I just recieved the plans for my next long term project.
It's a 22lr cal. Gatling gun. 10 barrels 12" long This thing is going to be
a blast! Check out the web site http://www.gatlingguns.net I spoke on the
phone with the chief cook and bottle washer for quite a while. He's very
friendly and helpful.
Tom
remove pyrotecnic device to e-mail

--How detailed are the plans? Seems to me I got a peek at the RG-G
plans many moons ago and they looked pretty lame..

--
"Steamboat Ed" Haas : A greasy donut, a cup of
Hacking the Trailing Edge! : coffee and thou...
http://www.nmpproducts.com/intro.htm
---Decks a-wash in a sea of words---

The plans are excellent or better. CAD drawn, 34 sheets. description page
for each sheet with mat. lists, as good as it gets without CNC code. Paul
has been refining the design and tweeking and updating for 14 years. The
plans show his efforts. You must have seen an early iteration. He also
offfers a CD with a lot of color 3D drawings illustrating the parts and
assemblys. I got that too.
Tom
"steamer" wrote in message
...
--How detailed are the plans? Seems to me I got a peek at the RG-G
plans many moons ago and they looked pretty lame..

--
"Steamboat Ed" Haas : A greasy donut, a cup of
Hacking the Trailing Edge! : coffee and thou...
http://www.nmpproducts.com/intro.htm
---Decks a-wash in a sea of words---

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 21:10:33 GMT, Tom Wait wrote:
I just recieved the plans for my next long term project.
It's a 22lr cal. Gatling gun.

Ah, I have a set of plans for one also, 6 barrels though. R.I.G. corp
for mine. Very long term project, unless I get started on the silly
thing...

On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 00:32:53 GMT, steamer wrote:
--How detailed are the plans? Seems to me I got a peek at the RG-G
plans many moons ago and they looked pretty lame..

RG-G, that's the set I have. No, they're pretty complete, I haven't
found any "guess-gaps" on them yet, but I also haven't started the
actual machining yet either.

I just recieved the plans for my next long term project.
It's a 22lr cal. Gatling gun. 10 barrels 12" long This thing is going to be
a blast!

I have seen finished models at NAMES. Very impressive.
Don't know which set of plans this builder used though.
Just curious how long you think it will take to build.
chuck

"Chuck Sherwood" wrote in message
...

I have seen finished models at NAMES. Very impressive.
Don't know which set of plans this builder used though.
Just curious how long you think it will take to build.
chuck

The seller said his standard answer to the "how long" question is 500 hours.
A lot of variables can change that figure. One chap on the forum is almost
finished with his gun and he guessed 200-300 hours. I'll be keeping track of
my time as I plan to sell it and build more.
Tom

Tom Wait wrote:

"Chuck Sherwood" wrote in message
...


I have seen finished models at NAMES. Very impressive.
Don't know which set of plans this builder used though.
Just curious how long you think it will take to build.
chuck


The seller said his standard answer to the "how long" question is 500 hours.
A lot of variables can change that figure. One chap on the forum is almost
finished with his gun and he guessed 200-300 hours. I'll be keeping track of
my time as I plan to sell it and build more.

Got your FFL manufacturer's license in order?

My class 7 FFL was issued July 1 this year. Barton Rifle Shop is the name
on the door.
Tom
"Jim Stewart" wrote in message
...
Tom Wait wrote:

"Chuck Sherwood" wrote in message
...


I have seen finished models at NAMES. Very impressive.
Don't know which set of plans this builder used though.
Just curious how long you think it will take to build.
chuck


The seller said his standard answer to the "how long" question is 500
hours.
A lot of variables can change that figure. One chap on the forum is
almost
finished with his gun and he guessed 200-300 hours. I'll be keeping
track of
my time as I plan to sell it and build more.

Got your FFL manufacturer's license in order?

I have the RG-G plans and they are all pretty good, I've run into a bit of a
snag though. Mine was put into storage and unfortunately it leaked Some
moisture got into the shed, and now my plans are bleeding. Would anyone know
how or where I can replace these plans? I've had mine for about 10 years or
so.

Rusty

"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 00:32:53 GMT, steamer wrote:
--How detailed are the plans? Seems to me I got a peek at the RG-G
plans many moons ago and they looked pretty lame..

RG-G, that's the set I have. No, they're pretty complete, I haven't
found any "guess-gaps" on them yet, but I also haven't started the
actual machining yet either.

"Rusty" wrote in message
...
I have the RG-G plans and they are all pretty good, I've run into a bit of
a
snag though. Mine was put into storage and unfortunately it leaked Some
moisture got into the shed, and now my plans are bleeding. Would anyone
know
how or where I can replace these plans? I've had mine for about 10 years
or
so.

Rusty
Go to the website http://www.gatlingguns.net .You can order the plans there.
I would recomend the CD also.
Tom

On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 12:24:32 -0700, Jim Stewart
wrote:

Tom Wait wrote:

"Chuck Sherwood" wrote in message
...


I have seen finished models at NAMES. Very impressive.
Don't know which set of plans this builder used though.
Just curious how long you think it will take to build.
chuck


The seller said his standard answer to the "how long" question is 500 hours.
A lot of variables can change that figure. One chap on the forum is almost
finished with his gun and he guessed 200-300 hours. I'll be keeping track of
my time as I plan to sell it and build more.

Got your FFL manufacturer's license in order?

There's no need, so long as it is for your own use.

In article ,
Steve Mulhollan wrote:

On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 12:24:32 -0700, Jim Stewart
wrote:

Tom Wait wrote:

"Chuck Sherwood" wrote in message
...


