Jump to content

NRA RCO Handloading Rule


Brillo

Recommended Posts

I was recently informed of the new rule in the 2019 NRA RCO manual on page 1 of the Introduction which is copied directly as follows:

5. Shooters who hand load their own ammunition must provide certification that their ammunition was prepared in strict accordance with accredited published loading manuals and must ensure that the Muzzle Energy (ME) value is within the permitted limits. They must be prepared to provide samples of their ammunition for chronographic analysis.

Any thoughts or comments please. How is this workable and how are we hand loaders expected to comply with this rule?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely this must be a CYA policy statement for insurance or similar in case of accident as I can't see how this could possibly be monitored or enforced

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks as though its a reminder of the hme rules , you’re expected to know if you’re exceeding the hme limit and if you have then you’ve shot an hme card and handed it in to the range office get a photocopy of it for inspection on the range if needed ( at bisley) or an alternative hme procedure on other ranges whislt shooting under the nra.

pretty easy to check , rco asks for say 3 rounds, two are fired over a chrony , 3rd pulled and bullet weighed. 

If you’ve already done an hme card , unlikely you’ll be asked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Artiglio said:

pretty easy to check , rco asks for say 3 rounds, two are fired over a chrony , 3rd pulled and bullet weighed. 

Not a practical option on a rifle range, lot's of issues with authority to possess that type/calibre or ammunition, scales and chronograph calibration and accuracy, delays and arguments. Self certification is also impractical, what form does it take, what happens if there is an error in accredited published loading manuals and who accredits the loading manual. So many holes in this looks like it was thought up by someone of limited knowledge or practical experience of hand-loading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fully agree with Dave T and Artiglio. I can’t see how this can be verified other than the “three rounds” bit. But how can certification be verified? 

It was suggested by the guy who told me about this new rule that signing Quickload data would satisfy the requirement but that’s difficult to verify l

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About the only practical option I can think of would be to have a Labradar on the mound measuring vels and if any doubt over projectile weight, a round could be pulled to check that, not the charge weight

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The clause regarding hand loading isn't new and it was raised on my RCO course two years ago.  I think DaveT has it about right, arse covering and insurance.

The rules are: if the RCO suspects the ammo is out of range limits he/she should ask/order the shooter to stop using it.  The RCO's word is final on the range.

It's about trusting the shooters to comply with Range Orders for MV and ME.  For example a hot load .308 in a long barrel may well just stray into HME territory,  the RCO can't "detect" that but if there's suspicion then the RCO just stops that shooter.  If the shooter wants to make a complaint then they should be prepared to submit rounds for testing (and that's highly unlikely in my opinion).  We had a chap shooting .243 which, with a light bullet, is over R.O. MV at Kingsbury (MV <1000m/s).  I took his word for the fact that he had chrono'd his loads and they were just under 1000m/s  - he was a known, trustworthy person.  If he was an unknown I would have asked him to stop using the rifle.  If he declined to agree I would have instructed him to stop.  If he argued he would be sent off the range and reported.

I guess if you had a chrono available on the range it could be set up and verified but what a faff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Popsbengo said:

The clause regarding hand loading isn't new and it was raised on my RCO course two years ago.  I think DaveT has it about right, arse covering and insurance.

The rules are: if the RCO suspects the ammo is out of range limits he/she should ask/order the shooter to stop using it.  The RCO's word is final on the range.

It's about trusting the shooters to comply with Range Orders for MV and ME.  For example a hot load .308 in a long barrel may well just stray into HME territory,  the RCO can't "detect" that but if there's suspicion then the RCO just stops that shooter.  If the shooter wants to make a complaint then they should be prepared to submit rounds for testing (and that's highly unlikely in my opinion).  We had a chap shooting .243 which, with a light bullet, is over R.O. MV at Kingsbury (MV <1000m/s).  I took his word for the fact that he had chrono'd his loads and they were just under 1000m/s  - he was a known, trustworthy person.  If he was an unknown I would have asked him to stop using the rifle.  If he declined to agree I would have instructed him to stop.  If he argued he would be sent off the range and reported.

I guess if you had a chrono available on the range it could be set up and verified but what a faff.

Its very simple from an RCO point of view is that he or she has full responsibility for conducting the range and complying with the range orders (non negotiable).Should something go wrong it's the RCO that completes all the paperwork when all the shooters have gone home. 

If it is found that hme tests have not been undertaken when required it is the RCO who is called to task. Even worse if the round leaves the danger area or an action fails  and causes injury everybody is in a world of pain.

We are all classed as competent shooters and this will probably be the first question asked in any inquiry of which you will have to answer ,"yes" or you have admitted you are not. The second question could be tell me what speed or energy your round was? If you know fine. If you don't they will refer you back to your original answer of being competent and perhaps challenge  the answer you gave.

As an RCO of course  I am going to cover my back when conducting on ranges as I will probably be the first person to face an enquiry. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't a new requirement. Some 20/25 or so years ago and long before shooter competence certification was required, somebody in the MoD discovered many civilian users of its ranges used handloaded anmunition. A standard self-certification pro-forma was produced and handloaders and/or users of non-NATO spec factory ammo had to complete it. If commercial factory ammo, details from the manufacturer had to be entered; if handloads details of which loading manual data was used. It was a simple form on the lines of I .....[name].................. hereby certify that my ammunition has been loaded in accordance with data from the ................. handloading manual and is within MoD range specifications. There were spaces for calibre, bullet weight, manual (or chronograph) provided likely MV, resulting ME.

Many of us duly made out these forms, one for each cartridge / handload recipe and took them with us to MoD range sessions. AFAIK, this requirement has never been rescinded and is still in force. I have never heard of anyone being asked to show the relevant authorities such a declaration and within a year or two nobody bothered about it. On the other hand I'm glad to say that I've never been on an MoD range when a serious overload has caused a major firearms failure and death or injury in which case somebody might have asked for the relevant declaration.

I have been near an action blow-up in an early European F-Class Championship meeting at Bisley when Steve Donaldson's rifle action from one of the smaller US action makers in a 308 Win F/TR rifle blew part of the receiver out. The NRA RCOs carted the bits off, fired cases and unused ammo and quizzed Steve on the load. The load and the ammunition / case conditions were soon given the all-clear and metallurgical testing of the remains of the receiver showed flaws that had caused the failure and a warning notice was issued about the make and model of action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few weeks back when I was in the zero range running in,  a long boring day, we ended up chatting to an NRA guy who was just off to an inquiry over what he described as a fairly big blow up which he had witnessed involving a hand load, he had no idea over whether it was a suspect action, or the load over pressured.

The problem is its no good if we are responsible, when there are one or two idiots with the attitude of  "as fast "  as they can get, who will cause problems for all of us.  And I certainly have chatted with people who it has crossed my mind that I'd rather not shoot near them!

The only incident we have had was whilst using reloaded ammo from a "well known" commercial certified reloader/manufacturer, that folded the firing pin into an S shape ( I may have exaggerated , but it was a pretty big scary bang that damaged the firing pin and the bolt), fortunately in an action built like the brick outhouse, but I still returned it to the manufacturer to check it over, and its why we will now only use factory, or reload ourselves,  we need to be aware there are people out there who are a danger to us all.

Have Fun

Robin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being an RCO is an onerous duty but someone's got to do it.  

We have to trust shooters but sometimes that's a real challenge!  I can think of one gentleman who's rifle fell apart on the line due to incompetent assembly after cleaning 🤨  We have no practical way of proving if ammo or indeed a firearm is fit for use so we have to make a judgement.   Home loaded ammunition is practically outside of our control; all I think we can do is ensure we make every effort to gain compliance from reloaders through training, education and peer-group pressure.  Should we get a blow-up we must make every effort to secure evidence and submit to the appropriate authorities for testing as necessary.

My concern is should there be a serious blow-up (is there such a thing as a not-serious blow-up??) resulting in loss of life or major injury and that's shown to be because of incompetent reloading, DIO may well feel they have no option but to ban reloads on Military ranges with all the attendant problems that will cause.

It's essential we all educate our club members, friends and colleagues to only reload to authoritative data using sensible good practice.  I will not hesitate to stop and remove if necessary any individual I suspect has unsafe ammo or firearm, whether I'm wrong or not - it's my signature on the 906 and my neck on the block.

Having said all that, my experience is that >99% of target shooters are safe and sensible persons - long may that be so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

This wouldn't be managed or monitored properly so there's no point. A HME procedure is one thing,shooters running there 223 ,243 and such like rifles past it's safe working pressures is another issue as they wouldn't be nowhere near HME but is a far more dangerous situation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Blue Haze said:

It would be interesting to see how the owner of a wildcat cartridge would be able to stay within the letter of the law here!

If the wildcat rifle has been proofed surely there shouldn't be a legality issue unless it was an unregistered firearm 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Chris-NZ said:

The context here is the NRA "law", not the law of the land

On a military range (which many of us use in the UK) the NRA rule is "law".  Wildcats could be used but it's up to the RCO to decide if they can trust that the necessary tests have been done to ensure it's within range limits and that no risk to the shooter and others will reasonably occur.  If it's HME the appropriate rules apply.

If it's a stranger to me as RCO, presenting wildcat loads for use, I'd want to reasonably satisfy myself that the person is competent and truthful about what they have.  If in any doubt it's a firm no from me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At a recent shoot on Stickledown, NRA guys turned up unannounced with a Labradar and measured my 6.5x47 MV. The conversation that followed indicated that spot checks would be introduced to ensure compliance with the aforementioned new rules. This can only be a good thing, if it gets off the ground..............

Pete

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Re-Pete said:

At a recent shoot on Stickledown, NRA guys turned up unannounced with a Labradar and measured my 6.5x47 MV. The conversation that followed indicated that spot checks would be introduced to ensure compliance with the aforementioned new rules. This can only be a good thing, if it gets off the ground..............

Pete

 

Interesting development, there are probably quite a few out there pushing it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Re-Pete said:

At a recent shoot on Stickledown, NRA guys turned up unannounced with a Labradar and measured my 6.5x47 MV. The conversation that followed indicated that spot checks would be introduced to ensure compliance with the aforementioned new rules. This can only be a good thing, if it gets off the ground..............

Pete

 

That'll put a cat amongst the pigeons !

I wonder if this will be taken up by others - like DIO ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From NRA General Range Orders:

c. Cartridges which, when normally loaded, would exceed the ME/MV limits of any specific range, may not be used, on that range, even if downloaded.

How do we interpret that for a wildcat especially a calibre designed to shoot flat and fast?  Short of chrono'ing or running QL to model the MV to check it's below 1000m/s (all ranges at Bisley) it's a difficult call.

Some popular calibers stoked up and shot through long barrels will exceed 1000m/s.  So is it reasonable to assume necked down cases will have significant increased MV than the parent and therefore certainly possible to breach limits ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Popsbengo said:

That'll put a cat amongst the pigeons !

I wonder if this will be taken up by others - like DIO ?

No issue if they do  from me, the few can so easily ruin it for the many

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bradders said:

No issue if they do  from me, the few can so easily ruin it for the many 

A truer word was never spoken....................spot checks of shooters incompetence cards might also turn over some stones.................

Pete

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Re-Pete said:

A truer word was never spoken....................spot checks of shooters incompetence cards might also turn over some stones.................

Pete

Which is probably not a small part in why the nra have taken over the issuing of cards. New system is pretty straightforward if you shoot in NRA / Bisley competitions, can see it being a nusiance for some. Though at least NRA are putting things in place early, i was asked in march formy details for a card that expires this december.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Artiglio said:

Which is probably not a small part in why the nra have taken over the issuing of cards. New system is pretty straightforward if you shoot in NRA / Bisley competitions, can see it being a nusiance for some. Though at least NRA are putting things in place early, i was asked in march formy details for a card that expires this december.

At the risk of thread drift. not something I have a problem with......but some mods certainly do, the SSC situation was not the best managed, and was taken advantage of by crusty old men (the type who just can't be told when you see them alongside doing something wrong, who just signed off and handed them out Willy Nilly

I'm lucky in mostly all I do is shoot the CSR League and our club is well established that they know me, but they still ask for my card when signing on....and that is fine by me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

10 minutes ago, bradders said:

At the risk of thread drift. not something I have a problem with......but some mods certainly do, the SSC situation was not the best managed, and was taken advantage of by crusty old men (the type who just can't be told when you see them alongside doing something wrong, who just signed off and handed them out Willy Nilly

I'm lucky in mostly all I do is shoot the CSR League and our club is well established that they know me, but they still ask for my card when signing on....and that is fine by me

Blimey, you mind reader! I was about to make a similar comment.  The process was abused for sure.  I think Georgina has a grip on the admin now, it was/is a big task but the NRA team have done a good job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy