The conspiracy theory I'm going with.... (kidding of course) he planned to use the tannerite, place it under he fuel tanks, shoot the fuel tanks from 800 yards away, pierce the tank with his shots. Then when he had a puddle of fuel, he was planning on shooting the tannerite to ignite the fuel. Yeah, that's it....think I can get on a news show as an expert now?

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
Do you think it's more likely that the rounds that struck the fuel tanks were simply stray rounds, or do you think he was actually targeting them?

Based on what I can determine from Google Earth, the fuel tanks were 675+ yards from the murderer’s location and the line of sight to them is over 20 degrees of angular difference from the center of the audience area of the performance. There are also what appear to be apartment buildings closer in angular distance to the tanks than the tanks are to the performance area, and if they’d been hit by bullets I suspect we’d have heard about that by now. Even allowing for the highly inaccurate fire when using a bump fire stock, it seems unlikely to me that the tanks were hit inadvertently.

The only other thing I’d speculate about is whether the tanks were actually hit by gunfire. The one very brief mention I read referred to “holes” in the tanks but that they were (evidently) quickly repaired. If they were true penetrating holes, I must wonder what sort of repair was conducted: plugs inserted through the metal? If, however, they were just dents or what appeared to be dents, then I’d be a lot less confident that they were caused by the shooter. Most people have utterly no idea what real bullet holes look like. A store I worked at long ago was targeted by an attempted break-in, and we discovered a hole that had been drilled into a plastic domed skylight cover. One of the police officers who initially responded said that the hole was caused by a falling bullet and no one had tried to break into the store(!) (Yes, really.)

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by gw3971:
The suspect tried to buy tracer ammo! Apparently tracer ammo is more lethal and more accurate now.

Possibly to shoot at the fuel tanks he reportedly targeted. And why only “tried”? It shouldn’t be that hard to acquire.
Do you have a source for that tidbit of information?

Fox news reported that he tried to buy tracer at a gun show in phoenix but the vendor was out.

I'm going with not-intentional or at least not planned.

This guy has been portrayed as Mr. Meticulous.

If that were the case - he would have thought-out / executed the 'attempt' to detonate the fuel tanks in a much more effective manner. You would want something with a lot more down-range punch than a .223 / 5.56.

---------------------------------------------------------

My understanding from what I’ve read is he hit the fuel tanks with two rounds and I’m sure it was deliberate as they’re a far different trajectory from the concert venue. Also, the second window he broke out points almost directly at them.

As reported in the article, one of the bullets penetrated the tank but didn’t do anything, obviously.

Link to article with photos

quote:

Originally posted by KevinCW:
Shoothing up to a high floor, at a distance of 400 yards on the ground, which is more like 550 yards or so as the hypotenuse of the triangle...

Just a bit of tid...It doesn't work like that - the bullet's travel like it is LESS than 400 yds at extreme angles.

Sorry for the drift. Now back to your regularly scheduled programming....

ETA : I realized (for some reason while flipping my eggs for breakfast) that I had switched Kev's line of sight distance and the horizontal distance.
Gravity acts on the bullet using the "bottom of the triangle" not the line of sight leg.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: KMitch200,

quote:

Originally posted by Copefree:
My understanding from what I’ve read is he hit the fuel tanks with two rounds and I’m sure it was deliberate as they’re a far different trajectory from the concert venue. Also, the second window he broke out points almost directly at them.

Link to article with photos

^This.
If one reads this thread one will encounter a detailed illustration which shows one window was broken for visibility of the event and one was for the tanks.

Chellim's post not difficult to find

quote:

Originally posted by Erick85:
The conspiracy theory I'm going with.... (kidding of course) he planned to use the tannerite, place it under he fuel tanks, shoot the fuel tanks from 800 yards away, pierce the tank with his shots. Then when he had a puddle of fuel, he was planning on shooting the tannerite to ignite the fuel. Yeah, that's it....think I can get on a news show as an expert now?

If thats the case then why didnt he put any tannerite there to begin with. His car was in the mandalay bay parking garage with all the tannerite and amonium nitrate?

I award you no points and may god have mercy on your soul.

quote:

Originally posted by Deqlyn:

quote:

Originally posted by Erick85:
The conspiracy theory I'm going with.... (kidding of course) he planned to use the tannerite, place it under he fuel tanks, shoot the fuel tanks from 800 yards away, pierce the tank with his shots. Then when he had a puddle of fuel, he was planning on shooting the tannerite to ignite the fuel. Yeah, that's it....think I can get on a news show as an expert now?

If thats the case then why didnt he put any tannerite there to begin with. His car was in the mandalay bay parking garage with all the tannerite and amonium nitrate?

I award you no points and may god have mercy on your soul.

Did you not see the part where I said I was kidding???? First sentence man....figured it would be obvious with how ridiculous the assumptions in the post were...

quote:

Originally posted by KMitch200:

quote:

Originally posted by KevinCW:
Shoothing up to a high floor, at a distance of 400 yards on the ground, which is more like 550 yards or so as the hypotenuse of the triangle...

Just a bit of tid...It doesn't work like that - the bullet's travel like it is LESS than 400 yds at extreme angles.

Um …, no: Based on what I could determine from photographs, the room the shots were fired from was about 100 yards (300 feet) above the ground.* If the horizontal distance from the room to the target area was 400 yards, then the slant line distance (hypotenuse of the triangle) would have been ~412 yards, not less than 400 yards. (Despite my own first estimates, the up/down angle between the ground at various locations and the room was only 14-16 degrees, and would have had little effect on points of bullet impact.)

If the situation consists of a shot fired downward at an angle from a high point, the line of sight distance (hypotenuse of the triangle) will always be greater than the horizontal distance from the shooter to the target. In a right triangle, the hypotenuse is always the longest leg (side).

If you didn’t just get yourself confused, the possible reason for your misconception is the oft-repeated statement that shooting up or down at extreme angles will cause the bullet to hit higher than expected. That’s true only if one estimates the distance of the shot by the line of sight rather than the horizontal distance.

* If anyone has been able to determine a more accurate value for the height of the room above the ground, I’d be very interested in learning it.

My guess. Just a guess. Is he is kidding too. Based on the final quote from the Adam Sandler movie

quote:

Originally posted by Erick85:

quote:

Originally posted by Deqlyn:

quote:

Originally posted by Erick85:
The conspiracy theory I'm going with.... (kidding of course) he planned to use the tannerite, place it under he fuel tanks, shoot the fuel tanks from 800 yards away, pierce the tank with his shots. Then when he had a puddle of fuel, he was planning on shooting the tannerite to ignite the fuel. Yeah, that's it....think I can get on a news show as an expert now?

If thats the case then why didnt he put any tannerite there to begin with. His car was in the mandalay bay parking garage with all the tannerite and amonium nitrate?

I award you no points and may god have mercy on your soul.

Did you not see the part where I said I was kidding???? First sentence man....figured it would be obvious with how ridiculous the assumptions in the post were...

quote:

Originally posted by Copefree:
My understanding from what I’ve read is he hit the fuel tanks with two rounds and I’m sure it was deliberate as they’re a far different trajectory from the concert venue. Also, the second window he broke out points almost directly at them.

As reported in the article, one of the bullets penetrated the tank but didn’t do anything, obviously.

I agree after looking at all of that and the pic above that it was most likely targeted deliberately.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ_Boston:

quote:

Originally posted by gw3971:
The suspect tried to buy tracer ammo! Apparently tracer ammo is more lethal and more accurate now.

I think the media is still fixated on the fuel tank thingy, and want to show it as an attempt to use it as an incendiary round. had he used tracers, maybe they might have found him quicker. they do work both ways....

About this "might have found him quicker" stuff. If we were standing 400 yards away from the hotel, and I told you or anyone else the exact room number of the shooter and started a clock ... I wonder if anyone could get to that room in less than 12 minutes.

Even if you were on the first floor of the hotel ... 12 minutes. I'm no expert at all, but I think that is a good response time, unless first responders were standing at the lobby elevator stack and knew the floor and room number.

Very sad news.

My spouse just came in with the local weekly...front page, a girl my daughter went to high school with was one of the fallen in Las Vegas.

We weren't close, as high school was a while back, but even having known her slightly brings it closer and sadder

Ding ding ding!

quote:

Originally posted by Kevbo:
My guess. Just a guess. Is he is kidding too. Based on the final quote from the Adam Sandler movie

quote:

Originally posted by Erick85:

quote:

Originally posted by Deqlyn:

quote:

Originally posted by Erick85:
The conspiracy theory I'm going with.... (kidding of course) he planned to use the tannerite, place it under he fuel tanks, shoot the fuel tanks from 800 yards away, pierce the tank with his shots. Then when he had a puddle of fuel, he was planning on shooting the tannerite to ignite the fuel. Yeah, that's it....think I can get on a news show as an expert now?

If thats the case then why didnt he put any tannerite there to begin with. His car was in the mandalay bay parking garage with all the tannerite and amonium nitrate?

I award you no points and may god have mercy on your soul.

Did you not see the part where I said I was kidding???? First sentence man....figured it would be obvious with how ridiculous the assumptions in the post were...

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by KMitch200:
Um …, no
<snip>
If you didn’t just get yourself confused, the possible reason for your misconception is the oft-repeated statement that shooting up or down at extreme angles will cause the bullet to hit higher than expected. That’s true only if one estimates the distance of the shot by the line of sight rather than the horizontal distance.

Yeah I realized my mistake in my post and have added to it. You beat me to the correction.

quote:

Originally posted by Deqlyn:
Ding ding ding!

Damn, I need to brush up on my Adam Sandler movies.

Just to help explain shooting at angles and long range shooting technique:

Easy to Understand:


Not SO Easy (at least for me ) but shows Equipment Doing it:


Simple trick to control recoil:

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by KMitch200:

quote:

Originally posted by KevinCW:
Shoothing up to a high floor, at a distance of 400 yards on the ground, which is more like 550 yards or so as the hypotenuse of the triangle...

Just a bit of tid...It doesn't work like that - the bullet's travel like it is LESS than 400 yds at extreme angles.

Um …, no: Based on what I could determine from photographs, the room the shots were fired from was about 100 yards (300 feet) above the ground.* If the horizontal distance from the room to the target area was 400 yards, then the slant line distance (hypotenuse of the triangle) would have been ~412 yards, not less than 400 yards. (Despite my own first estimates, the up/down angle between the ground at various locations and the room was only 14-16 degrees, and would have had little effect on points of bullet impact.)

If the situation consists of a shot fired downward at an angle from a high point, the line of sight distance (hypotenuse of the triangle) will always be greater than the horizontal distance from the shooter to the target. In a right triangle, the hypotenuse is always the longest leg (side).

If you didn’t just get yourself confused, the possible reason for your misconception is the oft-repeated statement that shooting up or down at extreme angles will cause the bullet to hit higher than expected. That’s true only if one estimates the distance of the shot by the line of sight rather than the horizontal distance.

* If anyone has been able to determine a more accurate value for the height of the room above the ground, I’d be very interested in learning it.

Ughh. this post takes me back to my Mr Rogers sweater wearing high school geometry teacher telling me that one day geometry would matter.

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyl...ere-gunman-s-n808431

IRS records show that Paddock was a successful gambler, earning at least $5 million in 2015. Some of that could be from other investments, but most of it was from gambling, officials say.

**********

I think the only gambling that has been publicly associated w Paddock is video poker.