Use of electronic targetry on MOD ranges now banned

[dromia]

Thank you.

[AR15]

I have just got off the phone with Warmister and have very good news. It would seem that they are frustrated as we are with the lack of effort the NRA have shown in resolving this situation that (according to them) should have been sorted out last year.
They are more than happy to set aside a range for the weekend and get RCO's trained up to spec on the new system, in their opinion this would be funded by the NRA. There is already an NRA ETR Qualification that just needs to be modified for SARTS, they can do this no problem.
The NRA didn't even turn up to the last AGM.

I would like an explanation as to why this has not been sorted out and what the hell the NRA think they are doing. Why did it take one simple phone call by me to the right person to discover this and why are clubs having to suffer due to the NGBs negligence?

This is coming from both sides now with the only hurdle being the NGB, what a farce.

[John MH]

Just had an enlightening morning searching for facts for IWR. Trawling, DIO Publications, Monthly Reports, JSPs, AOSP and other official documentation.

For those that are unaware the MoD operates the following Safe System of Training:

• Safe Persons – MOD staff, contracted staff and the user competent by virtue of qualifications (training), knowledge (experience), maturity (rank), currency.

• Safe Equipment – including weapons, ordnance, munitions, explosives, targets, communications.

• Safe Practice – in accordance with Service regulations including risk assessments and range orders.

• Safe Place – i.e. safe persons, using safe equipment adhering to safe practice with control measures to reduce risks to ‘as low as is reasonably practicable’ (ALARP).

The difficulty the MoD have with Civilians using their facilities is that they can be held responsible in part for the actions of Civilians using their facilities. In order to counter this and in particular the ‘Safe Practice’ element they need to understand what civilians are doing on their ranges. The only documented ‘Practices’ that MoD are able to recognise are those in the NGB Rule Books and are essentially the Match Conditions laid down in the Bisley Bible which specifies targetry, positions shot (ie prone, kneeling, sitting etc) and target exposure timings. The Military shooting practices are governed by the AOSP;

‘The purpose of the AOSP is to detail a progressive regime of shoots designed to introduce novice firers to shooting, to build their confidence and skills and then to train the battle shot for likely operational tasks’ all of which has been risk assessed and documented.’

The Military are not allowed to deviate outside of what is documented in the AOSP, for example they cannot use different targets, distances or exposure timings with the express approval of a 2* higher authority and endorsement by the DIO, this is because in effect every single shot fired has been risk assessed. Every new practice has to be fully risk assessed on every range where it may be shot, that is a labour and time intensive activity and as such there is no desire to allow too many changes.

How can a Civilian Club demonstrate that they are following ‘Safe Practice’? Arguing that we’ve been doing it that way for years will not cut the mustard these days. In effect casual plinking may not be strictly allowed but people are fortunately sensible and as long as a civilian is shooting from a recognised static position at a recognised and approved target positioned correctly in a frame or placed correctly on a FFR then they will be allowed to get on with their activity.

If civilians wish to use ranges set up for military training, iaw the AOSP, and use Military Figure Targets then those practices should be incorporated in the relevant NGB Rule Book in the first instance as these are already approved practices (some of these already exist in the Bisley Bible). What will need to be done then is familiarisation or training given to Civilian Club RCOs to enable them to operate the new target systems being installed, this maybe in the form of local training or possibly provided in one location although it will be dependant on the ‘Good Will’ of any MoD Training Provider and may incur some expense.

The good news is that not all Ranges are being upgraded to SARTS, Gallery Ranges will remain and there are currently no plans to close any, so access to ‘Hythe Frame’ equipped ranges should remain available.

What Civilian Clubs must do is follow the rules, if an incident occurs they should follow the procedures laid down in Range Standing Orders (failure to do so will result in a ban being issued by DIO SD as happened in 2013), and definitely refrain from shooting at unauthorised targets (Butane Gas Cylinders) as was done on 18 Nov 12 by a certain Club. All the indiscretions of Civilian Clubs and, for that matter, the Military users are reported, investigated and recorded.

[John MH]

I have just got off the phone with Warmister and have very good news. It would seem that they are frustrated as we are with the lack of effort the NRA have shown in resolving this situation that (according to them) should have been sorted out last year.
They are more than happy to set aside a range for the weekend and get RCO's trained up to spec on the new system, in their opinion this would be funded by the NRA. There is already an NRA ETR Qualification that just needs to be modified for SARTS, they can do this no problem.
The NRA didn't even turn up to the last AGM.

I would like an explanation as to why this has not been sorted out and what the hell the NRA think they are doing. Why did it take one simple phone call by me to the right person to discover this and why are clubs having to suffer due to the NGBs negligence?

