Airsoft Webley Mark VI .455 Revolver

[scorch]

 

I must admit that I am unfamiliar with the cas system but the UK law as written applies to "air weapons" which airsoft guns are not. Check the APS shotgun news thread for more info but, as far as I'm aware/understand the same principle applies to moscarts, aps/tanaka shotgun shells, etc

 

 

Correct. Same reason you can walk into your high street gun shop and walk out same day with a CO2 powered "CP99" in black, but can't do the same with an airsoft P99. They're governed by different legislation.

[Skarclaw]

It is something to do with how the round works.

 

 

Sort of. 

 

Here's where we discussed it previously: http://arniesairsoft.co.uk/forums/index.php?/topic/211824-new-aps-guns-like-a-friggen-shotgun-too/page-3 

 

The short version is (in my non-legally trained opinion!!) is that we can discount the idea of the "self contained gas cartridge" as that specifically applies to a "air rifle, air gun or air pistol"  

 

The pertinent bit is what is considered "specially dangerous" which means "it can be so converted without any special skill on the part of the person converting it and the work involved in converting it does not require equipment or tools other than such as are in common use by persons carrying out works of construction and maintenance in their own homes."

 

The hammer strike (as opposed to a "push" like wa-shan, moscart shells) is a potential worry. Was a cas ever successfully converted?  cheers

[FireKnife]

The hammer strike (as opposed to a "push" like wa-shan, moscart shells) is a potential worry. Was a cas ever successfully converted?  cheers

 

I think there was a big scare when in some part of East Asia it was reported that they 'might' or 'could' be converted and they were discontinued. As I said I don't think enough even made it into the UK to warrant anyone looking into it.

 

In fact I have only ever seen two anywhere in the UK, one was on Zero In being sold and one was at a game ages ago just around the time of the manufacturer recall and discontinuation.

 

But the idea of hammer fired over a thick rod poking a pressure pin does seem to have something to do with it. Again it may be due to the fact that UK wise there are few here and they were recalled bar personal imports?

 

'FireKnife'

[renegadecow]

But I thought they don't use firing pins? I believe the hammer hits a rod off center from where the firing pin normally would be which pushes the whole cartridge. The actual release valve is up front, pushed by a step inside the cylinder like a reversed moscart. Sure, one can drill through the back an put in a live firing pin, but there's still the matter of the cartridge blowing out sideways due to the plastic cylinder. AFAIK none were made to fire real live ammunition, not even by the police for testing who speculated that it could be done.

[BigAl]

Police / Government don't worry about minor details like fact!

[QQexDERA]

Sort of. 

 

Here's where we discussed it previously: http://arniesairsoft.co.uk/forums/index.php?/topic/211824-new-aps-guns-like-a-friggen-shotgun-too/page-3 

 

The short version is (in my non-legally trained opinion!!) is that we can discount the idea of the "self contained gas cartridge" as that specifically applies to a "air rifle, air gun or air pistol"  

 

The pertinent bit is what is considered "specially dangerous" which means "it can be so converted without any special skill on the part of the person converting it and the work involved in converting it does not require equipment or tools other than such as are in common use by persons carrying out works of construction and maintenance in their own homes."

 

The hammer strike (as opposed to a "push" like wa-shan, moscart shells) is a potential worry. Was a cas ever successfully converted?  cheers

Dunno about a Cassiopeia - but a single Asahi M40 (which uses a self-contained shell design that pre-dates the Cassiopeia system by well over a decade and a half) was converted to fire .22lr. Once the Japanese government got wind of it the brown stuff hit the fan and they tracked down as many of them as they could and destroyed them, and they've been paranoid about the situation arising again. 

[Aitch]

The cassyopea system DOES NOT work by hammer pin strike, the pin on the hammer is spring loaded and folds into the hammer when it is fired, the shell has a collar at THE FRONT of the cylinder where the bb end of the shell sits that the shell pushes against when the hammer strikes, only the fill valve is on the rear of the shell, you would need a real steel hammer/barrel/cylinder/hammer spring and rounds basically an entire pistol making the exercise pointless much like the uninformed ###### posts being spewed out on the subject,

This isn't the first time I've explained how the cassyopea system works, it was banned in Japan on the basis it could chamber a .45 round nothing else, as on my previous post on the subject I'll reiterate, I have owned/repaired one in the past, I have rebuilt the inner workings at THE FRONT of the cylinder that release the gas from the shell.

[PureSilver]

That's all well and good, but it doesn't seem to me that it specifies anywhere in the legislation how the self-contained gas cartridge system should work; instead, it merely requires that it involves self-contained gas cartridges. Which the Cassiopeia system definitely does. From my read of the Act it's irrelevant that it doesn't use a firing pin strike to trigger them.
 
Whether or not the Cassiopeia system contravenes that piece of the Act is first subject to whether or not the replicas that use it are "any air rifle, air gun or air pistol", which I think we all agree they aren't, for the same reason most airsoft guns aren't considered air weapons (absence of lethality). If they aren't an "air gun", then they can't be an "air gun [...] which uses [...] a self-contained gas cartridge system".

[renegadecow]

So technically they can bring the Brocock back if they tune it down and use bbs.

[Skarclaw]

So technically they can bring the Brocock back if they tune it down and use bbs.

