My friend (who is a physicist) and I revisited the alleged bullet incident that got steel targets beyond 100yds banned at Kokohead, and needless to say that it's still not looking good for those who claim that a bullet defied the laws of physics and traveled from the range through someone's window, approximately 1.5mi away.

We utilized the ballistics of a 7.62x54Rround and a mosin nagant, given the projectile showcased during the investigation appears to be a be a 7.62. We were initially going to analyze all common 7.62 platforms (AK, SKS, etc), but determined it would be a waste of time, given the low FPS, muzzle velocity and maximum range of those platforms, and that only a platform like the mosin and the 7.62x54R or something similar has the capability to generate the necessary velocity and flight pattern to recreate the incident.

We will be finalizing the calculations next week, but preliminary assessment reveals that someone would need to have walked passed the roof of the bench and into the grass, then fired a projectile at an 89 degree angle over the top of Kokohead, just to reach the location of where the bullet landed. That means someone would have to walk onto the firing lane while it was hot without the range officers noticing, and shoot almost straight into the air. This does not take into account air and wind resistance (which is prevalent at Kokohead), nor the dispersal of kinetic energy into a Target or off the ground or berm, which people claim was responsible for ricocheting the bullet over the top of Kokohead.

I'm not sure if anyone would be willing or want to do anything with this, but it would seem that this information might be useful in convincing those in charge of the range (specifically Mike) to allow the reimplementation of targets past 100yds.

This was my calculation using ballistic charts from the house that got hit with a bullet.  I went with a 7.62x39 but a 308 may a better fit if the bullet destabilizes.  The angle was very small, I can't remember.  Maybe 5 degrees to clear the ridge.

This was my calculation using ballistic charts from the house that got hit with a bullet.  I went with a 7.62x39 but a 308 may a better fit if the bullet destabilizes.  The angle was very small, I can't remember.  Maybe 5 degrees to clear the ridge.

The issue with this analysis is that it has nothing to do with the targets set up in a straight line of Kokohead, which further validates that removing the targets was completely unnecessary and pointless.

Furthermore, while there were multiple alleged incidents, the primary incident that got the targets shut down was the incident that took place on Koko Kai street, which is located at the opposite side of Kokohead and directly in line with the range, and the basis of the analysis we are doing. Given the location of the incident, the estimated angle for the bullet to travel to that specific location would have had to have been approximately 89 degrees, or almost straight in the air, as previously stated.

There is only one location from which that bullet type could have been fired from a platform capable of reaching the incident location, and that is the rifle range, meaning that (depending on the exact location of the house) the bullet would have had to travel over the highest peaks of Kokohead, which could have only been accomplished if someone intentionally shot into the air without anyone noticing. Given that we can't even cross the line during ceasefire without getting reamed, I find it highly unlikely that someone could have given both the safety officers and fellow shooters the slip to accomplish this.

There is also that bit of information from someone who witnessed an associate of Mr Knudsen (followed by a brief appearance by Knudsen himself) in a gun shop prior to the incident, ironically attempting to purchase the exact same caliber bullet that is believed to have been involved in the incident.

This is the case I used.   https://www.khon2.com/news/local-news/investigation-underway-after-stray-bullet-hits-hawaii-kai-home_20180104064129325/901580104

I'll do a straight line one.  Have to try different types of rounds to find the one with the right trajectory and energy.  I would think it's possible to clear the highest point and hit the housing.  I know of incidents where guns were shot high accidentally at the range.

Koko Head was planned and developed as a 100 yard range so anything beyond that is a liability in its current state.  The range could be improved to allow shooting at farther targets.  Building high backstops, baffles, improved shooting positions, etc.  But the city wouldn't want to spend the money on it.

Do you have a link or home address to the one you're working on ?

Preliminary stuff calculating for low angle.  Best case distance to the houses are around 2500 yards.  Crater wall is about 1075yrds from the firing line and must clear about 700 yards high.

A common 7.62x39 123gr round will shoot too low, about 500 yards high.  Anything flatter shooting would shoot even lower. 

Same round fired at 1500fps would have the right trajectory.  Same round fired with a bullet with a bc of .225 would have the right trajectory. 

It's possible it could be:

1.  Shooting it high with the bullet tumbling after going subsonic
2.  Shooting a low velocity round
3.  Shooting a low bc bullet
4.  Shooting at a high angle
5.  Ricochets are unlikely due to 2,000 yards to the housing

I don't know how to calculate high angles so can't test that, but I think it's possible.

Removing the targets past 100yds was probably due to ricochets on the hiking trail which could happen.  Also a very rare chance it could come back to the firing line.  Need a large soft backstop to catch the bullets.  Would need to be pretty large to catch the misses.  Extending the range would also require an EIS or EIA and would be costly.

On the previous thread, many years ago, I posted about soft sand or dirt could deflect rounds at unknown angles and leave projectiles near undamaged and scrubbed of rifling marks.

Anything is possible with murphy.

Im not saying that shooting past 100 shouldn't be studied or pursued, just saying it is plausible. 

