Had an email last night saying ALL NSWs are prohibited from being fired as they now fall outside the safe system of training until further notice.
You couldn’t make it up…
Who from?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes please to the source - that restriction would make trying to get cadets nominated for the Whistler Inter-Service Small-bore Competition omewhat problematical, as a non-Service Anschutz was going to be used,
If true, the remainder of my comments are probably better left unsaid!
[strike]I wondered if that is extended to air rifles - what with them being NSWs… [/strike]Wait… best not say anything…
Two posts on SharePoint says “yes”…
[quote]
The use of any non-service weapons, or of non-service ammunition, by cadets or CFAVs on ACO duty is temporarily prohibited, and is until further notice. This includes Air Rifles. The reasons, details and timescales are currently sketchy and further information will be promulgated ASAP. OC WSW[/quote]
From TG 5
[quote]Gentlemen
I regret to be the bearer of disappointing tidings.
Following two incidents with Non Service Weapons (NSW) owned by the Lothian & Borders ACF it has been determined that use of NSW by Cadets and CFAVs on duty is outside the Safe System of Training (SST).
In the interests of remaining within the SST and abiding by the requirements of Total Safety I believe we have to issue a Safety Notice to the whole Organisation stopping use of NSWs until this is resolved. My draft is attached.
Over this weekend it is likely that there will be use of NSWs therefore I ask you to send the text of the draft by Bader to all your Wg Shooting Officers calling a halt pending formal issue of the Safety Notice on Monday. COS, Rgnl Cmdts and OC SDT have been informed.
We have a large number of NSWs, around 2000 I believe. These comprise air rifles, small bore and full bore target rifles some of them owned by HQAC. All are subject to this ban until further notice.
I am working this weekend at Cosford where mobile phone reception is notoriously bad however I will check my in box periodically. I intend to be back in the office on Wednesday.
Regards
Constance[/quote]
So… to recap in 2014…
We can only just fly
We can’t glide
We can’t bivi
Ultilearn is still causing issues
And unless we have access to No 8’s, we can’t shoot…
Mmmm…
(sans rifle of course!)
Yes from our SATT
We can only use No8 L98 L86 and L81 at this time
Yet again a local incident that means everyone stops. No details about or idea as to what has happened, no commonsense approach to look at what happened and suggest some degree of caution. The problem is this will become another long stop on activities, as reports etc are written. Given that this affects air rifles the ramifications for faffing around are going to be massive. It looks likely that our session at a local sqn the week after next will be scrapped. So yet another group of disappointed cadets.
We’ve had one of our best intakes recently 13 new faces and 11 of whom have all stayed with us, this sort of thing makes it a real struggle to maintain interest, when they see and hear about things being cancelled.
It makes me smile that go back not too many years, pre-email, and no one would have known about this and just carried on, without incident. It seems that new communication methods never get used at the last minute for anything positive.
I’m sure the commandant will support TG5 fully in her approach, and then tear her a new one when the door is shut.
Don’t forget that air rifles are as near as possible to Services Wpns, in that they are ordered via HQ ACO, direct from the manufacturer.
I didn’t need that image in my head. Ta.
Air rifles are included in the ban
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes, I know - but the “origin” of the air rifles (certainly the Scorpion model) is the equivalent of an “issued” Service wpn due to the procurement requirement - direct from HQ ACO, which makes the ban on them somewhat ridiculous.
If it turns out that the incidents were ammunition-based, then it will be even more so!
Yes, I know - but the “origin” of the air rifles (certainly the Scorpion model) is the equivalent of an “issued” Service wpn due to the procurement requirement - direct from HQ ACO, which makes the ban on them somewhat ridiculous.
If it turns out that the incidents were ammunition-based, then it will be even more so![/quote]
Nope, as they won’t have undergone the full safety & suitability for service testing required to bring them in as Service weapons. They are NSWs - just a pet project and centrally organised via HQAC.
[quote=“redowling” post=22102]
Nope, as they won’t have undergone the full safety & suitability for service testing required to bring them in as Service weapons. They are NSWs - just a pet project and centrally organised via HQAC.[/quote]
I would seek clarification on that one. The BSA Scorpion and Air Arms CZ200 have their own official cadet manual, approved by the SASC, which details how they should be used, as opposed to proper NSW that would not have such a manual.
Anyone know if there is a similar ban in the ACF, or is this another case of ACF making mistakes and ACO paying for them.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
[quote=“juliet mike” post=22107]Anyone know if there is a similar ban in the ACF, or is this another case of ACF making mistakes and ACO paying for them.
[/quote]
I have not heard anything about it. I’ve also never seen NSWs being used at any point during my ACF career, but hey ho.
The ban also extends to clay pigeon shooting as well. Which is somewhat question able as its a sport. At no point has anyone wanted to support but it is now owned by TG5.
[quote=“talon” post=22106][quote=“redowling” post=22102]
Nope, as they won’t have undergone the full safety & suitability for service testing required to bring them in as Service weapons. They are NSWs - just a pet project and centrally organised via HQAC.[/quote]
I would seek clarification on that one. The BSA Scorpion and Air Arms CZ200 have their own official cadet manual, approved by the SASC, which details how they should be used, as opposed to proper NSW that would not have such a manual.[/quote]
The manual may well be approved by SASC; doesn’t mean the weapon has undergone the appropriate tests to make it a service weapon. If it had, it would have an L-number.