I have seen finished models at NAMES. Very impressive.
Don't know which set of plans this builder used though.
Just curious how long you think it will take to build.
chuck


The seller said his standard answer to the "how long" question is 500
hours.
A lot of variables can change that figure. One chap on the forum is almost
finished with his gun and he guessed 200-300 hours. I'll be keeping track
of
my time as I plan to sell it and build more.

Got your FFL manufacturer's license in order?

There's no need, so long as it is for your own use.


As I've been given to understand, that's true only if it comes onto your
property as raw chunks of metal, then never leaves your property again
for any reason whatsoever.

But, since the fellow has clearly stated that he intends to make and
sell, he's definitely going to be needing *AT LEAST* a dealer's license
if he wants to keep the BATF off his back.

--
Don Bruder - - New Email policy in effect as of Feb. 21, 2004.
Short form: I'm trashing EVERY E-mail that doesn't contain a password in the
subject unless it comes from a "whitelisted" (pre-approved by me) address.
See http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/main/contact.html for full details.

Jim Stewart wrote:

Got your FFL manufacturer's license in order?

Not needed if you don't sell it!

David

If we're still talking about a Gatling gun, it is NOT a full auto device.
It takes a continuing motion to produce continuous firing. Now, if you hook
up a motor to drive the crank, that's different. It becomes a minigun, very
Class III. He did, however, state that he was going to build these for
sale. Therefore, the type 07 mfgr license (for sporting weapons) would be
proper.
Respectfully,
Ron Moore
Class II Mfgr

"Ignoramus8243" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 02:48:56 GMT, David R. Birch wrote:
Jim Stewart wrote:

Got your FFL manufacturer's license in order?

Not needed if you don't sell it!

I believe that he needs a license for making a full auto gun. You are
correct that he would not need a license for making a gun for himself,
but that applies only to non-auto guns. It is an NFA issue.

i

"Ron Moore" wrote in message
news:HBE4f.39541$b65.7133@okepread01...

If we're still talking about a Gatling gun, it is NOT a full auto device.
It takes a continuing motion to produce continuous firing. Now, if you
hook up a motor to drive the crank, that's different. It becomes a
minigun,
very Class III.

Which again goes to show how absurd gun control laws are. Turning by hand =
good. Turning by motor = bad. Ridiculous!

Ignoramus8243 wrote:
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 02:48:56 GMT, David R. Birch wrote:

Jim Stewart wrote:


Got your FFL manufacturer's license in order?

Not needed if you don't sell it!


I believe that he needs a license for making a full auto gun. You are
correct that he would not need a license for making a gun for himself,
but that applies only to non-auto guns. It is an NFA issue.

i


I thought that the Gatling gun was not an automatic gun, since you have
to rotate the lever continuously to fire it.

Abrasha
http://www.abrasha.com

Tom Wait wrote:
I just recieved the plans for my next long term project.
It's a 22lr cal. Gatling gun. 10 barrels 12" long This thing is going to be
a blast! Check out the web site http://www.gatlingguns.net I spoke on the
phone with the chief cook and bottle washer for quite a while. He's very
friendly and helpful.
Tom
remove pyrotecnic device to e-mail



This is another seller of plans, also very helpful

http://www.modelgatlinggunplans.com/#

Abrasha
http://www.abrasha.com

On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 22:32:45 -0400, Rusty wrote:
I have the RG-G plans and they are all pretty good, I've run into a bit of a
snag though. Mine was put into storage and unfortunately it leaked Some
moisture got into the shed, and now my plans are bleeding. Would anyone know
how or where I can replace these plans? I've had mine for about 10 years or
so.

Contact the guy, I've talked to him in the past and he seems reasonable.
Might offer you an upgrade to the current plans for a discount given
that you've bought the plans from him already. Let me know how that
works out, actually...

On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 02:57:25 GMT, Ignoramus8243 wrote:
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 02:48:56 GMT, David R. Birch wrote:
Jim Stewart wrote:

Got your FFL manufacturer's license in order?

Not needed if you don't sell it!

I believe that he needs a license for making a full auto gun. You are
correct that he would not need a license for making a gun for himself,
but that applies only to non-auto guns. It is an NFA issue.

A gatling gun is not fully automatic, it's manually operated by a crank.

On 17 Oct 2005 14:52:21 GMT, Dave Hinz wrote:

On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 22:32:45 -0400, Rusty wrote:
I have the RG-G plans and they are all pretty good, I've run into a bit of a
snag though. Mine was put into storage and unfortunately it leaked Some
moisture got into the shed, and now my plans are bleeding. Would anyone know
how or where I can replace these plans? I've had mine for about 10 years or
so.

Contact the guy, I've talked to him in the past and he seems reasonable.
Might offer you an upgrade to the current plans for a discount given
that you've bought the plans from him already. Let me know how that
works out, actually...

According to posts in their forum, he does indeed sell upgraded plans
for $30.00 to past blueprint purchasers. I've never dealt with him,
but for a one man operation, his attention to customer satisfaction is
extremely impressive.

Snarl

On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 07:44:51 GMT, "DeepDiver"
wrote:

"Ron Moore" wrote in message
news:HBE4f.39541$b65.7133@okepread01...

If we're still talking about a Gatling gun, it is NOT a full auto device.
It takes a continuing motion to produce continuous firing. Now, if you
hook up a motor to drive the crank, that's different. It becomes a
minigun,
very Class III.

Which again goes to show how absurd gun control laws are. Turning by hand =
good. Turning by motor = bad. Ridiculous!

