New limits?

[Riotharmus]

Re: New limits?

In line with the new advice/policy anything that shoots over 375fps (using top end) must not be capable of fully automatic fire.. now this doesn't just mean "oh i've got it in Semi" i means under no circumstance/condition must it be made able to fire automatically.

In essence DMR is a type of real steel rifle that's not really translatable to airsoft.. you've either got an assualt rifle (fully auto capable sub 375 fps) or you've got a sniper rifle (single action sub 501 FPS).. so you've got to decided whether your DMR is one or the other... same applies to all airsoft weapons really.. support weapons are just a model rather than a type (so still subject to the sub 375 fps guidance).

[cannon_fodder]

Re: New limits?

rio,
You are correct that this report is incomplete and potentially flawed . I addition to your points, there is no mention of rate of fire, an important factor if you are calculating cumulative damage from full auto. And who decided 1 out 6 shots for the full auto test? where did they come across that random number?

But before everyone panics, This testing was commissioned buy UKARA because of complaints from some members, for example the ones trading in the thames valley area. Some shops were selling RIFs as air rifles and there was some rumors of under 18s not being allowed to use high powered bolt action on site (unsupervised use of an air rifle etc).
What this report has done is close that loop hole.. All single shot realistic imitations under 3J are now RIFs and have to be sold with a defence. Its apparent that the ACPO think that VCRA is better than the firearms act at restricting sales of RIFs.

I think the full auto testing will not stand up in court so I think 2.9J become will be the maximum "safe" limit for all air weapons and the transition to firearm in any future airgun restriction (looking at Scotland's proposals for airguns) BUT:
The recommended limit to 1.3J (374fps) is interesting as the highest MAX limit I know of for a UKARA registered site is 372. As our defense is that we use our AEGs to play at insured sites there is no reason to have an AEG that fires above this limit.

[Riotharmus]

Re: New limits?

Thanks, that's cleared something up for me.. I'm glad that they've got what they needed in that respect.

I'm still a bit dubious as to what the widespread ramifications will be.

[B.E.N.]

Re: New limits?

Tests were done a point blank range (barrel to ballistic medium), completely unrealistic

Tests only used one type of RIF (AEG) and report that had trouble gaining consistent FPS yet all the calculations/estimations are done assuming constant FPS

Tests only used one weight of BB, now out of the shooters i know at least 40% use .25g or above which will have a significant difference in kinetic energy values especially at range.. when it comes to the single shot chaps i'd be surprised if ANY used a .2g bb.

You COULD change these variables but I don't think it would serve to achieve anything useful.

Shooting at point blank is a "worst case scenario" I've been shot in the face (the eye lid at that) at less than a foot away from the end of somebodies gun, and I've been shot from closer elsewhere on my body. For me, it's not hard to imagine a point blank scenario being encountered.

With respect to the type of RIF, AEGs are what's primarily used in gameplay. FPS variance and all. Besides, are other types of airsoft gun not even more prone to FPS fluctuation?

As far as I understand it, a BB will carry only the energy imparted into by the gun, the only difference being that the heavier BB will retain that energy for a longer period... Since the tests are carried out at point blank, wouldn't this have little to know effect?

@Yosser: I don't understand where the innate distrust for UKARA comes from? Many of the retailers I know that are within the UKARA scheme are players themselves... It makes no sense to me that an organisation founded and maintained by retailers and players would so actively go and destroy not only their hobby but their livelihood.

Because of the above, I think the tests have actually been carried out in favour of the airsofter...They could have said "these guns are capable of firing .8g of steel BB ammo and they can take a spring that will put one out at 470fps, so that's what we will test"... Granted, the full auto test is a little unrealistic, since it's UNLIKELY you will get 6 rounds hitting exactly the same point but hey, it's again a reasonable "worst case scenario"...

[Caveira]

Re: New limits?

Has it not occured to anyone that point blank testing (etc etc) was used as that is what the law says must be used and also gives a consistent result when compared to similar tests done in the past on airguns.

Regardless, these are guidelines and any specific gun must be tested by the FSS before a prosecution has any chance of succeding. Inconsistent results in the tests work for us because of this and not against us. If they had achieved 100% accurate results then there would have been no chance of us questioning the (legally defined, ie skin penetration) lethality of our guns if we were prosecuted.

[yosser]

Re: New limits?

@Yosser: I don't understand where the innate distrust for UKARA comes from? Many of the retailers I know that are within the UKARA scheme are players themselves... It makes no sense to me that an organisation founded and maintained by retailers and players would so actively go and destroy not only their hobby but their livelihood.

I have my reasons for suspicion - but they are off the topic of this discussion but things like this happening dont exactly give you confidence in an organisation that doesnt even consult other groups in the ******* *****!

[Riotharmus]

Re: New limits?

let me clear up a few things:

point blank testing isn't specified as the method for testing at all. Further more it doesn't represent worst case scenario either.. depending on type of weapon used the impact, especially on fully automatic can be expected to be higher once a distance is gained from the barrel (further exaggerated with GBB mechanisms) so if anything it would detract from the results.

FPS fluctuation: i'm not saying that there's an airsoft system that can eradicate the fluctuation, what i'm saying is these variances must be factored in to the calculations to make them valid.

Weight of the BB: again assuming the point blank method is wrong, as above, then the weight comes into play, as does the material (i'm not getting into the physics of ballistics here because i'm not qualified, but they all have a significant impact on the figures). even at point blank the weight still has impacts regards momentum, energy transfer, frangibility so on and so forth.. so yes it is a critical factor.

I can't help but feel you've missed the point, of course they won't test a 370+ steel .8g bb.. but they very fact they could have makes this a potential issue (S5 modifiable firearm)..

regards inconsistency working for us. nothing could be further from the truth.. we need black and white definitions and regulations so we can finally lay to bed all the misgivings, semi-truths and nonsense around the hobby. With the inconsistency in place it will only take an overzealous examiner to put someone behind bars.

My arguement is not with UKARA, though i do think they've opened a can of worms, it's with governance of our hobby.. it needs to be in place but it needs to be practicable and agreeable to all parties, be that players, site owners, retailers, law enforcement, HSE... everyone.. or it will cease to be.

[V.A.K]

Re: New limits?

You COULD change these variables but I don't think it would serve to achieve anything useful.

Shooting at point blank is a "worst case scenario" I've been shot in the face (the eye lid at that) at less than a foot away from the end of somebodies gun, and I've been shot from closer elsewhere on my body. For me, it's not hard to imagine a point blank scenario being encountered.

With respect to the type of RIF, AEGs are what's primarily used in gameplay. FPS variance and all. Besides, are other types of airsoft gun not even more prone to FPS fluctuation?

As far as I understand it, a BB will carry only the energy imparted into by the gun, the only difference being that the heavier BB will retain that energy for a longer period... Since the tests are carried out at point blank, wouldn't this have little to know effect?

@Yosser: I don't understand where the innate distrust for UKARA comes from? Many of the retailers I know that are within the UKARA scheme are players themselves... It makes no sense to me that an organisation founded and maintained by retailers and players would so actively go and destroy not only their hobby but their livelihood.

Because of the above, I think the tests have actually been carried out in favour of the airsofter...They could have said "these guns are capable of firing .8g of steel BB ammo and they can take a spring that will put one out at 470fps, so that's what we will test"... Granted, the full auto test is a little unrealistic, since it's UNLIKELY you will get 6 rounds hitting exactly the same point but hey, it's again a reasonable "worst case scenario"...

also the distrust towards ukara possibly could be because the chairman is the owner of one of the larger airsoft retail stores this means he's got a vested intrest and not completely unbiased in my eye the chairman of ukara should be a nuetral person with a strong understanding of the law and no links to any airsoft store thus making him completely unbiased in his decision making process while some may constitute this as off topic i believe it to be relevant, the acpo has been looking at determining the lethality of airsoft guns having only briefly read the report during a 15 min break during work what i can gleam is there is no danger from airsoft guns unless the are used to fire at the same spot for a prolonged period of time, what we can take from this report is there is a defined limit to airsoft guns, this report however now poses a serious question.
do the guns have to come in to the country at below 370 fps or can the retailer downgrade them before a sale, this is now the gray area, if this point has been clarified already i apologise but i haven't had a chance to fully read the report, life and work tends to get in the way of a hobby.

[balaclava ben]

Re: New limits?

this is what i posted on another forum whilst zeroin was down,
"From what I have read up and looked into it, my conclusion is that,
- The recent tests to be plainly honest have not helped a single bit, summarising from their conclusion that 1) Full auto fire on the same area on a target leads to cumulative damage (Something we knew before hand and why many CQB sites impose single shot areas) 2) "A precise determination of a lethal threshold has not been possible due to the [equipment used]" therefore we are still waiting (and hopefully it will not arise for the sake of the sport) for a case in which the true lethal level will be found from court testing and in turn be applied as law. 3) Eye injuries are only theoretical values and not true experimental ones for obvious reasons... (And as 90% or so of airsoft guns are used for skirmishing and a large portion of those requiring UKARA/other equivilent, eye protection will be used in any case in accordance to site insurance policies. 4) The last comment in the conclusions states that 1J for full auto fire is "extreamely unlikely" to cause fatal injury aka death (we also knew this before hand), and 2J for single shot fire. Obviously full auto fire at 1J at an eye would cause devastating damage so this is clearly assuming that eye protection will be used whilst these energy levels of airsoft guns are being utilised and therefore go against their values of damage to the eye.

-In all respect of, what in my opinion is an awful experiment and write up (something a GCSE student could easily do to a better standard), anyone trying to rock the boat and start brinkmanship with these energy levels is asking for trouble (not that anyone I believe on this thread has actually stated that they will do)

-My personal conclusion, keep well below your local site limits. Be sensible with your airsoft gear for the securing safety of the sport for the future and don't do anything stupid, people for example the Xsite guys have clearly put hundreds of hours of time and money into the protection of the sport, don't ruin things for the sake of the people as mentioned above.

Just my penny's worth "

[cannon_fodder]

Re: New limits?

regards inconsistency working for us. nothing could be further from the truth.. we need black and white definitions and regulations so we can finally lay to bed all the misgivings, semi-truths and nonsense around the hobby. With the inconsistency in place it will only take an overzealous examiner to put someone behind bars.

It is almost impossible to get sensible black and white definitions to lethality. Anything that involves humans is always going to be grey. You will always get cases of a soldier or policeman getting shot 5 times and surviving along side some dying from falling off a bicycle. What is fatal to one person is not always universal.

The problem with any fixed limit is it will ALWAYS be wrong.
Take age limits... I would trust my daughter to drive safely now and she is only 15. I know some lads (including myself) who should have been made to wait until they were at least 21+ before being allowed to drive. Can anyone prove that every 17 year old is completely safe to drive??
The same with the 18 year limit on purchasing IFs . We all know some under 18s who could be trusted with a RIF, we all know some 20 year olds who cant be trusted.
ALL legally defined limits will ALWAYS be a random/arbitrary poke with a pin somewhere along a grey line.

I am happy with these guidelines. They don't impact on the sport in any way at the moment.

Before everyone starts panicking. NO ONE will be randomly testing our AEGs . Testing can only be done at an approved lab with approved and calibrated test equipment. It costs £1000's for each test. How will the police fund the testing of every AEG? it would cost £millions and the police are struggling with the overtime bill from the riots.
The limits for air rifles are set in stone as 12FtLb (another arbitrary value by the way). I have never personally heard of anyone having their air rifle randomly tested and I know far more air rifle users than airsofters. If your air gun put someone in hospital however you can be dam sure it would be tested.
And as I stated previously there is NO reason at all for any of us to have an AEG that is above 374 fps. what would be the point?

[The General]

Re: New limits?

If you actually read the document, 1.3J is the recommended limit for Automatic airsoft guns but 1.5J is the area where the tests begin to indicate lethality being a possibility. Yet no definite level is given due to the difficulty in reaching specific energy levels due to the equipment used. In English they need to make a custom air powered barrel that can have minute energy levels adjusted to come up with exact limits. The tests really are at best guidelines.

However as others have stated, I think the odds of ever having an airsoft gun tested by the Police is unlikely. However they could easily turn up to a site and ask to see any gun chronoscoped. If sites use a chronoscope like the Skan... Well it's a pretty good indication right there and enough to have someone taken down the station to be cautioned and the gun sent of for testing.

This all feels more like a way to prevent some retailers selling RIF as air weapons due to power levels and thus not requiring the appropriate defence. However it also is a good idea for airsoft in general and the levels recommended are appropriate in my opinion to any sensible site.

Yes the energy levels given with heavier bb's would result in higher figures but then I guess it is in the players favour that the .20 weight bb is used for testing.

[Riotharmus]

Re: New limits?

If nothing else, i think the fact we're all talking about it and are aware is a good thing!

[Caveira]

Re: New limits?

regards inconsistency working for us. nothing could be further from the truth.. we need black and white definitions and regulations so we can finally lay to bed all the misgivings, semi-truths and nonsense around the hobby. With the inconsistency in place it will only take an overzealous examiner to put someone behind bars.

I can't help but disagree with that.

Yes, black and white limits would be best of all, but as things stand any one of us can attempt to defend ourselves on the basis that the testing was not accurate and, therefore, neither can be any testing done on our guns. If they had managed perfect consistency, then we would have a legal definition that would be applied in the same way that some sites look at chrono results; 5 shots at 372 and one at 376 and you're in prison for a section 5 offence.

Personally, I'd rather be able to argue that a) their testing varied so much that the results from it can't be proved to be correct and b) neither can the results when my gun was tested before prosecution. If they don't test my gun before prosecution, they have no case anyway as CPS rules state that the FSS must conduct lethality tests on the individual weapon.

[Portnoy]

Re: New limits?

1.3J?
That's the limit in Portugal! This limit was negotiated!
For some reason, it seems to me, they are just recycling a useless idea to create a solution to a problem that never existed. Ergo it's bullshit.

Why do beaurocrats complicate everything?

[V.A.K]

Re: New limits?

1.3J?
That's the limit in Portugal! This limit was negotiated!
For some reason, it seems to me, they are just recycling a useless idea to create a solution to a problem that never existed. Ergo it's bullshit.

Why do beaurocrats complicate everything?

because they are useless they think they know best when in actual fact they have no clue