A new range designed for longrange shooting is what is needed and doubtful will ever come to fruition is that damn anti freedom state.  (Cant even get a stupid choochoo built reasonably)

A new range designed for longrange shooting is what is needed and doubtful will ever come to fruition is that damn anti freedom state.  (Cant even get a stupid choochoo built reasonably)

Never going to happen, as they wouldn't even let us adopt the range or voluntarily clean it up

Never going to happen, as they wouldn't even let us adopt the range or voluntarily clean it up

"They" know what's best, for everyone, about everything. They are our "public servants", after all.

A new range designed for longrange shooting is what is needed and doubtful will ever come to fruition is that damn anti freedom state.

Cannot even get any range on the Big island, with all the space we have.

Oh yeah, whatever happened to that "little mother" at Sandy beach that claimed a bullet from KHSC punched through her minivan top?

That sure went silent fast..........................

Cannot even get any range on the Big island, with all the space we have.

You could gather up some military friends and form a shooting club to use Pohakuloa ranges.  It would be like Disneyland for the shooting community there.

This is the case I used.   https://www.khon2.com/news/local-news/investigation-underway-after-stray-bullet-hits-hawaii-kai-home_20180104064129325/901580104

I'll do a straight line one.  Have to try different types of rounds to find the one with the right trajectory and energy.  I would think it's possible to clear the highest point and hit the housing.  I know of incidents where guns were shot high accidentally at the range.

Koko Head was planned and developed as a 100 yard range so anything beyond that is a liability in its current state.  The range could be improved to allow shooting at farther targets.  Building high backstops, baffles, improved shooting positions, etc.  But the city wouldn't want to spend the money on it.

Do you have a link or home address to the one you're working on ?

Or they could simply let a coalition of citizens and businesses adopt the park, let them demo and rebuild the range to specs with little or no funding from the county and be done with it.

No link, as it was kept out of public investigation information, but all houses on Koko Kai have essentially the same trajectory.

On the previous thread, many years ago, I posted about soft sand or dirt could deflect rounds at unknown angles and leave projectiles near undamaged and scrubbed of rifling marks.

Regardless of the media, the round would still need to fight against gravity, wind resistance and air resistance, as well as compensate for a reduction in kinetic energy after making contact with the media, to travel over the mountain and maintain a perfect flight path to the "victims" house. If you analyze the trajectory from the rifle range to Koko Kai, it is literally a straight line.

I am unaware of any round in .308 or 7.62 that has the capability to resist all those factors and still travel over an elevation of 600-900ft and 1.45 miles away; maybe a .50 or larger, but not this caliber.

I have never talked to any RO to see their stance on the 2a. But it would seem like hawaiis indoctation has something to do with all the rules at the range. Did anyone help fight the rules? 5 rds only, no rapid fire, no sillouettes, etc...

And now another event is used as a reason for more restrictions. Science will not help. Minds have already been made.

Next will be "no assault weapons" because it will give someone planning an active shooting a method to practice. Despide 5 rd max and no rapid firing.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Did any of you think to do a UIPA request for a copy of the police, city and state investigations ?

I have never talked to any RO to see their stance on the 2a. But it would seem like hawaiis indoctation has something to do with all the rules at the range. Did anyone help fight the rules? 5 rds only, no rapid fire, no sillouettes, etc...

The restrictions are legitimate for safety and were probably made by range consultants long ago.  The 5 round limit is incase the gun breaks and goes full auto, muzzle rises and it shoots high.  The no rapid fire is to keep the bullets in the backstop to prevent ricochets and not damaging other people's frames.  The silhouette thing is a politically correct thing and could be changed.

Koko Head is in a unique situation where the trail, housing encroachment, and lack of maintenance makes the restrictions necessary.  You don't see it on the mainland cause they have a lot of empty land so have leeway.  I've talked to several range planners who've been to Koko Head and they ask if the range is still there, if safety improvements were made, and if the targets on the side of the mountain were removed.

Also HRA paid for a Koko Head range consultation years ago that should answer some of the  questions here.  I've been trying to get a copy of it from them but gave up.  Maybe some of you will have better luck getting g it.

I'll put the silhouette targets on HIFICOs to do list.

Also HRA paid for a Koko Head range consultation years ago that should answer some of the  questions here.  I've been trying to get a copy of it from them but gave up.  Maybe some of you will have better luck getting g it.

I'll put the silhouette targets on HIFICOs to do list.

I would donate towards buying new targets if they can be reimplemented.

I'm sure it would also be extremely easy to design and pay for the manufacture a plate stand that would significantly reduce or completely eliminate ricochets from happening; at least those rounds that can magically defy physics.

Did any of you think to do a UIPA request for a copy of the police, city and state investigations ?

No I did not, because this was more of a curiosity and a side project when I had free time at work

The restrictions are legitimate for safety and were probably made by range consultants long ago.  The 5 round limit is incase the gun breaks and goes full auto, muzzle rises and it shoots high.  The no rapid fire is to keep the bullets in the backstop to prevent ricochets and not damaging other people's frames.  The silhouette thing is a politically correct thing and could be changed.

Koko Head is in a unique situation where the trail, housing encroachment, and lack of maintenance makes the restrictions necessary.  You don't see it on the mainland cause they have a lot of empty land so have leeway.  I've talked to several range planners who've been to Koko Head and they ask if the range is still there, if safety improvements were made, and if the targets on the side of the mountain were removed.

Arguments could be made for any restrictions at a gun range.  But I get it.  Next, the range will be closed when it's raining.  Someone could slip and fire a round in the air. (Joking).