True, yet one can roughly double th' number of rounds fired per min.
with a motor feed over hand cranked... if th' weapon is operating
correctly.

Snarl

On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 09:32:24 -0700, wrote:
On 17 Oct 2005 14:52:21 GMT, Dave Hinz wrote:

Contact the guy, I've talked to him in the past and he seems reasonable.
Might offer you an upgrade to the current plans for a discount given
that you've bought the plans from him already. Let me know how that
works out, actually...

According to posts in their forum, he does indeed sell upgraded plans
for $30.00 to past blueprint purchasers. I've never dealt with him,
but for a one man operation, his attention to customer satisfaction is
extremely impressive.

When I bought my plans originally, maybe 12 years ago, he sent me a
letter saying "I'm almost done with the next version; if you don't mind
waiting I'll send you the newer ones at no extra cost". So, what you
describe isn't surprising. I'll buy the upgrade.

Dave

On 17 Oct 2005 16:51:53 GMT, Dave Hinz wrote:

On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 09:32:24 -0700, wrote:
On 17 Oct 2005 14:52:21 GMT, Dave Hinz wrote:

Contact the guy, I've talked to him in the past and he seems reasonable.
Might offer you an upgrade to the current plans for a discount given
that you've bought the plans from him already. Let me know how that
works out, actually...

According to posts in their forum, he does indeed sell upgraded plans
for $30.00 to past blueprint purchasers. I've never dealt with him,
but for a one man operation, his attention to customer satisfaction is
extremely impressive.

When I bought my plans originally, maybe 12 years ago, he sent me a
letter saying "I'm almost done with the next version; if you don't mind
waiting I'll send you the newer ones at no extra cost". So, what you
describe isn't surprising. I'll buy the upgrade.

I take it you haven't really started on it? It'd be worth your while
to peruse his forum as there's a few errors in th' plans (even newer
ones) that are discussed. Might save ya some time and scrap.

I'm *really* leaning towards purchasing his Complete Materials
Package.

Snarl

On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:04:22 -0700, wrote:
On 17 Oct 2005 16:51:53 GMT, Dave Hinz wrote:

When I bought my plans originally, maybe 12 years ago, he sent me a
letter saying "I'm almost done with the next version; if you don't mind
waiting I'll send you the newer ones at no extra cost". So, what you
describe isn't surprising. I'll buy the upgrade.

I take it you haven't really started on it?

Well, I've made some scrap if that's what you mean.

It'd be worth your while
to peruse his forum as there's a few errors in th' plans (even newer
ones) that are discussed. Might save ya some time and scrap.

Excellent, thank you.

I'm *really* leaning towards purchasing his Complete Materials
Package.

That, to be honest, is the biggest hurdle. Maybe after I buy the 1927A1
I'll save the eBay toy fund money for the materials package. How much
is it these days?

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 07:44:51 GMT, "DeepDiver"
wrote:

"Ron Moore" wrote in message
news:HBE4f.39541$b65.7133@okepread01...

If we're still talking about a Gatling gun, it is NOT a full auto
device.
It takes a continuing motion to produce continuous firing. Now, if you
hook up a motor to drive the crank, that's different. It becomes a
minigun,
very Class III.

Which again goes to show how absurd gun control laws are. Turning by hand
=
good. Turning by motor = bad. Ridiculous!

True, yet one can roughly double th' number of rounds fired per min.
with a motor feed over hand cranked... if th' weapon is operating
correctly.

I'm not trying to be argumentative; just trying to illustrate how stupid the
gun control laws are.

I could easily design a mechanical transmission, with governor, to both
increase the speed of the hand crank as well as regulate it's rotational
speed in order to provide a fairly smooth and constant rate of fire similar
to that of an electric motor. Yet the entire system would still be powered
by the hand crank. Does that mean it's still not an automatic weapon?

What if I attach an electric motor to the Gatling drive, and then use a
hand-cranked electric generator to drive that? Technically, it's still
powered by hand. I've just replaced the mechanical transmission (a shaft)
between my hand and the operating mechanism with an electrical transmission.
What about a hydraulic motor driven by a hand-pump?

It's kind of like shotgun barrel lengths: 18" = good; 17-15/16" = bad (or
something like that; I don't bother trying to memorize the thousands of
stupid rules on the books). Or the ridiculous "assault weapon bans" where
the criteria for banning the weapon has to do with its cosmetic appearance.

These regulations (which are clearly in violation of Constitutional law) are
arbitrary and capricious.

On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 20:11:40 GMT, DeepDiver wrote:

I'm not trying to be argumentative; just trying to illustrate how stupid the
gun control laws are.

I don't think you are being argumentatitve, and we agree on the
stupidity of gun control laws, apparently.

I could easily design a mechanical transmission, with governor, to both
increase the speed of the hand crank as well as regulate it's rotational
speed in order to provide a fairly smooth and constant rate of fire similar
to that of an electric motor. Yet the entire system would still be powered
by the hand crank. Does that mean it's still not an automatic weapon?

It would be functionally still a semi-auto, yes.

What if I attach an electric motor to the Gatling drive, and then use a
hand-cranked electric generator to drive that? Technically, it's still
powered by hand. I've just replaced the mechanical transmission (a shaft)
between my hand and the operating mechanism with an electrical transmission.
What about a hydraulic motor driven by a hand-pump?

I dunno, why don't you try that, ask the feds, and we'll send you a cake
with a file in it when it doesn't work? Why would you want to do
something like that? Doesn't serve any useful purpose and has the real
potential of giving some idiot an excuse to ban hand-cranked firearms.