This is coming from both sides now with the only hurdle being the NGB, what a farce.

You are very likely to derail any negotiations the NRA are having with the MoD on the rewrite of JSP 403 by doing your own crusade. But I'm sure you are convinced that you know best so crack on, the guy you need to speak to is SO1 Trg Safety.

[dromia]

Just had an enlightening morning searching for facts for IWR. Trawling, DIO Publications, Monthly Reports, JSPs, AOSP and other official documentation.

For those that are unaware the MoD operates the following Safe System of Training:

• Safe Persons – MOD staff, contracted staff and the user competent by virtue of qualifications (training), knowledge (experience), maturity (rank), currency.

• Safe Equipment – including weapons, ordnance, munitions, explosives, targets, communications.

• Safe Practice – in accordance with Service regulations including risk assessments and range orders.

• Safe Place – i.e. safe persons, using safe equipment adhering to safe practice with control measures to reduce risks to ‘as low as is reasonably practicable’ (ALARP).

The difficulty the MoD have with Civilians using their facilities is that they can be held responsible in part for the actions of Civilians using their facilities. In order to counter this and in particular the ‘Safe Practice’ element they need to understand what civilians are doing on their ranges. The only documented ‘Practices’ that MoD are able to recognise are those in the NGB Rule Books and are essentially the Match Conditions laid down in the Bisley Bible which specifies targetry, positions shot (ie prone, kneeling, sitting etc) and target exposure timings. The Military shooting practices are governed by the AOSP;

‘The purpose of the AOSP is to detail a progressive regime of shoots designed to introduce novice firers to shooting, to build their confidence and skills and then to train the battle shot for likely operational tasks’ all of which has been risk assessed and documented.’

The Military are not allowed to deviate outside of what is documented in the AOSP, for example they cannot use different targets, distances or exposure timings with the express approval of a 2* higher authority and endorsement by the DIO, this is because in effect every single shot fired has been risk assessed. Every new practice has to be fully risk assessed on every range where it may be shot, that is a labour and time intensive activity and as such there is no desire to allow too many changes.

How can a Civilian Club demonstrate that they are following ‘Safe Practice’? Arguing that we’ve been doing it that way for years will not cut the mustard these days. In effect casual plinking may not be strictly allowed but people are fortunately sensible and as long as a civilian is shooting from a recognised static position at a recognised and approved target positioned correctly in a frame or placed correctly on a FFR then they will be allowed to get on with their activity.

If civilians wish to use ranges set up for military training, iaw the AOSP, and use Military Figure Targets then those practices should be incorporated in the relevant NGB Rule Book in the first instance as these are already approved practices (some of these already exist in the Bisley Bible). What will need to be done then is familiarisation or training given to Civilian Club RCOs to enable them to operate the new target systems being installed, this maybe in the form of local training or possibly provided in one location although it will be dependant on the ‘Good Will’ of any MoD Training Provider and may incur some expense.

The good news is that not all Ranges are being upgraded to SARTS, Gallery Ranges will remain and there are currently no plans to close any, so access to ‘Hythe Frame’ equipped ranges should remain available.

What Civilian Clubs must do is follow the rules, if an incident occurs they should follow the procedures laid down in Range Standing Orders (failure to do so will result in a ban being issued by DIO SD as happened in 2013), and definitely refrain from shooting at unauthorised targets (Butane Gas Cylinders) as was done on 18 Nov 12 by a certain Club. All the indiscretions of Civilian Clubs and, for that matter, the Military users are reported, investigated and recorded.

The really I don't see a problem why doesn't our national body arrange courses of fire and the training to allow suitably qualified clubs to use the equipment and why hasn't it been looked at before now when it gets raised as on issue on an open forum??

[Fedaykin]

I have just got off the phone with Warmister and have very good news. It would seem that they are frustrated as we are with the lack of effort the NRA have shown in resolving this situation that (according to them) should have been sorted out last year.
They are more than happy to set aside a range for the weekend and get RCO's trained up to spec on the new system, in their opinion this would be funded by the NRA. There is already an NRA ETR Qualification that just needs to be modified for SARTS, they can do this no problem.
The NRA didn't even turn up to the last AGM.

I would like an explanation as to why this has not been sorted out and what the hell the NRA think they are doing. Why did it take one simple phone call by me to the right person to discover this and why are clubs having to suffer due to the NGBs negligence?

This is coming from both sides now with the only hurdle being the NGB, what a farce.

You are very likely to derail any negotiations the NRA are having with the MoD on the rewrite of JSP 403 by doing your own crusade. But I'm sure you are convinced that you know best so crack on, the guy you need to speak to is SO1 Trg Safety.

But here is the rub John MH, we the civilian full bore target shooter who uses MOD ranges doesn't know if the NRA are having negotiations with the MOD. People are going on personal crusades trying to find out what the heck is going on because the NRA or MOD are hardly open in what they are doing. Also if they are in negotiation I rather resent that they are being held in secret, that doesn't mean we all need to be there throwing in our two pence worth but at least we should be informed abut what is going on. This is a serious matter and people are reacting in an angry manner because there hasn't been a clear process of informing the clubs what is happening. Considering access to these ranges severely impact people especially in the north who rarely or never use Bisley the NRA need to be mindful of keeping us informed that way we don't have these panics on an open forum the same as with the tracer last year. If the NRA are in negotiations about access to MOD range facilities there should be a clear press release to the shooting press and on their website of what is going on, why it is going on, what the process is and how they are defending our interests. Saying that the NRA might be in secret negotiations only serves to inflame more anger from members of affiliated clubs.

I agree with you that there needs to be a serious look at range safety practices with an eye to national conformity, my own club unfortunately had an incident last year (I wasn't at the range involved on that day before anybody asks) and we have only recently been allowed to shoot again by the NRA/MOD after an investigation but the NRA needs to be open if it is to be perceived as a real representative body for our sport.

[Chapuis]

Put simply the military allow civilians to use their ranges but reluctantly as they have no duty to do so. They are a vital training facility for the military and if a civilian were to mess up their electronic target systems it could cause them all sorts of difficulties and set back their training programmes. Also they don't see the need for civilians to use such systems.

If clubs want to use such systems to increase their fun why don't they provide their own portable systems.

I haven't hired MOD ranges for a number of years in fact the army were only just installing some of their first systems when I last hired a military range but I'm fairly sure at that time our range licence actually said that we weren't allowed to use the electronic target system so it isn't something new.

[John MH]

Saying that the NRA might be in secret negotiations only serves to inflame more anger from members of affiliated clubs.

Who said there were any secret negotiations going on? Emotive language being used again.

I don’t know if the NRA are in discussion with the MoD on the rewrite of JSP 403 but I would at the very least expect the content of RSPL 13/02 be incorporated in the next revision of JSP 403 which is expected in 2014. The MoD don’t negotiate or discuss the content of JSPs with Civilian Shooting Club's as every one will have its own opinion, that’s why any discussion would be with the NGB effected. The section on Civilian Use of MoD Ranges is only a small chapter of the JSP and I doubt very much that any lengthy discussions have taken place and they would be considered as normal business and not extraordinary negotiation. If there are problems being encountered then the NRA needs to know and the contact in the first instance should be IWR not AM. If IWR is not furnished with all the details he is powerless to act on your behave and unable to attempt to put right what you see as a wrong or unfair restraint put on you by the person responsible for Range Safety on the range you are using. The Range safety Officer can put whatever restrictions or limits on the civilian use of the ranges they are responsible for that they see fit, they don’t have to justify it to you are probably far too busy to be wasting time on it.

Multi pronged attacks and interference from the ill informed will do Civilian Clubs no favours. There are recognised lines of communication for these issues and they are really the only ones the DIO SD will take note of.

[dromia]

Surely if people were informed in the first place about what is or isn't going on then they would be less likely to be ill informed.

Why are the recognised lines of communication only being used now? Why weren't they used when this new targetry was tabled? Is there or isn't there an ongoing mechanism for negotiating civilian use of MoD ranges with the MoD? If so where has it failed in this instance?

This has the distinct feel of being made up as we are going along.

Considering the possible and in your interpretation likely consequences of this it looks very bad indeed.

[Fedaykin]

Well you did John MH, these are your words:

You are very likely to derail any negotiations the NRA are having with the MoD on the rewrite of JSP 403 by doing your own crusade.

Now you are saying:

I don’t know if the NRA are in discussion with the MoD on the rewrite of JSP 403

There in lies the problem with a lack of information AR15 did some digging you then say to him that it threatens negotiations, as nobody knows of such negotiations one can only assume they are in secret. You now admit you know nothing, thus sowing even more confusion.

Also I can't agree with the opinion that we can't be kept informed of what is happening and the process informed with timely updates. I am not asking to be in those negotiations but I am as a customer asking to be kept abreast of the situation.

If the NRA is the only body the DIO will listen to fine but that doesn't mean the NRA can't keep us informed and up to date. I want openness from the NRA not vague statements on a forum. People are striking out on their own and contacting random people in the MOD or in AR15's care Warminster because the NRA is not keeping us informed of what is happening and why it is happening. I respect that MOD or DIO might not want to go into details with civilian clubs but it is the duty of the NRA to keep us informed. This whole thread was avoidable if the NRA was keeping us up to date on the situation.