Pseudotectonic

Without photos I guess it is your soldering joints, if that is the only thing you touched. How exactly did you bypass the fuse? Cropped the wires and reused the tamiya?

Ok after looking up statutory interpretation, it seems there are various rules the judge can use for interpretations, but it is up to the judge to decide which rule to use. And among these rules, the only way airsoft is considered air weapon is if it is taken using the Literal Rule and selectively with certain English dictionaries and not others, and very selectively on words, and without considering the generally understood conventional classifications. Meaning even with this method the judge will have to quite purposefully go out of his way to interpret airsoft as air weapon, which should never happen. Paperback Oxford English Dictionary says "Air rifle" (or "air pistol") is defined as: a gun which uses compressed air to fire pellets. And then "pellet": a piece of small shot or other lightweight bullet. - Origin Old French pelote 'metal ball'. Cambridge Dictionary online says "air rifle" is: a gun [...] uses air pressure to fire a pellet (= small metal ball). And when using other methods i.e. Golden Rule or Mischief Rule or Purposive Approach, then airsoft should logically be excluded. The exclusion of "airsoft" (as a class of barrelled weapon with certain ballistic characteristics) from "firearm for the purposes of this Act" should extend to "firearm [and shot gun and air weapon] ..." because that should be the more accurate meaning within context, and for the purposes of the introduction of the exclusion as a general exclusion to the Act. And generally, I think any judge would select the easiest method of interpretation, and the "general exclusion" method is the most straightforward, and would require the least interpretation gymnastics from the judge. To say "airsoft is air weapon" would require the judge (actually, firstly, the prosecutor) to make a technical judgement to explain how a particular airsoft rifle uses compressed air or air pressure therefore it is air weapon, and why metal pellet is irrelevant to such a definition. Which should be easily defended with above by the defendant (or his solicitor). So I guess we should be safe for now.

The practice of loaning the rental to the parent/guardian, rather than the kid, may be just to cover any potential repair or replacement costs. Waiver can be useful for catching some responsibilities in a case of negligence. And it would be rather convenient if the site only needs to deal with the parent/guardian at the reception for the rental and waiver forms. For s 24(4)(b) "to part with the possession", yeah it doesn't actually matter whether the parent or the site is doing the "parting", because the kid will be supervised regardless therefore perfectly legal. But loaning to the parent might give the site an extra layer of defence in an astronomically unlikely prosecution. "We didn't give it to the kid, we gave it to the parent, see this rental form, and then the parent gave it to the kid" Although in reality the RIF is probably handed to the kid directly (which is almost impossible to prove). So the rental form can perhaps give the site operator a very tiny assurance in relation to this offence. The supervision will have to be by the refs (who has to be 21+). The whole purpose of supervision (for the Act) seems to be s 23(1) to make sure no missile goes beyond the premise. But, actually, maybe there is entirely no need for s 23(1) supervision, because there is s 23(3): if the kid is over 14, he can have with him the air weapon on private premises with consent of the occupier (i.e. the site). This should free up the 21+ requirement for refs, although they will still be responsible for beyond premise shots under s 21A(1A) because they are supervising on private premise (sharing responsibility with the kid I suppose, who also committed offence, because the kid cannot offload the offence via s 23(1) any-premise-supervision). And if the kid is under 14, then he needs the supervision. There is no provided age-related defence for the supervisor in a shooting beyond premise offence, like the "parting with possession" offence has a defence of reasonable ground of belief of the person is over 18. So they will have to just make sure everyone under or above 18 is not shooting beyond premise. Which would be an offence for an 18+ player to do anyway. There is a defence for everyone that is if the other premise the BB went into had given general consent, so if the site had spoken to their neighbours prior then perhaps this can be sorted, with some sort of private arrangement. Nonetheless all these are exceedingly unlikely, and only if airsoft is not excluded from air weapon, which I think is still very debatable. The more I look at Firearms Act, the more it reads like air weapon is considered a type of firearm therefore would exclude airsoft. And that the s 57A airsoft exclusion is broad general exclusion from the entire Act which I think was the intention. And that the two definitions of air weapon and airsoft within Firearms Act would seem incompatible, because air weapon typically fire metal bullets, while airsoft is exclusively plastic pallets, and forms its own separate ballistic category within Firearms Act. The fact that they all use air, or has the word air-, is irrelevant next to the legal definitions; they all use metal bodies too, but mere similarities cannot be the reason one type is another. My point is, "an air rifle, air gun or air pistol (key words from the Act)" and "airsoft" cannot be understood to be the same thing, or one type can also be another; the former has certain calibres of metal pallets (as a matter of fact), the latter has certain calibres of plastic pallets (as a matter of legal definition), they are of entirely different constructions, they have entirely different uses, therefore the two categories, as legally defined, and as intended by the Act, should not overlap. Phew. (Although airsoft can still be imitation firearms, because of appearance.) One can go on to argue, if there is a spring powered airsoft that uses a 24 inch (~ 600 mm) smooth bore barrel and only has one manual loading BB slot, it would fit the definition of shot gun within Firearms Act (even a better fit than "air weapon"), but of course that particular airsoft spring rifle would still be airsoft and not a shot gun. And that shot gun would be still firearm. The exact same logic should apply to air weapon. The mere fact that some air weapon is technically not firearm should be irrelevant for the purposes of Firearms Act, which airsoft is excluded from. In the cases of shot gun vs air weapon vs airsoft, where the legal definitions are unclear, conventional "common sense" understanding of these classifications should apply, or at least takes priority over minor technicalities. (I am not entire sure. Googling statutory interpretation now...)

I should preface this is entirely within the context of Firearms Act 1968, in particular the offences related to air weapons. And that all this time I had the impression that airsoft is not air weapons. But I am raising this question because I saw this. The police website says airsoft guns are air weapons. https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/fi/af/firearms-licensing/air-weapons/ If airsoft is air weapon, it would become illegal to gift minors airsoft, so will gifting them plastic BBs, under s 24(2). I saw some prior discussions here but cannot find any concrete conclusion. Most websites out there seem to suggest it is ok to gift airsoft to someone under 18, implying that airsoft is not air weapon. I also had the believe that gifting airsoft to under 18 is ok. But if airsoft is air weapon then it would be illegal. It also says you must be above 18 to hire one. So under 18 cannot hire rentals? (What about paintball?) CPS considers paintball guns as air weapons. Pouring over the Firearms Act it doesn't give any indication either way. The definition of air weapon in Firearms Act s 1(3)(b) does not really exclude airsoft, like how airsoft is excluded from firearms. One can say the wordings of Firearms Act would imply air weapon is a subcategory of firearm (e.g. section titles, subsection structures), therefore by virtue of airsoft not being a firearm it is automatically excluded from the air weapon definition, but this is not super explicit, can definitions be interpreted like this? (Any experts of statutory interpretation?) Interestingly, the Air Weapons and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2015 would explicitly exclude any air weapon that is not a firearm, and airsoft which is not a firearm would qualify. So airsoft is certainly not air weapon in Scotland at least for licensing purposes. However, the Act also implies that there are air weapon that is not firearm ("the expression [air weapon] does not include ... an air weapon which is not a firearm"). The dictionary meaning of "air pistol" and "air rifle" and "air gun" would literally include airsoft because of the use of compressed air. Therefore unless air weapon as defined in s 1(3)(b) is strictly a subcategory of firearm, it is possible to count airsoft as air weapon, similar to how airsoft is also imitation firearm. One can argue, if it applies to paintball, it should similarly apply to airsoft, so if paintball is air weapon, so is airsoft? Tangentially, are airsoft fields operated the same way as paintball fields? Particularly in rentals to under 18s?

The law in question is the Section 19 offence: having imitation firearm in public without reasonable excuse. Since a gearbox is not an imitation firearm, there is no offence. ... Actually, what do you mean by possible? What do you mean by travel? What do you mean by complete set of airsoft gearbox?

"Vandalism ate my homework" Is this site insured? Is Connor Collins the responsible person? Is he a sole trader and operating an e-commerce without providing a business address? Surely the postman cannot deliver a letter before claim to a woodland at TN3 9AQ? Does he even own the woodland or have permission to use it?

@ParHunter Very roughly this is a guide for voluming, generally you want to follow a rough ratio of say > 2. The cylinder volume is just literally the cylindrical shaped block of air, inside the cylinder, in front of any port opening on the cylinder. That is the block of air that is being compressed when the piston slams forward. Stronger spring can compress a certain air volume faster, which gives the BB more acceleration, thus fps. (In car: how hard you press the gas) A bigger air volume, will accelerate the BB for longer (given a long enough barrel to make use of it). (In car: how long you hold the gas) You can accelerate to a certain speed by pressing the gas harder, or by holding the gas longer. If you press hard enough, you can get to a high speed using less runway distance. And if you have a long enough runway, you don't have to press the gas as hard, you can just hold the gas for longer, so when you reach the end of the runway you would have gained enough speed.