It's kind of like shotgun barrel lengths: 18" = good; 17-15/16" = bad (or
something like that; I don't bother trying to memorize the thousands of
stupid rules on the books). Or the ridiculous "assault weapon bans" where
the criteria for banning the weapon has to do with its cosmetic appearance.

Yes, of course.

These regulations (which are clearly in violation of Constitutional law) are
arbitrary and capricious.

Yes. But waving examples in the face of the anti's just gives them
another target.

On 17 Oct 2005 19:20:40 GMT, Dave Hinz wrote:

On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:04:22 -0700, wrote:

I take it you haven't really started on it?

Well, I've made some scrap if that's what you mean.

Heh. No, I was just thinking you'd be better off if you weren't too
far into it yet as there's been some improvements since you bought
those older plans

It'd be worth your while
to peruse his forum as there's a few errors in th' plans (even newer
ones) that are discussed. Might save ya some time and scrap.

Excellent, thank you.

You're welcome. I spent way too much time droolin' over that site
yesterday... was that close to gettin' out Mr. Credit card.

I'm *really* leaning towards purchasing his Complete Materials
Package.

That, to be honest, is the biggest hurdle. Maybe after I buy the 1927A1
I'll save the eBay toy fund money for the materials package. How much
is it these days?

From his web page:

"Complete Materials Package

All raw materials necessary for building the RG-G Gatling gun are
included, with the exception of parts for the carriage and yoke mount.
All metals are high quality stock, with sizes selected as close to
finished dimensions as possible. The brass is good quality mill
finish, and the steel is cold finished with no scale or slag. Lengths
allow material for finish cuts to clean. No machine work has been
done. The package includes rifled barrel liners, ground firing pins,
all hardware (screws, nuts, bushings, springs, bearings, gears, etc.),
and an explanatory inventory list. With this package and our plans,
you're ready to start building!

Price: $719.00 USD

(Includes S&H within the continental US)"

Rather steep, but all things considered, it's still very reasonable,
to me anyway. YMMV. The deal maker may be those regulars who post in
th' forum (who've been there, done that) assistance, plus his personal
help, if needed.

The deal breaker may be legalities. Someone in here mentioned that
they're perfectly legal as long they come to your property as plans,
etc., and never, ever, leave it as a completed weapon. Guess I need
to check into that further. What if you sell your property?

Snarl

On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 20:11:40 GMT, "DeepDiver"
wrote:

wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 07:44:51 GMT, "DeepDiver"
wrote:

"Ron Moore" wrote in message
news:HBE4f.39541$b65.7133@okepread01...

If we're still talking about a Gatling gun, it is NOT a full auto
device.
It takes a continuing motion to produce continuous firing. Now, if you
hook up a motor to drive the crank, that's different. It becomes a
minigun,
very Class III.

Which again goes to show how absurd gun control laws are. Turning by hand
=
good. Turning by motor = bad. Ridiculous!

True, yet one can roughly double th' number of rounds fired per min.
with a motor feed over hand cranked... if th' weapon is operating
correctly.

I'm not trying to be argumentative; just trying to illustrate how stupid the
gun control laws are.

You're preaching to th' choir g.

It's kind of like shotgun barrel lengths: 18" = good; 17-15/16" = bad (or
something like that; I don't bother trying to memorize the thousands of
stupid rules on the books). Or the ridiculous "assault weapon bans" where
the criteria for banning the weapon has to do with its cosmetic appearance.

Agreed. I guess I'm just thankul for th' loophole allowing us to
build and play with one of these... if we want to.

These regulations (which are clearly in violation of Constitutional law) are
arbitrary and capricious.

Akin to th' landlord tennant acts around here, likely everywhere. A
series of knee-jerk generated garbage that follows neither logic nor
constituntional interpretations... depending on who one asks.

Personally, I'd rather make chips, then loud noises, over discussing
political antics g.

Snarl

wrote:
On 17 Oct 2005 19:20:40 GMT, Dave Hinz wrote:


On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:04:22 -0700, wrote:


I take it you haven't really started on it?

Well, I've made some scrap if that's what you mean.


Heh. No, I was just thinking you'd be better off if you weren't too
far into it yet as there's been some improvements since you bought
those older plans


It'd be worth your while
to peruse his forum as there's a few errors in th' plans (even newer
ones) that are discussed. Might save ya some time and scrap.

Excellent, thank you.


You're welcome. I spent way too much time droolin' over that site
yesterday... was that close to gettin' out Mr. Credit card.


I'm *really* leaning towards purchasing his Complete Materials
Package.

That, to be honest, is the biggest hurdle. Maybe after I buy the 1927A1
I'll save the eBay toy fund money for the materials package. How much
is it these days?


From his web page:

"Complete Materials Package

All raw materials necessary for building the RG-G Gatling gun are
included, with the exception of parts for the carriage and yoke mount.
All metals are high quality stock, with sizes selected as close to
finished dimensions as possible. The brass is good quality mill
finish, and the steel is cold finished with no scale or slag. Lengths
allow material for finish cuts to clean. No machine work has been
done. The package includes rifled barrel liners, ground firing pins,
all hardware (screws, nuts, bushings, springs, bearings, gears, etc.),
and an explanatory inventory list. With this package and our plans,
you're ready to start building!

Price: $719.00 USD

(Includes S&H within the continental US)"

Rather steep, but all things considered, it's still very reasonable,
to me anyway. YMMV. The deal maker may be those regulars who post in
th' forum (who've been there, done that) assistance, plus his personal
help, if needed.

The deal breaker may be legalities. Someone in here mentioned that
they're perfectly legal as long they come to your property as plans,
etc., and never, ever, leave it as a completed weapon. Guess I need
to check into that further. What if you sell your property?

Interesting delimna

Comes with all buildings and other improvements.
Oh, don't mind that little machine in the basement

Of course, if it's a gun enthusiast, then it becomes a selling point.

I suspect the law says "Never leaves your possesion", i.e. take it with
you when you move residences.

On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 16:39:40 -0500, Rex B
wrote:

wrote:
On 17 Oct 2005 19:20:40 GMT, Dave Hinz wrote:

On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:04:22 -0700, wrote:

I take it you haven't really started on it?

Well, I've made some scrap if that's what you mean.

Heh. No, I was just thinking you'd be better off if you weren't too
far into it yet as there's been some improvements since you bought
those older plans

It'd be worth your while
to peruse his forum as there's a few errors in th' plans (even newer
ones) that are discussed. Might save ya some time and scrap.

Excellent, thank you.

You're welcome. I spent way too much time droolin' over that site
yesterday... was that close to gettin' out Mr. Credit card.

I'm *really* leaning towards purchasing his Complete Materials
Package.

That, to be honest, is the biggest hurdle. Maybe after I buy the 1927A1
I'll save the eBay toy fund money for the materials package. How much
is it these days?

From his web page:

"Complete Materials Package

All raw materials necessary for building the RG-G Gatling gun are
included, with the exception of parts for the carriage and yoke mount.
All metals are high quality stock, with sizes selected as close to
finished dimensions as possible. The brass is good quality mill
finish, and the steel is cold finished with no scale or slag. Lengths
allow material for finish cuts to clean. No machine work has been
done. The package includes rifled barrel liners, ground firing pins,
all hardware (screws, nuts, bushings, springs, bearings, gears, etc.),
and an explanatory inventory list. With this package and our plans,
you're ready to start building!

Price: $719.00 USD

(Includes S&H within the continental US)"

Rather steep, but all things considered, it's still very reasonable,
to me anyway. YMMV. The deal maker may be those regulars who post in
th' forum (who've been there, done that) assistance, plus his personal
help, if needed.

The deal breaker may be legalities. Someone in here mentioned that
they're perfectly legal as long they come to your property as plans,
etc., and never, ever, leave it as a completed weapon. Guess I need
to check into that further. What if you sell your property?

Interesting delimna

Yes it is, and I'm pretty sure that getting to th' bottom of it will
cause an excedrin headache or two g.

Comes with all buildings and other improvements.
Oh, don't mind that little machine in the basement

A $10-20k machine according to my research, yikes!

Of course, if it's a gun enthusiast, then it becomes a selling point.

Therein lies another rub, woudn't that mean that you also sold th'
weapon... which is illegal to do?

I suspect the law says "Never leaves your possesion", i.e. take it with
you when you move residences.

That would be *way* too reasonable.

But officer, this RV is my home... argh, where's that excedrin?

Snarl

"Dave Hinz" wrote

I'm *really* leaning towards purchasing his Complete Materials
Package.

That, to be honest, is the biggest hurdle. Maybe after I buy the 1927A1
I'll save the eBay toy fund money for the materials package. How much
is it these days?

The complete package is $719 Including shipping. In the plan set but not on
the website are prices for partial material kits. I can't find that sheet at
the moment but I think the brass kit was $130. The barrel liners are
available from Brownells, but unless you're an FFL holder you won't save any
$ over buying them from RG-G. I have a few bits of metal I can start on now
and scrounging and dumpster diving can supply some and Speedy Metals has
good service. I'll probably get enough to build two units. Materials cost
isn't as bad as the excise tax hit when the guns are done or sold. 11% or
about a grand apiece. OUCH!!
Tom

"DeepDiver" wrote in message

It takes a continuing motion to produce continuous firing. Now, if
you
hook up a motor to drive the crank, that's different. It becomes a
minigun,
very Class III.
Yup


Which again goes to show how absurd gun control laws are.

I agree. But I'll qualify that and say 'some' gun laws are absurd.
Turning by hand good. Turning by motor = bad.
True, yet one can roughly double th' number of rounds fired per min.
with a motor feed over hand cranked... if th' weapon is operating
correctly.
Turning by hand, 600 rounds per minute or more is possible according to
other builders and the designer. A motor besides being illegal might well
exceed the guns capabilities. Remember this thing was designed in the
1860's. High speed (1000 RPM) wasn't in the cards then. The RG-G gun is
esentially the same design.


I could easily design a mechanical transmission, with governor, to both
increase the speed of the hand crank as well as regulate it's rotational
speed in order to provide a fairly smooth and constant rate of fire
similar
to that of an electric motor. Yet the entire system would still be powered
by the hand crank. Does that mean it's still not an automatic weapon?

I beilive that is correct.

What if I attach an electric motor to the Gatling drive, and then use a
hand-cranked electric generator to drive that? Technically, it's still
powered by hand. I've just replaced the mechanical transmission (a shaft)
between my hand and the operating mechanism with an electrical
transmission.

Technicaly its still hand cranked. But the ease that a switch or "trigger"
could be installed would probably raise some eyebrows at ATF. I'd guess they
would lock you up.
What about a hydraulic motor driven by a hand-pump?

Still not a machinegun, but why? It's just adding complication. Or are you
just tweaking the collective nose of the Feds?

It's kind of like shotgun barrel lengths: 18" = good; 17-15/16" = bad

Gotta draw the line somewhere.

"snip"

Or the ridiculous "assault weapon bans" where
the criteria for banning the weapon has to do with its cosmetic
appearance.

That one expired over a year ago. It was a stupid law and wasn't renewed.

These regulations (which are clearly in violation of Constitutional law)
are
arbitrary and capricious.
It's not that clear to me.
Tom

"Tom Wait" wrote in message
news

"DeepDiver" wrote in message

What if I attach an electric motor to the Gatling drive, and then use a
hand-cranked electric generator to drive that? Technically, it's still
powered by hand. I've just replaced the mechanical transmission (a
shaft)
between my hand and the operating mechanism with an electrical
transmission.

Technicaly its still hand cranked. But the ease that a switch or "trigger"
could be installed would probably raise some eyebrows at ATF. I'd guess
they
would lock you up.
What about a hydraulic motor driven by a hand-pump?

Still not a machinegun, but why? It's just adding complication. Or are you
just tweaking the collective nose of the Feds?

Just posing hypotheticals to expose the gray area and absurdities in the
laws.


It's kind of like shotgun barrel lengths: 18" = good; 17-15/16" = bad

Gotta draw the line somewhere.

Why? What makes a shotgun magically evil at less than 18"? The problem isn't
how the projectiles are dispersed, it's simply a matter of where they end
up. Besides, it's well known that the practical effects of gun control laws
a

1. To disarm the general population.
2. To make lawful citizens into outlaws.
3. To "stack up" criminal charges against the accused so that prosecuters
have greater plea bargain leverage.

Considering how many criminals use guns (particularly the most violent of
criminals like drug dealers and gang members), it's quite clear that gun
control laws do little to abate the criminal use of firearms.


Or the ridiculous "assault weapon bans" where the criteria for
banning the weapon has to do with its cosmetic appearance.

That one expired over a year ago. It was a stupid law and wasn't renewed.

It hasn't expired in California. (OK, technically, it's a different law, but
the California law is very similar to the former federal law.)

As for it now being renewed, that may only be a temporary reprieve.
President Bush, of all people, pledged to sign it back into law if passed by
Congress. And you can bet that President Hillary will certainly resurrect it
(as well as launch a slew of other anti-RKBA laws).


These regulations (which are clearly in violation of Constitutional law)
are arbitrary and capricious.

It's not that clear to me.

What part of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be
infringed" is not clear to you?

- Michael

In article ,
"Tom Wait" wrote:

"DeepDiver" wrote in message

It takes a continuing motion to produce continuous firing. Now, if
you
hook up a motor to drive the crank, that's different. It becomes a
minigun,
very Class III.
Yup


Which again goes to show how absurd gun control laws are.

I agree. But I'll qualify that and say 'some' gun laws are absurd.
Turning by hand good. Turning by motor = bad.
True, yet one can roughly double th' number of rounds fired per min.
with a motor feed over hand cranked... if th' weapon is operating
correctly.
Turning by hand, 600 rounds per minute or more is possible according to
other builders and the designer. A motor besides being illegal might well
exceed the guns capabilities. Remember this thing was designed in the
1860's. High speed (1000 RPM) wasn't in the cards then. The RG-G gun is
esentially the same design.


I could easily design a mechanical transmission, with governor, to both
increase the speed of the hand crank as well as regulate it's rotational
speed in order to provide a fairly smooth and constant rate of fire
similar
to that of an electric motor. Yet the entire system would still be powered
by the hand crank. Does that mean it's still not an automatic weapon?

I beilive that is correct.

What if I attach an electric motor to the Gatling drive, and then use a
hand-cranked electric generator to drive that? Technically, it's still
powered by hand. I've just replaced the mechanical transmission (a shaft)
between my hand and the operating mechanism with an electrical
transmission.

Technicaly its still hand cranked. But the ease that a switch or "trigger"
could be installed would probably raise some eyebrows at ATF. I'd guess they
would lock you up.
What about a hydraulic motor driven by a hand-pump?

Still not a machinegun, but why? It's just adding complication. Or are you
just tweaking the collective nose of the Feds?

It's kind of like shotgun barrel lengths: 18" = good; 17-15/16" = bad

Gotta draw the line somewhere.

Why?

'Cause "they", whoever they might be, don't like it? shrug Sounds to
me like their problem. Gun laws *ARE* capricious. What I can't figure
out is which part of "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,
shall not be infringed." is unclear.

--
Don Bruder - - New Email policy in effect as of Feb. 21, 2004.
Short form: I'm trashing EVERY E-mail that doesn't contain a password in the
subject unless it comes from a "whitelisted" (pre-approved by me) address.
See http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/main/contact.html for full details.

On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 00:17:23 GMT, "Tom Wait"
wrote:


Or the ridiculous "assault weapon bans" where
the criteria for banning the weapon has to do with its cosmetic
appearance.

That one expired over a year ago. It was a stupid law and wasn't renewed.

Not in California

Gunner, jonesing really bad for an STG-58


"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 00:58:52 GMT, "DeepDiver"
wrote:

As for it now being renewed, that may only be a temporary reprieve.
President Bush, of all people, pledged to sign it back into law if passed by
Congress. And you can bet that President Hillary will certainly resurrect it
(as well as launch a slew of other anti-RKBA laws).


These regulations (which are clearly in violation of Constitutional law)
are arbitrary and capricious.

It's not that clear to me.

What part of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be
infringed" is not clear to you?

- Michael

http://www.klastv.com/Global/story.a...86766&nav=168Y

laska anti-gun control law set to go into effect this week

JUNEAU, Alaska A new anti-gun control law goes into effect in Alaska
this week.
It means handgun owners won't need permits to carry concealed weapons
in the seven Alaska cities where they're still required. There also
will be no more restrictions on keeping a firearm in a vehicle.

The new law will essentially bar municipalities from passing gun laws
that are more restrictive than state law.

The National Rifle Association, which helped write the legislation,
calls it state pre-emption, and Alaska will be the 44th state to have
such a law on its books.

What the N-R-A wants to do is prevent cities from passing more
restrictive laws in the future.

But Alaska police chiefs worry about no longer being able to enforce
laws banning guns from public buildings, such as city halls.

http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story...-6893005c.html
State, city carry dueling gun laws

PERMITS: Legislature says Anchorage can't create stricter rules.

By ANNE AURAND
Anchorage Daily News

Published: September 20, 2005
Last Modified: September 20, 2005 at 03:29 AM

Anyone legally allowed to own a handgun in Anchorage can carry it just
about anywhere.

Carrying a concealed handgun used to be against the law without a
special permit.

But the city stopped enforcing the permit requirement after the state
passed a law in 2003 that said Alaskans no longer needed the permit.
Concealed weapons are those hidden from view -- in a purse, under a
coat, in the glove box.

However, the city's permit law remained on the books. Assemblyman Dick
Traini wants to change what it says so the two laws match.

Since state law trumps the city's anyway, he said, it's just
housekeeping.

Traini, who brags about his firearms collection, thinks permits are
unnecessary anyway. He said he trusts people to meet the necessary
requirements to carry a pistol -- being 21 and a U.S. citizen, being
clear of any felony or domestic violence convictions. Those who
wouldn't meet the requirements would buy guns if they wanted them
anyway, he said, illegally, without a permit.

"The criminal element is never going to get a permit. The criminal
element gets their guns because they're criminals. It doesn't matter
how many laws you put on the books," Traini said.

Alaska Rep. Eric Croft, D-Anchorage, sponsored the 2003 anti-permit
bill, citing at the time frustration with constant fine-tuning of
state gun laws. Getting rid of required permits, he said, would also
help gun owners in rural areas where handgun safety courses, a
requirement for getting a concealed weapons permit, aren't always
available.

Croft's law didn't change prohibitions against carrying firearms into
state courtrooms or court buildings, other justice-related agencies,
school yards, the grounds of private child care facilities, bars,
domestic violence shelters or the private homes of people who don't
give permission.

To make things more complicated, the Legislature passed another law
this session barring the city from imposing tougher restrictions on
gun ownership than the state does. That law goes into effect next
month.

What does it all mean? Who has to let in people with guns? Depends
who's talking.

For instance, city officials, including Traini, Police Chief Walt
Monegan and Mayor Mark Begich, say it means a legal gun owner can
carry a pistol into City Hall, or the Assembly chambers because the
state law doesn't specifically ban municipal buildings.

State Rep. Mike Chenault, R-Kenai, who sponsored the bill restricting
the city from passing tougher laws, disagrees.

It's no more strict for the city to prohibit firearms in a city
building than it is for the state to ban them in a state building,
such as a courthouse. The law leaves room for interpretation, he said.

Anchorage's Deputy Clerk Linda Heim thinks people should not be
allowed to bring guns into City Hall. What if someone is mad at the
mayor, the tax collector or the clerk, she said.

Traini and the city prosecutor were uncertain how the gun laws apply
to private property, like stores or apartment buildings.

Mina Freeman, in the state troopers' concealed handgun permits
department, said a private property owner can post an enforceable sign
that prohibits firearms. They do it that way at the 5th Avenue mall,
she said. It's enforced as a trespass law.

Of course, a gun owner remains free to carry a visibly displayed gun
most places -- a grocery store, a city sidewalk.

"You could walk into Home Depot with a rifle strapped to your back. It
might raise some eyebrows, but yeah," said Anita Shell, a police
spokeswoman. "Imagine the amount of calls we'd get."

Police Chief Walt Monegan said if police are called to check out
someone walking around with an unconcealed gun, they'd stop the person
to make sure the person wasn't drunk, mentally ill or a felon --
things that make owning a gun illegal. If they meet the criteria,
they're allowed to carry on.

After all, Traini said, "It's your right to carry a weapon."

Even if the city were able to pass tougher laws, Monegan said he
wouldn't push for a concealed weapons permit requirement for
Anchorage.

People can still get a permit even though they're not required. Some,
like attorney Wayne Ross, local director for the National Rifle
Association, said it's a good idea because other states may recognize
the Alaska permit. But he's not an advocate for permit laws.
Background checks are performed when people buy guns anyway, he said.

"If you have a constitutional right, why should you have to go to the
state to get permission to exercise it?" he said.

Vermont is the only other state that doesn't require special permits
to carry concealed weapons, he said.

Getting a permit requires the gun owner to go through some gun
education and training, and that's a good thing, said Begich. But like
other city officials, he said the people who shouldn't be allowed to
carry a gun would probably bypass the permits and carry one illegally
anyway.

He would like to see some gun education in the public schools, he
said. In Alaska, where so many people hunt or spend time in the
outdoors, guns are prevalent.

"Kids should understand the power of them and that there's a way to
handle them and not handle them," Begich said.

Daily News reporter Anne Aurand can be reached at or
257-4591.

The rules

• PER ALASKA STATUTE 11.61.220: Concealed guns may not be carried into
a courtroom or office of the Alaska Court System, a school yard, a
bar, a domestic violence or sexual assault shelter that receives
funding from the state, the premises or parking lot of a child care
center, or into another person's residence without their permission. A
person carrying a deadly weapon commits a crime if he doesn't
immediately inform any peace officer who contacts him for any reason
that the weapon is concealed on his person. He must allow a peace
officer to secure the weapon, or obey directions from the officer to
secure it.

