.17HMR banned on Melville

News from the National Rifle Association (UK)

Moderator: dromia

Forum rules
Please note that the NRA section has been locked until further notice.
Message
Author
ColinR

Re: .17HMR banned on Melville

#41 Post by ColinR »

the running man wrote:I know which caliber ide rather be shot with!
Me too! Maybe someone at the NRA will take the initiative to set up a sand bag and see which calibre is most disruptive at the 60 or so yards to the stop - we will be taking bets!
Chapuis
Posts: 1661
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 11:32 am
Contact:

Re: .17HMR banned on Melville

#42 Post by Chapuis »

Colin I think the real reason is the stupid conditions on the range safety certificate that was issued by the army for this range many moons ago. The certificate probably hasn't been reviewed since originally issued and because .17hmr wasn't around at the time it was normal for the army to restrict the use of ranges to quite a low limit with .22 rimfire. On my own club indoor range we had the silly situation previously where you couldn't use .17hmr or .22-250 because it exceeded the velocity limits yet you could use .375 H&H.
ColinR

Re: .17HMR banned on Melville

#43 Post by ColinR »

Chapuis wrote:Colin I think the real reason is the stupid conditions on the range safety certificate that was issued by the army for this range many moons ago. The certificate probably hasn't been reviewed since originally issued and because .17hmr wasn't around at the time it was normal for the army to restrict the use of ranges to quite a low limit with .22 rimfire. On my own club indoor range we had the silly situation previously where you couldn't use .17hmr or .22-250 because it exceeded the velocity limits yet you could use .375 H&H.
Yes I suspect that as well - maybe with all that sand at Bisley there are too many ostrich's working at the NRA. (maybe why they are so protective of the sand at Melville :bad: )

It seems particularly short sighted for what is probably the foremost shooting ground in the world not to keep abreast with modern developments and to ensure their range certificates are reviewed to take account of this. I think that the NRA/Bisley is steeped in long range target shooting and all these peripheral disciplines are just about tolerated because they bring in some money.

I am sorry to say I think this head in the sand attitude takes no account of members changing needs and in some respect has probably led them to this financial hiatus. It is hardly user friendly just to say you can't use a particular calibre by trying to cloud the issue with unfounded reason. If the NRA were customer oriented (we are customers not just members - something the NRA need to quickly realise)they would hopefully acknowledge the lack of reasoning behind this ban and take, what might be unprecedented in the current regime, steps to sort it out and let reason reign, rather than wheeling out constant platitudes and 'facts' that treat everyone as if they were stupid.
HeatherW762

Re: .17HMR banned on Melville

#44 Post by HeatherW762 »

I spoke to Brian T today about this as part of something bigger as it fitted in well. Basically the sand covering on Melville range is thinner which is fine for pistol calibre firearms but not for .17. However we discussed a plan to enable .17 shooters to use Butt Zero on the left hand side of Stickledown. I made certain assumptions like:

You want shorter distances like 50-80 yds
You want benches
You want some sort of cover during the winter months

Is that about right?

It means a bit of work on the stop butt but nothing major and we already have portable benches and tentage - for want of a better word!

Is that the sort of thing that would work?

Heather
ColinR

Re: .17HMR banned on Melville

#45 Post by ColinR »

HeatherW762 wrote:I spoke to Brian T today about this as part of something bigger as it fitted in well. Basically the sand covering on Melville range is thinner which is fine for pistol calibre firearms but not for .17. However we discussed a plan to enable .17 shooters to use Butt Zero on the left hand side of Stickledown. I made certain assumptions like:

You want shorter distances like 50-80 yds
You want benches
You want some sort of cover during the winter months

Is that about right?

It means a bit of work on the stop butt but nothing major and we already have portable benches and tentage - for want of a better word!

Is that the sort of thing that would work?

Heather
Hi Heather I am very grateful for your response and I am sure many other members will be as well. Brian T did mention when we spoke that Butt Zero could be used on Stickledown. My comment then was that if Butt Zero was an open range (I have never been down there) then on a windy day it might be unsuitable for zeroing .17hmr as the bullet is very light and susceptible to cross winds. However, this is a great move in the right direction and I thank you.

Certainly shorter distances, 25, 50 & 100 yards would be ideal.

Covered would be fantastic, as would benches. As I say I have not been to Butt Zero so to make it really useful for this small calibre some side wind screens would make it ideal. The whole point of this discussion has been about the low ME of .17hmr and the very light 17 grain bullet, so although this is a step in the right direction it still might be cheaper and more convenient for the NRA to revisit and upgrade the range safety certificate on Melville and actually do some practical trials to determine once and for all that .17hmr won't penetrate sand anymore than a magnum bullet fired from a rifle. This might sound ungrateful, but it is not intended to be, it is just a cost consideration, because if you are really trying to accomodate .17hmr shooters Butt Zero might not be the best solution in the long term.

It seems that several clubs have initially taken the same stance as the NRA against .17hmr, but in the fullness of time have resolve the situation to everyone's satisfaction.

This thread was never about special treatment or a cost to the NRA it was about practical reasoning rather than theoretical reasoning, but nonetheless it is a huge step forward that someone at the NRA is listening and making suggestions, for that I sincerely thank you.
Last edited by ColinR on Wed Mar 07, 2012 6:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
kennyc
Posts: 2340
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:21 pm
Home club or Range: hunters NRPC
Location: Reading West Berks
Contact:

Re: .17HMR banned on Melville

#46 Post by kennyc »

I'm surprised that HMR is thought more likely to penetrate the sand than pistol calibres, on a rainy day HMR can disappear between the rifle and the target! :grin:
ColinR

Re: .17HMR banned on Melville

#47 Post by ColinR »

HeatherW762 wrote:I spoke to Brian T today about this as part of something bigger as it fitted in well. Basically the sand covering on Melville range is thinner which is fine for pistol calibre firearms but not for .17. Heather
Historically .22LR (LR = Long Rifle) is not a pistol calibre and that is allowed on Melville.
the running man
Posts: 1967
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 7:05 am
Home club or Range: Bdrpc ebrpc
Contact:

Re: .17HMR banned on Melville

#48 Post by the running man »

butt zero is a start,but .17hmr more dangerous than a .357 magnum,sorry but any fool can see thats wrong................yeah just pawn em off down butt zero.......lets avoid anty range certification problems.............heather if u want anymore stainess rugers i know where there is another one too.........
When someone says "it's not about the money" you know what? it probably is all about money!
HeatherW762

Re: .17HMR banned on Melville

#49 Post by HeatherW762 »

ColinR wrote:
HeatherW762 wrote:Brian T did mention when we spoke that Butt Zero could be used on Stickledown. My comment then was that if Butt Zero was an open range (I have never been down there) then on a windy day it might be unsuitable for zeroing .17hmr as the bullet is very light and susceptible to cross winds. However, this is a great move in the right direction and I thank you.
Although Butt Zero is on Stickledown it is in a bit of a dip and has trees to the left hand side which do screen it. We use other small calibres there in competition very successfully so it should be fine.

Heather
ColinR

Re: .17HMR banned on Melville

#50 Post by ColinR »

HeatherW762 wrote:
ColinR wrote:
HeatherW762 wrote:Brian T did mention when we spoke that Butt Zero could be used on Stickledown. My comment then was that if Butt Zero was an open range (I have never been down there) then on a windy day it might be unsuitable for zeroing .17hmr as the bullet is very light and susceptible to cross winds. However, this is a great move in the right direction and I thank you.
Although Butt Zero is on Stickledown it is in a bit of a dip and has trees to the left hand side which do screen it. We use other small calibres there in competition very successfully so it should be fine.

Heather
Thanks Heather, All we can do is see how we get on - how many firing points on Butt Zero, will it be added to NRASC bookings, can it be booked by the hour - presumably no markers?

regards Colin
Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests