ODRC - Home Office Approval

[Catch-22]

Good news - after a very long delay, Offas Dyke Rifle club received a renewed Home Office approval the other day, meaning club shoots are up and running again.

The calendar is starting to fill up with range dates. However Sennybridge ‘F Range’ is still a no-go due to the MOD temporarily banning all civilian clubs from shooting on field firing areas across the UK.

ODRC calendar here: http://www.offasrifleclub.com/index.php/calendar

 

[terryh]

C-22,,

without going into too much depth, what was the reasoning re. No civilians (the owners ) being able to shoot on the FF ranges - just a spin off of the 50 cal thing?

T

[Catch-22]

48 minutes ago, terryh said:

C-22,,

without going into too much depth, what was the reasoning re. No civilians (the owners ) being able to shoot on the FF ranges - just a spin off of the 50 cal thing?

T

In all honesty Terry, I don’t know much about it.

Seemingly it’s a UK wide ban, something about the MOD being ‘unable’ to ‘prove’ safe arc’s of fire on FF ranges.

Obviously the MOD must be content with safety for its own military personnel, so why it doesn’t extend to civvies I cannot say?

And why on ranges historically used by the MOD and civvies the arcs are now seemingly different or have somehow suddenly changed (I know F range on sennybridge is the same as it as been for years)  is also unclear. 

It is supposedly only a temporary ban. But the MOD moves at a snails pace, so we shall see. Shame really.

[Chanonry]

Any links to the mod issue ?

[Catch-22]

7 hours ago, Chanonry said:

Any links to the mod issue ?

I don’t. Hopefully someone with more knowledge on the matter than I can chime in.

[Chanonry]

Seems to be consistent though.

Last time we were on the range we had an officer helping set targets !

Ironically on a range that we hadn't used for years and one that had more potential hazards than the ranges we used to use 😁

[AJW7088]

In the current NRA Journal (p42) Nic Couldrey, NRA Ranges Manager, states that;

”MoD staff are prohibited from getting involved in the planning of civilian shoots and the placement of targets. As a result access to FFAs was withdrawn two years ago.”

He goes on to explain that there is ongoing work to resolve this. I don’t know what occasioned the decision by the DIO.

Adrian

[terryh]

Adrian,

Thank you for info.

“MoD staff are prohibited from getting involved in the planning of civilian shoots and the placement of targets. As a result access to FFAs was withdrawn two years ago.”

I find this a odd and actually a bit sad, that the MoD cannot work with civilians - ‘sad’  this is not exactly too stressful or a QHSE threat as it is, under normal circumstance, part of their daily routine i.e does not require a PTW or whatever the MoD call it? (No planning involved)

’Odd’ , (actually a bit annoying), as I support the army as in contacting my MP re things like Soldier X etc, but fundamentally I pay for the Army, cloths, food, toys, pensions the lot, so am I naive in expecting just a little bit back in return? (Silly me 😉 ), you know ‘biting the hand that feeds you’ etc?

Terry

[Chanonry]

Well it suits them fine doesn't it. Good excuse not to allow the civvies onto their ranges

Ironic that its the Army that is undermining shooting sport.  Can't get a range at the weekend because the officers don't want to work and the TA are never there. Can't get a range on a Friday as they all want to get away early. Can't get a range on a Monday as there is no one there first thing.

Tough life for the idle officer class.

[terryh]

Chanonry,

I’m not sure that picking out one part of the whole equation is appropriate (or even accurate?).

You have Landmark in there somewhere (which has part of their contract to maximise the use of ranges, which seems to be ignored). Big organisations, regardless of their areas of operations. (Civilian or military),  do not communicate, so a TA unit cancelling use of a range or pre-booking ahead of time and Landmark not knowing its vacancy is to be expected.

My observation was general in nature, and not pointed at (or soliciting) any witch hunt.

T

[TSG]

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/659421/20171114-3Scots_SI_RoundtripFINAL.pdf

This is one of the reasons why.  As I understand  the rules now, ranges that have fixed templates and are multi use ranges may still be used as they have fixed arcs of fire. You will still have to submit a Range Action Safety Plan (RASP) which will be examined by the Range Officer controlling the range area. Movement from fixed firing positions will need planning and unless you happen to have the appropriate qualification to plan it, then it will be rejected. 

Range officers at the ranges cannot become involved in the planning. There appears to be no common standard between ranges with the Range Officers having the final say. They do a good job. I deal with them on a day to day basis and although there is little of no flexibility they will try to ensure that the shooting can go ahead. The BAMS range booking system does  not help as only MOD can see the spreadsheets but the ranges belong to them.

Expect them to be intrusive and come along and see what you are doing. They may well question your shooters about the briefing you have given as the RCO. 

I am sure somebody will come along with further info but it seems ok in the South East Region

[Catch-22]

The above unfortunately doesn’t seem to influence Landmark/MOD’s decision not to permit use of F Range at Sennybridge. 

Fixed firing points (trenches) firing on known , marked and fixed (tanks) and reactive targets out to 1300m. No movement or transition on the range with loaded weapons are permitted.

Shame...it’s a brilliant range to shoot on ☹️

[Chanonry]

10 hours ago, terryh said:

I’m not sure that picking out one part of the whole equation is appropriate (or even accurate?).

It's certainly accurate. 

As for being appropriate, I don't see why not.

[Chanonry]

9 hours ago, TSG said:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/659421/20171114-3Scots_SI_RoundtripFINAL.pdf

This is one of the reasons why.  

Expect them to be intrusive and come along and see what you are doing. They may well question your shooters about the briefing you have given as the RCO. 

I don't see why.  2016. It took 3 years? 

Its hard to imagine a scenario less like a day on these ranges with our club. Not many LAW users with us and even fewer mobile night attacks.

We have been shooting on that range ever since (until very recently) with nothing impacting us from that incident or the above review. Similarly there was an incident with a Para on Davy Shiel a bit before. No impact on civilian shooting.

They expect us to be competent and don't bother us at all. Quite the reverse.