********* It appears that Alaska and Vermont are not alone.....

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaind...820.xml&coll=2

Bills aim to oil concealed-carry law
Both seal lists; one would skip permit
Wednesday, September 14, 2005
Julie Carr Smyth
Plain Dealer Bureau

Columbus - A sweeping proposal debuted in the Ohio House Tuesday that
would further liberalize Ohio's rules for carrying concealed handguns.

The bill, sponsored by Cincinnati Republican Rep. Tom Brinkman, would
allow carrying with no permit, lift carefully negotiated restrictions
on hidden guns in public places, and cut off public access to
permit-holder information.

Brinkman's aide, Kara Joseph, called it "the real right-to-carry
bill." Twenty-four of 99 House members are co-sponsors.
Brinkman said support has grown for loosening gun restrictions
because Ohio's 17-month-old permitting process has been so successful.

"We have issued 45,000 gun permits and there's not been a single
incident of a citizen with a permit committing a crime," he said.

His new bill proposes a hybrid "Alaska-style" approach to concealed
weapons permitting, marrying Vermont's no-permit-required system with
training requirements and optional licensing, Joseph said. Some people
like having a permit they can carry to other states with reciprocal
gun agreements.

Brinkman's legislation is viewed as a long shot for passage, most
likely to be upstaged by a second concealed weapons bill being
prepared by Rep. Jim Aslanides, the Coshocton Republican who carried
2004 legislation repealing Ohio's longstanding concealed-carry ban.

Both bills would repeal a provision that allows journalists access to
the names of permit-holders by county. The records are otherwise off
limits to the public.

Frank Deaner, executive director of the Ohio Newspaper Association,
said his organization will fight for access.

"This isn't just a public records issue; this is a public safety
issue," he said. "There are all kinds of reasons why people might want
to know their friends and neighbors are carrying a concealed deadly
weapon."

Brinkman said simply, "They're concealed weapons and we want to keep
them that way."

His bill would also reverse restrictions against carrying concealed
guns on college campuses, in day-care centers, and in cars traveling
the highway. The State Highway Patrol lobbied successfully in 2004 for
requiring permit-holders to either carry their weapons on their person
or in a locked box while on the road.

Patrol spokesman Capt. John Born said the safeguards remain important
to the patrol - whose support was key to Gov. Bob Taft's support of
the 2004 CCW bill.
Taft also insisted on journalists' access to permit-holder names at
the time - and will continue to do so, said spokesman Mark Rickel.

"Those provisions were crucial to the governor's signing of the bill,"
he said, while stopping short of reviving any veto threat by the
governor.

Sen. Eric Fingerhut, a Shaker Heights Democrat, said the future of the
compromise "is clearly on Taft's shoulders."

"The National Rifle Association's intent was always to continue to
chip away at reasonable precautions that were negotiated into the bill
that they didn't like," Fingerhut said. "We have a responsibility not
to subcontract the gun policy of Ohio to the NRA."

To reach this Plain Dealer reporter:

, 1-800-228-8272
"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 06:58:57 GMT, Gunner Asch
wrote:

Both bills would repeal a provision that allows journalists access to
the names of permit-holders by county. The records are otherwise off
limits to the public.

Frank Deaner, executive director of the Ohio Newspaper Association,
said his organization will fight for access.

"This isn't just a public records issue; this is a public safety
issue," he said. "There are all kinds of reasons why people might want
to know their friends and neighbors are carrying a concealed deadly
weapon."


Can anybody name one legitimate reason?

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 07:58:14 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm, Gunner
Asch quickly quoth:

On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 06:58:57 GMT, Gunner Asch
wrote:

Both bills would repeal a provision that allows journalists access to
the names of permit-holders by county. The records are otherwise off
limits to the public.

Frank Deaner, executive director of the Ohio Newspaper Association,
said his organization will fight for access.

"This isn't just a public records issue; this is a public safety
issue," he said. "There are all kinds of reasons why people might want
to know their friends and neighbors are carrying a concealed deadly
weapon."


Can anybody name one legitimate reason?

Nope, and when everyone else uses the term "concealed weapon" and he
uses "concealed deadly weapon", we all know where his almost hidden
agenda lies. Perhaps I should have said "concealed deadly agenda".


-------------------------------------------------
- Boldly going - * Wondrous Website Design
- nowhere. - * http://www.diversify.com
-------------------------------------------------

On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 03:16:53 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 07:58:14 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm, Gunner
Asch quickly quoth:

On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 06:58:57 GMT, Gunner Asch
wrote:

Both bills would repeal a provision that allows journalists access to
the names of permit-holders by county. The records are otherwise off
limits to the public.

Frank Deaner, executive director of the Ohio Newspaper Association,
said his organization will fight for access.

"This isn't just a public records issue; this is a public safety
issue," he said. "There are all kinds of reasons why people might want
to know their friends and neighbors are carrying a concealed deadly
weapon."


Can anybody name one legitimate reason?

Nope, and when everyone else uses the term "concealed weapon" and he
uses "concealed deadly weapon", we all know where his almost hidden
agenda lies. Perhaps I should have said "concealed deadly agenda".



BIG gold star.

G

Gunner

-------------------------------------------------
- Boldly going - * Wondrous Website Design
- nowhere. - * http://www.diversify.com
-------------------------------------------------

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner