Corporate_Black_Ops Posted November 27, 2004 Report Share Posted November 27, 2004 Kilocalories are listed on food items simply as calories - joules aren't listed like that, a joule already being a significant unit. At the risk of breaking the rules and for the sake of clarity 0.3kJ or 300J would throw a 0.2g BB out at 98,425 fps that's thirty kilometers a second, well in excess of escape velocity, if you shot a gun like that straight up nothing would stop it until it hit a planet, moon or asteroid (and you'd break limbs AFAIK). Link to post Share on other sites
Hissing_Sid Posted November 27, 2004 Report Share Posted November 27, 2004 I beleive we did this in science, when joules or calories are used on boxes itended for the public (ie non scientists) a KJ is merely stated as a J to stop confusion, i believe it was something along those lines, so it is entirely possible that the gun was 0.3 KJ this just meant it was 0.3J. who ever wrote the box obviously didn't know that it was changed to J. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The above is utter b0llocks. Please disregard. Link to post Share on other sites
joeking27 Posted November 27, 2004 Report Share Posted November 27, 2004 Kilocalories are listed on food items simply as calories - joules aren't listed like that, a joule already being a significant unit.At the risk of breaking the rules and for the sake of clarity 0.3kJ or 300J would throw a 0.2g BB out at 98,425 fps that's thirty kilometers a second, well in excess of escape velocity, if you shot a gun like that straight up nothing would stop it until it hit a planet, moon or asteroid (and you'd break limbs AFAIK). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Wha.... its nearer 1.7 km/s Didn't everyone agree that it was typo ages ago? Link to post Share on other sites
Hissing_Sid Posted November 27, 2004 Report Share Posted November 27, 2004 I guess this is what happens when you discuss techie stuff in the noob forum. Link to post Share on other sites
Corporate_Black_Ops Posted November 28, 2004 Report Share Posted November 28, 2004 Doh! Of course you're correct joeking27, 1732.051m/s to be precise... I really ought to think before I post shouldn't I Link to post Share on other sites
Eddie182 Posted November 29, 2004 Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 Just a small point/query. you say 328 is the uk limit yet GZ allow 350 for assault rifles and 500 for snipers. I'm confused?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!? Link to post Share on other sites
HaVoC Posted November 29, 2004 Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 328fps isn't technically the strict UK limit, it's just the commonly accepted limit, and the limit for discussion on these forums. I personally agree with 328fps for AEGs and GBBs but believe bolt-action rifles should be higher (400fps?), but that's a matter for debate elsewhere. Oh yeah, hold off on the punctuation eh??!!?!?!??!!??!! Link to post Share on other sites
nmcabecadas Posted November 29, 2004 Report Share Posted November 29, 2004 The 1 J limit is set by the FSS and any shot above can be prosecuted in court and be supported by the FSS as being able to cause a "more than trivial wound". To be safe, both in the field and in court, its better to respect the limit accepted by the experts from the HO. This isn't just a commonly accepted limit and the comittee responsible for the report also required that such limit become embodied in the law apart from being accepted in court. Link to post Share on other sites
Corporate_Black_Ops Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 I was under the impression that, at present, 1.35J (aka 1 footpound) was the point at which "more than a trivial wound" could be caused at present, thus allowing us the discretionary 10% biven a (currently) volentary 1J limit... in the same way as that is the point at which an AEG becomes a class 5 firearm. Link to post Share on other sites
nmcabecadas Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 1.35J is the limit to become a firearm. The "more than a trivial wound" its a forensic defenition as stated by the FSS and currently set to 1 Joule. This isn't yet the limit in the law to become a firearm, however the recomendation is to be set to 1 J. Link to post Share on other sites
Hairy Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 > 1.35J and full auto fire capability for Section 5. Quite probably burst mode as well - I'm not clear on that. And I've really no idea as to whether the recent ban includes anyting capable of being modified to fire more than one shot.. Single shot, air-powered, and not specifically banned permits a maximum of 6ft-lb for a pistol and 12 ft-lb for a rifle. If you fire these at anyone, you will quite rightly be prosecuted. Link to post Share on other sites
Desolation mkII Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Oops, My Bad just got confused Link to post Share on other sites
nmcabecadas Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 > 1.35J and full auto fire capability for Section 5. Quite probably burst mode as well - I'm not clear on that.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> The law says more than one shot with a single pressure of the trigger, so a 2 round burst is included. Link to post Share on other sites
Corporate_Black_Ops Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Burst mode/multiple shots from a single trigger pull (although IIRC that doesn't include some of the old pepperpots) is Section 4 isn't it, Section 5 must be capable of emptying the entire magazine with a single trigger pull (so you could argue that as long as you use hicaps you're fine... although I wouldn't advise it). Link to post Share on other sites
nmcabecadas Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Just need to shot more than one bullet/projectile with a single pressure of the trigger to become section 5. Link to post Share on other sites
Corporate_Black_Ops Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 OK, I'll have to brush up on the divisions again obviously. That was my last post on the matter, hopefully I've quit before I pick up warnings. Link to post Share on other sites
nmcabecadas Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 OK, I'll have to brush up on the divisions again obviously.That was my last post on the matter, hopefully I've quit before I pick up warnings. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You don't get warnings for that. Just to illustrate what is not allowed in the UK check the Drozd automatic airgun. Its able to shot bursts and is section 5. Link to post Share on other sites
Hissing_Sid Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 Just to illustrate what is not allowed in the UK check the Drozd automatic airgun. Its able to shot bursts and is section 5. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> S'cuse me? You mean the Baikal Drozd MP661k? It's for sale in the UK. It's not full-auto. It's semi. However, given that it's got an electronic trigger, I suspect that a lot of people buy them under the assumption that it's possible to convert them to full-auto fun. http://www.jsramsbottom.com/cgi-bin/jsr.ex.../CO2_baikal.HTM Link to post Share on other sites
nmcabecadas Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 The genuine gun is able to fire bursts. The UK and German version have this feature electronically disabled. Check the site from the maker. Link to post Share on other sites
Hissing_Sid Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 The genuine gun is able to fire bursts. The UK and German version have this feature electronically disabled. Check the site from the maker. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Erm... you just said it was S5 in the UK. I corrected your mistake. Link to post Share on other sites
nmcabecadas Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 I mean the version with burst. Not a mistake because I'm talking about the Standard Drozd, not a country specific version. The problem is that apparently you didn't know that the Drozd is originally a burst weapon. Link to post Share on other sites
Hissing_Sid Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 No. The problem is that you incorrectly stated that it was S5 in the UK. Just leave it at that. You simply picked a poor example of a S5 gun. It might've been clearer if you'd said "The full-auto version of the Drodz...." Link to post Share on other sites
nmcabecadas Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 If I was mentioning the Drozd to illustratea burst weapon under the law, obvioulsy is the auto version. Not difficult to understand that. So, just refrain your comments because its very easy to understand what version I was talking. Only confusion was yours, so stop arguing now. Link to post Share on other sites
HaVoC Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 Eye'm best gun - future the next! Ahem, yes anyway. Back on topic. A good power - 328fps. Surely there isn't a debate left here? Personally I'd say that 400fps is more reasonable for snipers, but everyone can argue that their own way. The limit for THIS SITE is 328fps - straight forward, surely? Link to post Share on other sites
Hissing_Sid Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 Eye'm best gun - future the next! Ahem, yes anyway. Back on topic. A good power - 328fps. Surely there isn't a debate left here? Personally I'd say that 400fps is more reasonable for snipers, but everyone can argue that their own way. The limit for THIS SITE is 328fps - straight forward, surely? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Indeedy. The fact that discussion on Arnies is restricted to 1J was never in doubt. S'funny but 6 months ago I was trying to tell people that 1.35J was the legal limit for non-firearms BUT the limit for a potentially lethal wound was 1J. At the time, however, a certain forum official was very keen to ensure that the unequivocal limit was 1J. A bit strange, methinks, since his company was trying to sell a full-auto gun which fired an 11mm rubber projectile at WELL-OVER 1J. Work that f*cker out! Maybe I'm just being cynical but perhaps there was some conflict of interest there? Personally, I'd be interested to see the results of tests into how quickly a BB shed it's kinetic energy. If, for example, the muzzle energy of a gun was 1.35J, how long would it be before it'd shed 0.35J of muzzle energy and now was carrying a "sub-lethal" 1J of energy? If it turned out that a BB lost enough kinetic energy that it became "sub-lethal" within a couple of feet then it'd be a lot easier to propose that the legal limit for airsoft was kept at 1.35J instead on the current proposals of 1J. Snowman, where are you? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.