 

Not so sure. Unless you significantly altered the design I think they would still class the brocock as a "specially dangerous weapon" as above  

[ED-SKaR]

Although I have no proof, I was under the impression that the moscart was specifically excepted from the law, reasons given the method of pushing rather than striking. This would mean that any re-design of the brocock design would still require specific exception.

[Skarclaw]

Although I have no proof, I was under the impression that the moscart was specifically excepted from the law, reasons given the method of pushing rather than striking. This would mean that any re-design of the brocock design would still require specific exception.

 

I strongly doubt that is the case. 

[PureSilver]

Sorry - it looks like I've been giving bad advice. I was under the impression that the details of the Firearms Act 1982 restricted the category of "readily convertible" to air weapons. That is not the case; the text of the Act reads:

 

1. Control of imitation firearms readily convertible into firearms to which section 1 of the 1968 Act applies.
 

(1) This Act applies to an imitation firearm if—

(a) it has the appearance of being a firearm to which section 1 of the 1968 Act (firearms requiring a firearm certificate) applies; and
(b ) it is so constructed or adapted as to be readily convertible into a firearm to which that section applies.

 

It's therefore clear that being an airsoft gun is not enough to stop a gun being readily convertible, as both RIFs and IFs (using VCRA 2006 definitions) fall under the description of IF (using FA 1982 definitions). So therefore...
 

So technically they can bring the Brocock back if they tune it down and use bbs.

 

No, absolutely not - Skarclaw is right. This problem would never have arisen with today's airsoft guns, because airsoft guns have always been made out of such materials that, as Aitch said, you'd need to recreate basically the entire gun out of stronger ones in order to shoot real bullets, which means that you need special skills and/or rare equipment or tools (s.1(6)(a) and (b ) respectively) to complete the conversion. Unfortunately in the heyday of BACS some manufacturers simply rebarreled real gun designs to make BACS-compatible guns. That meant that the amount of work you need to do to turn a BACS revolver into one that fired real bullets was negligible - either boring out the barrel to .38 calibre, or swapping the cylinder for one that was .22 calibre.

 

They can bring back the Brocock (theoretically speaking) if they make the guns harder to convert to fire live ammunition. Given how illegal BACS guns are today (so illegal that they must be registered on a firearms certificate and cannot be transferred between certificates, so when the certificate lapses (e.g. the owner dies) the gun must be surrendered for destruction) I think it's highly unlikely anyone will, though.

  

I was under the impression that the moscart was specifically excepted from the law

 
Nope.

[GlockworkOrange]

 

Finish looks very nice, it's a shame the cartridges are so small though, I hadn't thought of that until now. Lots of space between each cartridge since the .455 cylinder is so big. 

[hitmanNo2]

Tempting to get one just to try the badass reloading style of the Broken Butterfly in RE4.

[FireKnife]

I do love that 'this is the best bit, BLARG, SHELLS EVERYWHERE' moment.

 

I think I would end up using it more like a 'take one round out, pop another in tactical loader' .

 

'FireKnife'

[ED-SKaR]

Looks more like a .38...

 

 

{edit} He says they are smaller than WGs previous shells, presumably the .357 mag, so these are probably SMALLER than a .38 super.

 

Disappointing but I'm not sure I care quite that much. I'm sure the reenactors will be more upset.

 

Also confirmed for WG.

[FireKnife]

{edit} He says they are smaller than WGs previous shells, presumably the .357 mag, so these are probably SMALLER than a .38 super.

 

.38 Special is the common revolver round, 38 Super is a pistol cartridge used in things like 1911s in competitions .

 

Still how much smaller can you go? .32 would be too thin to fit the bb and then have some shell around it. Unless he means shorter which is possible as you did get even shorter .38 rounds but why they don't just make them a WG copy for ease of use I don't know.

 

'FireKnife'

[renegadecow]

Most likely just .38spl judging by the size of the bb hole.

[Solid Snake]

I'm really getting excited, can't wait for a review of this.  If they can do this, then certainly other famous revolvers can't be far behind. I know that SAA's have already been done, but perhaps a Remington 1873 or a Schofield? Maybe even an affordable, skirmishable SAA?   

The pistol in the video certainly looks good, I will give them that. Nice finish, and a realistic shell ejection. Not bad!

[aznriptide859]

Wow. Never considered a British kit, but I kinda want one now.

[scorch]

Schofield

 

One can dream.

 

Also, he says in the video "Asia version" due to markings... Surely the trademarks have lapsed on this by now? 

[ED-SKaR]

.38 Special is the common revolver round, 38 Super is a pistol cartridge used in things like 1911s in competitions .

'FireKnife'

 

Fffuuuuu, I've been looking at 1911s too much ><. I did mean .38 special.

[GlockworkOrange]

The regular WG cartridges woud be too long for the .455 cylinder, so when they say smaller, they must mean shorter rather than thinner. The .455 is short and fat, definitely shorter than a .38 Special.

[FireKnife]

One can dream.

 

Also, he says in the video "Asia version" due to markings... Surely the trademarks have lapsed on this by now? 

 

Probably given that I don't even think anyone makes these nowadays. However I am sure that is just something they say anyway, no matter what the design. Either way I doubt the british Army or whatever is left os Webley is going to be that fussed about it.

 

'FireKnife'