Airsoft Artillery

[thewallhitme]

Yes, it's much more sensible to just post spam.

 

 

Now, if you have some actual EVIDENCE to support your assertion that "it'll be okay" I'd really love to hear it because, so far, you've said nothing worthwhile.

 

the post above yours isnt spam either?

 

and nice one, i just said i wasnt going to dispute it anymore...

[shibisueka]

What about firing tennis balls? Sure, they can hurt if they hit you, but not too much.

Plus, if they ignore the balls landing nearby them, just fire more - they're inexpensive!

 

Just throwing that out there. Unless the whole purpose was to actually hit the person with BBs or something.

[mattyw]

I must admit, I like my nerf gizmos.

I recently built a nifty "LAW" that shoots sponge tennis balls and nobody seems to mind it but it's only ever used in a scripted way.

As I say, we'll have a "grenadier" who has to be protected until he can reach a target and then fire an orange sponge ball at it to destroy it.

 

As you say, though, even something like that, if left to rage out of control, could easily cause an injury if some numpty fired one that landed in gravel and then decided it'd be smart to fire it again without cleaning all the crud off the ball.

 

to be far the sponge tennis ball idea might work and what we do at are game site is that if a piro gos off we have a 5 m rule wich is the blast radus even if you dont get hit by one of the bbs so it could work if you fill it with talcom powder when it hits and you know where it is.

[thewallhitme]

What about firing tennis balls? Sure, they can hurt if they hit you, but not too much.

Plus, if they ignore the balls landing nearby them, just fire more - they're inexpensive!

 

Just throwing that out there. Unless the whole purpose was to actually hit the person with BBs or something.

 

thats pretty much what ive been saying and it hasnt gone down very well so far.

[dusseldorf101]

thats pretty much what ive been saying and it hasnt gone down very well so far.

 

For what its worth dude, despite the shortsightedness of some other people, ive been listening to what you've been saying and ive deffinately taken on bored what youve been saying.

 

For the recoiless rifle, im going to use 204 madbull shells. However for the mortar, im going to use your tennis ball/sponge ball idea!! For a range, precision attack firing a physical object such as a ball is more then ideal and very logical and intelligent. So thank you very much for that piece its has been a great help

 

 

Ryan

[Azulsky]

All math issues aside the the bazookas that use 12 gram CO2 charges fire the nerf howlers at a very reasonable velocity. Catching them at 100ft is doable if you are in the line of fire and past that a person might as well have thrown a football.

 

Most likely there is a practical way for a smoke marker round to be shot out, nerfs as well. I dont think bb's can be done well they will not be falling in a close enough pattern to mimic a mortar neither will they retain enough energy to be felt. I believe BigEd has successfully done both at events with excellent results.

 

 

Simulation of artillery is much easier at fixed opfor events where one side is event staff or at least run by event staff. Preplaced pyro can be done effectively and timed easily with noisemaking charges set off at the firebase. You have the participants call in the grid coordinates which the LO/Marshall checks, and then the opfor can be made aware of their impending death before "shots out". You have the Opfor with their own charges to simulate the impact of the round(simple fireworks mortar shell stripped of the booster charge) and they light and toss it in a close but safe direction and they all fall limp on the ground.

[thewallhitme]

For what its worth dude, despite the shortsightedness of some other people, ive been listening to what you've been saying and ive deffinately taken on bored what youve been saying.

 

 

Ryan

 

well cheers mate. its disapointing that some people would not consider other peoples ideas to make something work, but rather constantly beat the same horse saying it cant be done. id love to see some kind of working artillery in an airsoft game.

 

edit: whoops, wrong quote.

[dusseldorf101]

Right Okayy getting Back on topic.

 

Thanks to this thread i've narrowed the best piece of artillery that could feesibly be applied to an airsoft game and still function well is the recoiless rifle. As such i've now put the gears in motion for the build and have purchased a 110mm PVC pipe in order to make the barrel. Soon as that arrives i can start building

 

In case any of you are in doubt here is what a recoiless rifle looks like:

[dusseldorf101]

And of course this is the nuclear recoiless rifle

[Stealthbomber]

For what its worth dude, despite the shortsightedness of some other people....

 

well cheers mate. its disapointing that some people would not consider other peoples ideas to make something work, but rather constantly beat the same horse saying....

 

You guys need to stop feeling so sorry for yourselves and understand that what I'm saying is not opinion.

I'm telling you what the law is.

 

You can't just say "Oh, I could throw summat further than that so it can't be dangerous".

[thewallhitme]

im a step away from fingers-in-ears-ignoring you. but what the hell; if i can throw something at a distance, and someone on the other end isnt going to be hurt by it, then how can it be dangerous? my point isnt that i can throw it far, my point is that it wont cause any damage if it hits someone. you seem to be having trouble seeing the difference there. if this law was true then how come people can use upgraded sniper rifles which you have said are illigal? clearly there is something wrong with your argument if the law is being broken.

 

btw i dont feel sorry for myself... try not to take it down to a personal level shall we?

 

OT: the recoiless rifle seems to be a damn good idea. its mobile, but not soo mobile that it would be unfair. would be quite good for bunker busting etc. you would need a set up that meant that you needed more than one person to carry it, ie make it heavy/ cumbersome- which i think it naturally would be.

[Stealthbomber]

im a step away from fingers-in-ears-ignoring you. but what the hell; if i can throw something at a distance, and someone on the other end isnt going to be hurt by it, then how can it be dangerous? my point isnt that i can throw it far, my point is that it wont cause any damage if it hits someone. you seem to be having trouble seeing the difference there. if this law was true then how come people can use upgraded sniper rifles which you have said are illigal? clearly there is something wrong with your argument if the law is being broken.

 

btw i dont feel sorry for myself... try not to take it down to a personal level shall we?

 

Now you're just being obtuse.

 

The fact is that the law uses muzzle velocity to define legality.

This is actually a pretty smart idea because it does what you're failing to do.

It considers the worse-case-scenario in relation to injury.

 

As I've said before, if you throw something 20-odd metres it might not hurt anybody at that range.

However, if somebody sticks their head up right in front of you when you throw it, it's gonna hurt them a lot.

That is why muzzle energy is the important factor.

 

As to the legalities, there's nothing wrong with my opinion. The problem is simply that retailers often ignore the law.

As I already said, there are plenty of full-auto guns available in the UK that shoot at greater than 1.35J muzzle energy and, technically, that makes them section 5 firearms.

 

There's plenty of stuff in airsoft that might, technically, be illegal.

That really doesn't bother me though.

I'd be far more concerned about practical issues.

Moscarts, although technically illegal, are not really dangerous so I'm not that bothered about them.

Launching a pyro 20-odd metres or more is not only illegal but dangerous and dumb.

 

To put this in context, I'm currently allowing a thread to continue even though it's discussing illegal things on the assumption that the advice I'm offering will be heeded.

If I start to think that my advice is being ignored, and you're intent on blatantly ignoring the law regardless of what I say, I'll just close this thread.

[thewallhitme]

Now you're just being obtuse.

fair enough

 

The fact is that the law uses muzzle velocity to define legality.

This is actually a pretty smart idea because it does what you're failing to do.

It considers the worse-case-scenario in relation to injury.

considering the project hasnt been made yet, i cant comment on the muzzle velocity it will put ou.

 

As I've said before, if you throw something 20-odd metres it might not hurt anybody at that range.

However, if somebody sticks their head up right in front of you when you throw it, it's gonna hurt them a lot.

That is why muzzle energy is the important factor.

same thing goes for upgraded sniper rifles with an MED no?

 

As to the legalities, there's nothing wrong with my opinion. The problem is simply that retailers often ignore the law.

As I already said, there are plenty of full-auto guns available in the UK that shoot at greater than 1.35J muzzle energy and, technically, that makes them section 5 firearms.

there is nothing wrong with anyones opinion.