Of course no one can make it "illegal" to play airsoft however you like it. Any definition would inevitably become a sub-genre of the bigger hobby. I just saw this video which perhaps frames it nicely, basically they are saying, as a hobby like airsoft naturally evolves, it will naturally become big enough to draw too much attention from other people. To overcome this, let's say public image problem, thus allowing the hobby to even continue to exist, it is quite useful to evolve a more sporty format to the hobby, just as other similar "problematic" hobbies have done. This "sport" of airsoft, is currently taking up de fecto by speedsoft. But I think skirmishing should develop its own sport. If someone skiing around and shooting a rifle can become an Olympic sport, there is no reason skirmishing cannot. @GeorgePlaysAirsoft As you say most sites already share a common rule set. You see rules as a killer of new experimental formats. I would argue it is exactly that rules, a set of clear and robust rules, is what will enable experiments with new and different formats. Even a close knit group doing an experimental game (I assume is based on skirmish rules), it would still be operating with some custom rules. And there should be rules (or framework) about these rules. Again your example of no respawn, is still based on the idea of a default rule of respawning at a certain location. I just feel that if you draw a Venn diagram of all the rule sets enforced by all the sites (at least in the UK) there would emerge a basic skirmishing rule set. My opinion is, it is this non-binding, but well adopted and tested, rule set that should become the basis of airsoft sport. Airsoft skirmishing, not some 5v5 paintball format, should define the airsoft-based gunfighting simulation sport. If such as rule set is defined, it doesn't mean it is changed, it just means it is regularised. So that people outside can have a better understanding and expectation of the hobby. And that competition between game operators can take place on better grounds, with most if not all of the sub-standard and poor quality operations condemned as not following code. To start, it will not be something prescribed, merely documented, from the existing, better practices. It is a manicured, curated representation of "skirmishing" that we can call airsoft sport. And if you make variations of these rules, you make your experimental skirmishing games. Of course if you are doing some non-standard game format that is totally different it would not be relevant. The point is, you are making a variation from something. That something needs to be documented at some point in time, and now is perhaps a good time.

Bonus question: In a physics problem, comparing two barrels, one longer and one shorter, assuming in both situations the BB will exit with the same velocity of 300 fps while spinning at the same RPM for hop, would the longer or shorter barrel provide more accuracy? This is an unsolved problem, both theoretically and experimentally. In pure geometry a longer barrel should suggest a more precise exit vector with less angular variation, however the question of BB ballistics inside the barrel is a complex situation combining the Magnus effect, Bernoulli's principle, Coanda effect, harmonics, interactions of plastic vs brass (or steel), and inevitably the probabilities of defects and surface finish variations, etc. We are still very far from a comprehensive theoretical model that describes everything that happens in this simple system, and as far as I know no one has done such an experiment. So really it is still up to debate.

I think ultimately it depends on the context and detail of the question. Are you asking about a physics problem, where all other variables including cylinder size and spring and hop are unchanged, would simply a longer or shorter barrel affect accuracy? Yes, because changing the length would unmatch the air volume, which affects fps, in turn affect reach, and then accuracy. Is it day and night difference? It will not be day and night difference, if your barrel length is not day and night difference. Are you asking about swapping a different length barrel on the same gun, while re-tune the cylinder and hop so that the fps is unchanged? Probably depends more on whether your tech skills can tune it to the same fps and hop. Anecdotally a shorter barrel feels more accurate (see above comments) but it is unknown how air volume factor into this, and whether it is measurably more accurate in a target grouping test. Therefore, in the same gun, the effect of the absolute length of barrel is negligible and unpredictable, because of all these other variables you are inevitably changing at the same time. Some might say it makes "no difference" in a practical sense. Unless you are doing something extreme, of course. Incidentally polishing the same barrel will make a bigger improvement than swapping to a longer or shorter barrel, so is changing hop rubber, or use a heavier BB; barrel length is the last thing you need to worry about, when upgrading the same replica. Are you asking about choosing between two entirely different guns with two different barrel lengths, like an MP5 vs an AK? Or a pistol vs sniper? Now the pool of variables are even bigger, because ergonomics, skills, play style, and even situations where you use them would be so vastly different it would be comparing apple and orange. Even if they all shoot the same fps, the difference in weight of the replica alone would probably make a greater difference in your aiming posture and control than say the barrel length difference. So the barrel length difference, in this question, is quite irrelevant.

I think airsoft can benefit from a baseline rule book, similar to that speedsoft rule book, to better define the game and hobby, and allow it to evolve iteratively perhaps every year. Perhaps the airsoft field / game operating industry is a bit like a dark forest scenario, everyone is trying to run on their own rules, but do not want to share the same rules because competition, which fragments the hobby and sets a very low bar as to how a game is run. The result is you get patchy results as to whether a field is using x rule and not y rule, and a varying degree of how the game is marshalled, which is not great for the growth of the game operating industry as a whole. Whereas if there is some sort of trading standard, some sort of best practice rule book, maybe it will make a rising tide that lifts everyone in the game. And an essential step in raising the profile of the hobby.

Interestingly the biggest speedsoft events e.g. SpeedQB actually has rules against binaries or other "advantageous programming of FCU". And penalties for overkilling.

(Not based on any particular site) Level design: loops, lanes, options, variety, etc which allow strategic options, each area can have different environmental pro/cons for certain builds / play styles, options is king Cover design: crouch, prone, odd openings, jump over, parkour, etc which allow multiple tactical options for every situation, again options is king Scenic design: overall art direction and narrative, identity of each room and building and object, good lighting design, good acoustic design, good prop design, immersion, instagramibility, interactive props and objectives etc that are fun to use, I want to be able to larp at least in my head Comfort and convenience: overall cleanliness, comfy safe zone, maintenance, ventilation, ease of navigation etc Admin: how the game is orchestrated, vibe, atmosphere etc

An upgraded cheap gun will have better fps and higher rate of fire So the question is can you do upgrades, if only just swapping the motor? If you want an international forum you can head to r/airsoft they can speak American over there