Excuse the CCF-centred ignorance here but what’s going to happen to ATC shooting when the no. 8 rifle is withdrawn and, probably, not replaced?
CCFs will have L98A2 with the L41A2 subcalibre adaptor. Nasty but it will work. Most of us will probably privately purchase .22 rifles in practice.
Will you all be forced onto air rifle unless your squadron is well off?
Asking partly because of the opportunity to offer our privately-purchased .22s and range to local ATC units which would provide me with an even better justification for the capital expenditure and running costs!
the tone of this post implies a final cut off date for No8 shooting has been set…is this true?
if so it is the first i have heard about it - is this a hyperthetical question for when the time comes?
What i have heard isthat “sooner or later” the RAF will stop supporting the No8 rifle…but have been hearing that for as long as there has been a Queen on our throne.
i have also heard that there are enough “spares” around that if purchased by the MOD/RAF/ACO that would maintain the No8 shooting for another generation (30+ years)
what i havent heard is when the No8 is going out of service or what the likely alternatives are, officially, however have heard plenty of suggestions from the CFAV which would include prrivately purchased weapons
The cadet shooting policy released a couple of years ago speculated that when it became too uneconomical to maintain the No8s they should be replaced with an off the shelf rifle - preferably one that is modern and light!
This another old chestnut that goes back at least 30 years and pops up every 3-4 years.
As a cadet in the early 80s we were told to be gentle with the N°8s as spare parts were getting scarce. This then morphed into not enough armourers to service them and then no more new parts/rifles and rifles would be cannablised. But then were are ‘told’ they’ve found loads all in the waxed wrapping.
Then on top of these ‘problems’ we stated getting all the media driven claptrap about teaching youngsters to kill, by training them to fire rifles, which resulted a minority of parents not letting their children shoot, a similar phenomenom to a spate of no photos a few years ago.
What is needed a proper release from HQAC to say exactly what is happening which could either be positive or negative and then go with it, rather than the standard rumour grapevine and administrative tinkering. If this means no service supported maintenance/supply of weapons fine, at least it allows squadrons to go down the private weapon and FAC route (which I beleive is what happened years ago) so be it. If then we lose in one foul swoop a large chunk of service tinkering. I wonder if we only had private weapons would the only move arms/ammo with 4 Officers have had any effect. My .22s and ammo have been lodged on another sqn for many years as the moving became more onerous for a couple of hours on a parade night. If we went ‘private’ it would or should, I believe, become easier. Well that’s unless our paper shufflers can’t keep their noses out.
What you are in effect proposing GHE is that .22 shooting should be “civilianised” whilst still keeping it within the ACO. I personally feel that would be an good policy. The links that used to exist between rifle clubs and cadet units might then be re-established to the benefit of all.
I really cannot believe that the provisions of the Firearms Act are judged to be so deficient in this area that they require the burden of the additional regulation added by the MoD.
What you are in effect proposing GHE is that .22 shooting should be “civilianised” whilst still keeping it within the ACO. I personally feel that would be an good policy. The links that used to exist between rifle clubs and cadet units might then be re-established to the benefit of all.[/quote]
Yes exactly that.
My mates with FACs are subject to the police turning up at their houses as and when they like to spot check their weapons and ammunition storage. Two of my mates also load their own cartridges, which has another level of regulation. The police spot checks seem to be the only downside. However they have all got home alarms and separate alarms on their ‘gun cabinets’, which I think they said they have to have. So there may be a cost to CWCs there.
You would like to think the Firarms Act is sufficient, however given the fact that HQAC seems to be over-run by public sector administrators as opposed to people with a bit more of a grip on reality, I couldn’t see them not interfering.
Do you not have security inspections for your no. 8 storage at ATC sqns then? We are subject to MI section inspections but we do store other calibres.
What I ‘know’ is that the consultation on the replacement of the no. 8 rifle has been cancelled. I agree this isn’t really news, but I can also report that 8 of our 18 no. 8 rifles were recently withdrawn (leaving us enough for our 8-lane range and two spares, so I can’t really whinge) to be used as spares/for spare parts to support other no. 8 rifles. If other CCFs had similar surpluses that might keep the no. 8 going a bit longer. What I ‘think’ is certain is that there will be no military replacement, so we could go down the civilian route. That said, we don’t as a CCF need a FAC to own private .22 rifles as long as they are on our SSR and belong to the unit on the UIN, not to the civilian/school side of the equation. (I guess that means your CivCom can’t own them - and I seem to recall Sqns don’t have a UIN? would Wing have to hold them?)
Yes you have periodic inspections, but the bobbies can call at anytime so I’ve been told, whereas we invariably get some notice from Wing Staff who normally carry out the inspections. You also have to do your own checks.
Not sure on the finer points, but could a squadron be licensed as a club, thus there is no individual ownership as such?
Never had a visit at other than renewal or change of address in the last 40 years. In fact, the only statutory rights of inspection at other times that the police have are under S17(7) for Approved Rifle Clubs and S40(4) relating to Registered Firearms Dealers (RFD). S49(2) covers access by the police to firearms in transit; although primarily intended to cover arms traffic. Other than that the police require a warrant under S46(1) or to satify the criteria of S47(1) giving them power of inspection in a public place. if they cannot comply it becomes an unlawful “fishing trip”. Using the “Production of Certificate” provisions of S48(1) will not wash.
They may wish to politely enquire as to the authority for these inspections, under which section of the Firearms Act are the police operating?