeus (14)
Pictures (1)
Piracy (13)
Pistol (2)
Pizzagate (21)
Police (410)
Police in COIN (3)
Policy (15)
Politics (449)
Poppy (2)
PPEs (1)
Prisons in Counterinsurgency (12)
Project Gunrunner (20)
PRTs (1)
Qatar (1)
Quadrennial Defense Review (2)
Quds Force (13)
Quetta Shura (1)
RAND (3)
Recommended Reading (14)
Refueling Tanker (1)
Religion (162)
Religion and Insurgency (19)
Reuters (1)
Rick Perry (4)
Rifles (1)
Roads (4)
Rolling Stone (1)
Ron Paul (1)
ROTC (1)
Rules of Engagement (75)
Rumsfeld (1)
Russia (29)
Sabbatical (1)
Sangin (1)
Saqlawiyah (1)
Satellite Patrols (2)
Saudi Arabia (4)
Scenes from Iraq (1)
Second Amendment (260)
Second Amendment Quick Hits (2)
Secretary Gates (9)
Sharia Law (3)
Shura Ittehad-ul-Mujahiden (1)
SIIC (2)
Sirajuddin Haqqani (1)
Small Wars (72)
Snipers (9)
Sniveling Lackeys (2)
Soft Power (4)
Somalia (8)
Sons of Afghanistan (1)
Sons of Iraq (2)
Special Forces (28)
Squad Rushes (1)
State Department (20)
Statistics (1)
Sunni Insurgency (10)
Support to Infantry Ratio (1)
Supreme Court (5)
Survival (26)
SWAT Raids (54)
Syria (38)
Tactical Drills (1)
Tactical Gear (4)
Taliban (167)
Taliban Massing of Forces (4)
Tarmiyah (1)
TBI (1)
Technology (17)
Tehrik-i-Taliban (78)
Terrain in Combat (1)
Terrorism (95)
Thanksgiving (8)
The Anbar Narrative (23)
The Art of War (5)
The Fallen (1)
The Long War (20)
The Surge (3)
The Wounded (13)
Thomas Barnett (1)
Transnational Insurgencies (5)
Tribes (5)
TSA (18)
TSA Ineptitude (11)
TTPs (1)
U.S. Border Patrol (5)
U.S. Border Security (14)
U.S. Sovereignty (17)
UAVs (2)
UBL (4)
Ukraine (3)
Uncategorized (56)
Universal Background Check (3)
Unrestricted Warfare (4)
USS Iwo Jima (2)
USS San Antonio (1)
Uzbekistan (1)
V-22 Osprey (4)
Veterans (2)
Vietnam (1)
War & Warfare (220)
War & Warfare (40)
War Movies (3)
War Reporting (19)
Wardak Province (1)
Warriors (6)
Waziristan (1)
Weapons and Tactics (61)
West Point (1)
Winter Operations (1)
Women in Combat (21)
WTF? (1)
Yemen (1)

September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006

about · archives · contact · register

Copyright © 2006-2019 Captain's Journal. All rights reserved.