 

There's plenty of stuff in airsoft that might, technically, be illegal.

That really doesn't bother me though.

I'd be far more concerned about practical issues.

Moscarts, although technically illegal, are not really dangerous so I'm not that bothered about them.

Launching a pyro 20-odd metres or more is not only illegal but dangerous and dumb.

launching a pyro may be illigal, but nobody has confirmed what the gun will actually fire. second part is opinion which you are entitled to.

 

To put this in context, I'm currently allowing a thread to continue even though it's discussing illegal things on the assumption that the advice I'm offering will be heeded.

If I start to think that my advice is being ignored, and you're intent on blatantly ignoring the law regardless of what I say, I'll just close this thread.

keep doing a great job

 

i dont mean to sound confrontational, difficult, or anything like that. i just think that we may be jumping the gun (oops, excuse the pun) in some areas. further discussion and practical research needs to be done before we declare this as dangerous and illigal.

 

edit: obviously, my bits are in bold.

[Stealthbomber]

edit: obviously, my bits are in bold.

To address your points in no particular order...

 

Sniper rifles are not illegal to own because they have muzzle energy of less than 16J.

16J is the upper limit for muzzle energy of ANY unlicensed firearm.

 

Sites that allow the use of sniper rifles more powerful than 1J do so on the basis that it IS not illegal to shoot somebody with a >1J weapon as long as all parties are in agreement about it.

As I already said, it's the same ethic that allows people to participate in martial arts without having each other arrested for assault.

 

Any mortar that you design absolutely MUST mave muzzle energy of less than 16J.

This is not me being narrow-minded or whatever. It's me telling you how to stay out of jail.

 

Beyond that, there is a certain amount of discretion required.

Thing is, as we've already seen, sniper rifles shoot at >1J and have restrictions imposed.

They shoot with muzzle energy around 2.5J maximum.

That's still an awful long way from the 10-15J you'd need to launch a 20g projectile any distance.

Is it likely that a site that requires MEDs for a 2.5J gun is likely to be happy for people to use weapons shooting with 4 times that power?

 

The law is not a matter of opinion.

select-fire weapons (or any that shoot more than one shot per trigger pull) are legally restricted to 1.35J maximum muzzle energy. Above that they become a section 5 firearm.

That means that, technically, any >1.35J AEG is illegal and every moscart is illegal.

That's NOT opinion. It's a statement of british law.

 

As to shooting pyro's at people, have you ever done any kind of formal risk-assessment?

If you can justify shooting any kind of payload-bearing or explosive device in order to gain insurance for your site I imagine you would have a dazzling career in law in front of you.

[thewallhitme]

To address your points in no particular order...

 

Sniper rifles are not illegal to own because they have muzzle energy of less than 16J.

16J is the upper limit for muzzle energy of ANY unlicensed firearm.

thats not what i meant. i meant what if someone stuck their head up in front of a sniper withing their MED. becasue we have no idea what ammunition will be used, and what range will be achieved, we CANNOT determine that this will have a muzzle velocity of greated than 16j.

 

Sites that allow the use of sniper rifles more powerful than 1J do so on the basis that it IS not illegal to shoot somebody with a >1J weapon as long as all parties are in agreement about it.

As I already said, it's the same ethic that allows people to participate in martial arts without having each other arrested for assault.

if all parties were in agreement to it, then surely this weapon, so long as it didnt fire over 16j, would not be illigal.

 

Any mortar that you design absolutely MUST mave muzzle energy of less than 16J.

This is not me being narrow-minded or whatever. It's me telling you how to stay out of jail.

yeah yeah ok, everyone gets it about the 16j thing. we all have done since the first time you said it.

 

Beyond that, there is a certain amount of discretion required.

Thing is, as we've already seen, sniper rifles shoot at >1J and have restrictions imposed.

They shoot with muzzle energy around 2.5J maximum.

That's still an awful long way from the 10-15J you'd need to launch a 20g projectile any distance.

Is it likely that a site that requires MEDs for a 2.5J gun is likely to be happy for people to use weapons shooting with 4 times that power?

neither me or you can say for sure. it would depend on the context of how it is used.

 

The law is not a matter of opinion.

select-fire weapons (or any that shoot more than one shot per trigger pull) are legally restricted to 1.35J maximum muzzle energy. Above that they become a section 5 firearm.

That means that, technically, any >1.35J AEG is illegal and every moscart is illegal.

That's NOT opinion. It's a statement of british law.

ok, but people still have them.

 

As to shooting pyro's at people, have you ever done any kind of formal risk-assessment?

If you can justify shooting any kind of payload-bearing or explosive device in order to gain insurance for your site I imagine you would have a dazzling career in law in front of you.

ok mate,where have i said we would be firing pyros? ive always been talking about throwing pyros, or firing somehting of the same weight. you seem to be missing that point, every single time i have brought it up.

 

your main point here seems to be that this "thing" would be horrifically dangerous and illigal. seeing as how it hasnt been manufactured yet, or even the final design been confirmed, how can you come to such a conclusion?

 

edit: spelling

[Stealthbomber]

Please stop inserting replies into a quoted post. it makes it MUCH harder to respond.

 

It can be estimated what power will be required to launch a projectile by calculation.

A tennis ball, for example, weighs 80g and we can pretty easily calculate that it will take roughly 40J to shoot it 20m.

 

Equally, we can easily work out that any projectile that has a payload of 100-odd BBs will weigh at least 15g (0.12 x 100) even if it's merely a bunch of BBs wrapped in tissue paper.

Using the same calculations we find that this projectile would require almost exactly 16J to shoot 20m.

That shows that 15g is about the maximum projectile weight you can use and that doesn't leave much room for any kind of mechanism to disperse the BBs on landing.

 

I mention pyro's because some people suggested shooting smoke grenades out of mortars and also suggested using an explosive to disperse the payload of a mortar round and I wanted to highlight the intrinsic dangers of such a system.

 

The other point is that although sniper rifles have MEDs, a risk assessment would show that, even at point-blank range, a 2.5J hit from a BB is, realistically, unlikely to be harmful, even though the government says otherwise.

By contrast, a point-blank hit from a projectile the size of a ping-pong ball (let's say the size of a pile of 100 BBs) would definitely be powerful enough to disconnect a retina, damage a larynx or burst an eardrum and possibly cause spinal damage.

 

Again, if you can risk-assess those possibilities to mitigate them, I suspect there's a law firm in need of you somewhere.

 

Which reminds me, I'd appreciate it if you respond to my questions as well.

I asked you if you've ever carried out any formal risk assessments. Please respond.

[thewallhitme]

why no, i havent carried out a formal risk assesment.

[DrKalinka]

OK! Since this obviously have gone out of hand...

 

I used the FPS calculator on this very page to figure out this:

 

15g projectile (this being those 100x 0,12g bbs) fired at 150 FPS will be less than 16J.

 

Now. Fire these out of a discarding sabot, which obviously is not a projectile, and you have now directed the shot. Obviously aimed at 45 degrees. I have no idea how far that will go, but there you have a benchmark.

 

Stealthbomber: The formula you are using is to calculate how much energy you would need to move an object a certain distance in a HORISONTAL line. And this is going to be fired indirectly, so the formula does not apply to this specific incident.

[dusseldorf101]

Please stop inserting replies into a quoted post. it makes it MUCH harder to respond.

 

It can be estimated what power will be required to launch a projectile by calculation.

A tennis ball, for example, weighs 80g and we can pretty easily calculate that it will take roughly 40J to shoot it 20m.

 

Equally, we can easily work out that any projectile that has a payload of 100-odd BBs will weigh at least 15g (0.12 x 100) even if it's merely a bunch of BBs wrapped in tissue paper.

Using the same calculations we find that this projectile would require almost exactly 16J to shoot 20m.

That shows that 15g is about the maximum projectile weight you can use and that doesn't leave much room for any kind of mechanism to disperse the BBs on landing.

 

I mention pyro's because some people suggested shooting smoke grenades out of mortars and also suggested using an explosive to disperse the payload of a mortar round and I wanted to highlight the intrinsic dangers of such a system.

 

The other point is that although sniper rifles have MEDs, a risk assessment would show that, even at point-blank range, a 2.5J hit from a BB is, realistically, unlikely to be harmful, even though the government says otherwise.

By contrast, a point-blank hit from a projectile the size of a ping-pong ball (let's say the size of a pile of 100 BBs) would definitely be powerful enough to disconnect a retina, damage a larynx or burst an eardrum and possibly cause spinal damage.

 

Again, if you can risk-assess those possibilities to mitigate them, I suspect there's a law firm in need of you somewhere.

 

Which reminds me, I'd appreciate it if you respond to my questions as well.

I asked you if you've ever carried out any formal risk assessments. Please respond.

 

You're really starting to sound like a broken record!!

 

No one is trying to launch any projectiles over legal limits!! Ive already calculated it for you?? Thats proof that it is WELL within the law!! So stop quoting it like its gospel!! We get it, youve said your piece, we've taken it on board, no one has disputed that it IS the law and ive proven that this system is 100% un-negotiably within the law!! No single BB has more than 1.28J!! Fact!! That is physics and it doesnt change!!

 

Yes that may be the required energy to shoot a tennis ball, however that is NOT how much energy the tennis ball has!! That is the energy required to accelerate a tennis ball to that velocity!! Otherwise surely we would have a load of dead tennis players rolling around according to 'The Law'

 

I have made my intentions clear!! I AM NOT FIRING PYRO!!! Please stop bringing it up!! I fully understand the legal issues associated with firing any form of projectile and i equally would expect this system to be used against me as any other player!! So why would i put myself in danger?? T'would be pointless, recless and stupid and i can assure you that i wouldnt do that!!

 

You've kind of contradicted yourself here as youve said "even at point-blank range, a 2.5J hit from a BB is, realistically, unlikely to be harmful". So im actually not going to say anything more because i couldnt have put it quite so eloquently myself.

 

Sorry but im gonna have to add that the physics doesnt support your arguement so that is going to have to be ruled out!! Also a ping pong ball is more elastic than a BB so a the total energy transfer would be less so your analagy is incorrect, also the particles are not joined so therefore the maximum transferable energy is actually only the maximum energy held in ONE BB not 100!! They are not joined so therefore the do not have energy's that simply 'add' up!! Otherwise if some one was to spray you with 100 BBs on full auto then by your arguement i might break my spine??

 

And I HAVE carried out a formal risk assessment for a stage production company to highlight the risks of 15 year old students operating lighting equipment on a gantry which i can assure you has INFINITYLY more risks involved and far far far more legal issues to be resolved than someones backyard toy that fires BB's within the legal limit.

 

Now i do not wish to have you posting any further comments about the LAW. Enough people have heard what you have had to say. We agree with you. We are not disputing you. However this thread is NOT about the law, it is about a recoilless rifle project which i am taking on, so if you please could we stay on topic??

 

Now going back to the topic i have had a confirmation email from my supplier to let me know the 110mm pipes are on their way Work can now begin on the firing mechanism. Now i was haing a few issues with this as ive made a prototype, however its so crude im embarassed to put it up so further refinement is required here. I'll keep you posted how it goes I want to keep it as real to the real steel as possible so im hoping to make it load in the same way as the real one like this http://img197.imageshack.us/i/reecoiless.jpg/

 

 

Ryan

[dusseldorf101]

You guys need to stop feeling so sorry for yourselves and understand that what I'm saying is not opinion.

I'm telling you what the law is.

 

You can't just say "Oh, I could throw summat further than that so it can't be dangerous".

 

TBH its not me i feel sorry for. Its the wallhitme that your utterly laying into and with with a really weak arguement?? And we know its 'the law' however NOBODY is in breach of it?? So theres actually no need to bring it up and further more its off topic. And i have proved to you countless times that it isnt dangerous as have others yet you ignore it every time and shoot people down with your unfounded comments and poor level of physics??

 

Tell you what, i will build this. Then i will make a youtube video. PM you the link. Then i will prove to you with a large number of tests upto and including this being fired at myself from point blank range to prove to you that the only reason it will hurt more than an ordinary BB is because it will be a larger volume of the same pain!! A very short lived pain that is by far much much much less painful than a day paintballing!!

 

If i end up in A&E or with the fuzz banging on my door, then you can say i told you so!! But until then either come up with a better arguement than, its the law or because i said so!!

[Stealthbomber]

You're really starting to sound like a broken record!!

I'm sorry I sound like a broken record.

We'll see why in a minute.

 

No one is trying to launch any projectiles over legal limits!! Ive already calculated it for you?? Thats proof that it is WELL within the law!! So stop quoting it like its gospel!! We get it, youve said your piece, we've taken it on board, no one has disputed that it IS the law and ive proven that this system is 100% un-negotiably within the law!! No single BB has more than 1.28J!! Fact!! That is physics and it doesnt change!!

And there it is.

 

Muzzle energy is related to, erm, the energy of the projectile(s) discharged from a weapon.

 

You can't launch a thousand BBs out of a mortar with muzzle energy of 1,000J and say "No single BB has more than 1.28J!! Fact!!"

 

For the umpteenth time, you're definitely restricted to 16J which means that your 100 0.12g BBs would all be restricted to roughly 100fps each (or 0.0625J) each.

Having said that, according to the Firearm Act a moscart launcher is, technically, a full-auto weapon (more than one shot per trigger pull) so it might be restricted to 1.35J maximum.

That'd mean your 100 0.12g BBs can fire at round about 50fps each.

 

Yes that may be the required energy to shoot a tennis ball, however that is NOT how much energy the tennis ball has!! That is the energy required to accelerate a tennis ball to that velocity!! Otherwise surely we would have a load of dead tennis players rolling around according to 'The Law'

Tennis balls are not fired out of guns so the Firearms Act does not apply to them.

 

This stuff isn't really hard to understand.

 

I fully understand the legal issues associated with firing any form of projectile and i equally would expect this system to be used against me as any other player!! So why would i put myself in danger?? T'would be pointless, recless and stupid and i can assure you that i wouldnt do that!!

That's not really relevant though is it?

 

I have a motorbike that's built to travel at 160mph.

I'd be quite happy to ride it at 140mph and I'd be quite happy for other people to ride motorbikes at 140mph too.

Trouble is, the world is full of idiots and, as a result, if people rode motorbikes on the road at 140mph there'd be lots of accidents.

So, they make laws that say you can only ride a motorbike at 70mph.

 

Sorry but im gonna have to add that the physics doesnt support your arguement so that is going to have to be ruled out!! Also a ping pong ball is more elastic than a BB so a the total energy transfer would be less so your analagy is incorrect, also the particles are not joined so therefore the maximum transferable energy is actually only the maximum energy held in ONE BB not 100!! They are not joined so therefore the do not have energy's that simply 'add' up!! Otherwise if some one was to spray you with 100 BBs on full auto then by your arguement i might break my spine??

I was using a ping-pong ball as an example of the size of projectile a heap of BBs would have. Nothing more.

 

If you're talking about a moscart, I agree with you. If all the BBs are firing like a scattergun type thing then the energy is, indeed dissipated.

 

I was, however, responding to the suggestion about wrapping a bunch of BBs in tissue or tinfoil (or having any single projectile).

In that case, the BBs are all touching and you will get a cumulative effect from the force of the projectile.

 

Now i do not wish to have you posting any further comments about the LAW. Enough people have heard what you have had to say. We agree with you. We are not disputing you. However this thread is NOT about the law, it is about a recoilless rifle project which i am taking on, so if you please could we stay on topic??

Well, in that case, stop trying to dispute what I'm telling you.

Just say "Thanks for the input" and move on.

And, for my part, if I think this is discussing anything illegal, I'll just delete it without a further comment.

 

TBH its not me i feel sorry for. Its the wallhitme that your utterly laying into and with with a really weak arguement??

I'm surprised you feel sorry for him.

He's the guy who was talking about launching big heavy objects out of a mortar while, at the time, you were telling me that you absolutely understood that any such projectile would be unacceptable and that you thought the only suitable method would be to launch a cloud of BBs as from a moscart.

 

*EDIT*

Just to be clear, if you're planning on some kind of a system that DOES shoot a cloud of BBs out of a launcher, or even some kind of sponge projectile, then I'm totally behind you as far as possible.

I sympathise over the legalities and I'm sure a lot of the "technicalities" can be overlooked in the interests of producing a viable project.

 

My only concern is with the ongoing discussion of solid projectiles or with bundles of BBs wrapped in tinfoil.

I know that creates legal issues but, more importantly, in practical terms I'm sure (from your earlier posts) that you're aware of the very real dangers of throwing heavy objects around if they accidentally hit somebody at close range.

 

Genuinely, best of luck with your project IF it can be made in a way that's safe from a practical POV.

[BigEd]

I was unaware of the strict Joule laws in the UK regarding shot power. There is some enlightening information and math posted here.

 

In the US we are privileged to have unlimited power. I clocked tennis balls from 200 to 440 fps, which places them in the 104 to 503 Joule range (56 gram tennis ball). I can also "juice" a ball by dunking it in water which can add 20+ fps (The additional weight of the water is lost in flight). Any shot to the head or torso at point blank range would be instant death. Powerful cannons are for the mature and responsible operators.

 

Direct fire guns are different story. Nerfs don't like high power guns. Nerfs distort, squish, bend and turn inside out at higher pressure. I shoot tennis balls at hard targets like a bunker, building or vehicle, and the firing area should be open space. Make sure the target is 75+ feet away, have a clear firing path, gas up, load projectile, check clear firing path again, and fire.

 

I believe BigEd has successfully done both at events with excellent results.

 

I have a "blast" at every event I bring them to. At fields with open spaces, fields, lakes etc, rubber necking (watching the rounds in flight) takes place on both sides allowing for troops to maneuver quickly. In wooded areas I punch holes through the canopy with dixie cups filled with bb's or pea stone. Then I can shoot tennis balls or water balloons through the hole.

 

Always respect the muzzle energy.

 

///ed///

[teflon don]

You can't launch a thousand BBs out of a mortar with muzzle energy of 1,000J and say "No single BB has more than 1.28J!! Fact!!"

i don't want to start an argument here but

they calculate shotguns with one bb

while in reality it shoots 6 its kinda the same thing

a shot gun can easily shoot 7 joules and still it wont hurt like a 7 joule sniper

Tennis balls are not fired out of guns so the Firearms Act does not apply to them

they do make tennis ball guns (for training tennis) are these considered a lethal weapon

they are used to fire tennis balls directly at people

 

anyway we are not here to give legal advice

he will do it no mater what we say

i would say go for it test it out on your self and see how it works

it can also inspire other guys to make such a thing there might be some guys here that like the idea and who aren't restricted by law

[Stealthbomber]

i don't want to start an argument here but

they calculate shotguns with one bb

while in reality it shoots 6 its kinda the same thing

a shot gun can easily shoot 7 joules and still it wont hurt like a 7 joule sniper

Eh?

Who?

What?

So?

 

*EDIT*

Just to be clear, are you actually trying to ADD anything to this thread or is this just a petty attempt to prolong the legal nonsense?

Unless you actually have something to add to the thread, please don't bother trying to prolong the legal nonsense.

 

Just thought I'd reword that so it wasn't a question that requires an answer.

[AllGunzblazin]

teflon don is right though...