Someone f**ked up !

[Lasbrisas17]

1 minute ago, Tackle said:

ouch, wearing borrowed goggles I took a bb into the little fleshy bit in the corner of the eye, the caruncula lacrimalis, Jesus, think of the worst kick in nuts & multiply it by ten, literally left me in a heap on the floor until the pain eased

that sounds awful, hopefully your vision is fine!

[Tackle]

1 minute ago, Lasbrisas17 said:

that sounds awful, hopefully your vision is fine!

thanks, no lasting damage thankfully but at the time it felt like it had pierced the eye.

had only borrowed goggles as mine became faulty, but now I take 3 or 4 pairs with me, just to be safe.

[Albiscuit]

1 hour ago, Tackle said:

thanks, no lasting damage thankfully but at the time it felt like it had pierced the eye.

had only borrowed goggles as mine became faulty, but now I take 3 or 4 pairs with me, just to be safe.

 

Thought I was the only one who took more eye pro options than bbs to a game   

[clumpyedge]

7 hours ago, Tackle said:

thanks, no lasting damage thankfully but at the time it felt like it had pierced the eye.

had only borrowed goggles as mine became faulty, but now I take 3 or 4 pairs with me, just to be safe.

 

I have three sets I take also as you never know what can happen, better to have them and not need then, than need them and not have them. Luckily all mine have RX inserts so if someone needs to borrow a pair they can slip them out and use the glasses without having to look through my prescriptions.

[Rogerborg]

9 hours ago, EDcase said:

Even though players sign a waiver I don't know the legal extent they would cover.

 

They're largely meaningless.  Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 S2 voids them for death or personal injury resulting from negligence.  It even says that agreeing to such a term does not (in itself) constitute an acceptance of risk.

 

It's an interesting question as to who would be liable if Alice shoots Bob through or around his inadequate eye-pro.  The negligence is Bob's, but does the site have any culpability.  In general you go after the deep pockets, which would be the site owner and (hopefully) their insurers.

 

I've never seen or heard of a site checking eyepro for performance or markings.  Given that non-sealed glasses can only be rated EN166F, and that's not (quite) adequate for the energies used in airsoft, I can't see how you could reasonably argue that any glasses are suitable.

 

[clumpyedge]

38 minutes ago, Rogerborg said:

I've never seen or heard of a site checking eyepro for performance or markings.  Given that non-sealed glasses can only be rated EN166F, and that's not (quite) adequate for the energies used in airsoft, I can't see how you could reasonably argue that any glasses are suitable.

 

Here is an interesting read, albeit American based.

 

https://blog.safetyglassesusa.com/how-to-identify-ballistic-rated-eyewear/

http://the-lowdown.smithoptics.com/content/guide-ballistic-eyewear

 

"Ballistic Eyewear Ratings:

The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) tests ballistic eyewear with projectiles traveling at 150 fps (feet per second). Glasses and goggles that pass this testing are given the rating, ANSI Z87.1+ and are suitable for civilian or industry use. 

Civilian eyewear that meets a Military Specified impacts (MilSpec) generally meet the ballistic characteristics clause of MIL-PRF-31013 (glasses) or MIL-DTL-43511D (goggles).  For the US military, ballistic eyewear worn for duty must meet the MIL-PRF-32432 Military Combat Eye Protection Standard (MCEPS). Tests involve subjecting eyewear to small metal balls traveling at 650 fps (glasses) and 550 fps (goggles)—more than four times the speed of ANSI Z87.1 testing. Additionally, military eyewear must have UV protection, a comfortable fit, chemical resistance, and environmental stability (resistance to extreme temperatures and environmental changes).

US military-approved ballistic eyewear is listed on the Authorized Protective Eyewear List (APEL)."

 

And then this from Wiley x

 

EN.166S (Safety glasses):
Frame and lens must withstand the impact of a 22 mm steel ball weighing 43 grams dropped from 1,3 meters at a speed of 18 km/h. The lens must remain in the frame and is not to shatter. The frame must remain intact as well.
 

EN.166F (Safety glasses):
Frame and lens must withstand the impact of a 6 mm steel ball weighing 0,86 gram fired at 162 km/h. The lens must remain in the frame and is not to shatter. The frame must remain intact as well.

EN.166B (Safety goggles):
Frame and lens must withstand the impact of a 6 mm steel ball weighing 0,86 gram fired at 432 km/h. The lens must remain in the frame and is not to shatter. The frame must remain intact as well.

 

 

 

Interestingly 162 km/h = 147.63780 Feet per Second where as 432 km/h = 393.70079 Feet per Second but the bearing is made from steel and not what we use for Airsoft.

[Steveocee]

I appreciate how selfish this may sound but here we go.......

 

If another player chooses to play with stupid under performing eyepro and they feel that they are absolutely fine to do so. (Choosing to do it as they have done for years etc).

 

What about me if I am the person who shoots and actually hits them in the eye and blinds them? All the anguish and guilt I'd feel for doing that to another human would be soul destroying and I don't care how many "well it's his fault for wearing wrong goggles" you get told, you'd still have blinded them and I'm fairly sure most individuals who'd been blinded would absolutely blame you for it as society is a permanent blame culture.

 

It's not just them who they are putting at risk by doing this. The site needs to be made aware of THIS THREAD and the denunciation of their practises as a way of getting them to pull their socks up. I'd rather decline a player (regular or not) than risk all of the potential legal and insurance and personal risks to myself and others.

[EDcase]

1 hour ago, Rogerborg said:

 

They're largely meaningless...

 

That's what I expected.  It could come down to who's got the best lawyer if a claim is made against the shooter.

 

...

33 minutes ago, Steveocee said:

...all the anguish and guilt I'd feel for doing that to another human would be soul destroying...

I would feel bad about it but not that bad because its totally their fault.

I agree that the site should prevent this bad situation in the first place.

 

As for the actual ballistic strength of the eyewear, as long as a BB can't get directly to the eye then I'd say its suitable for outdoor games.  Indoor CQB would need better eye pro I think.

[Druid799]

20 minutes ago, Steveocee said:

I appreciate how selfish this may sound but here we go.......

 

If another player chooses to play with stupid under performing eyepro and they feel that they are absolutely fine to do so. (Choosing to do it as they have done for years etc).

 

What about me if I am the person who shoots and actually hits them in the eye and blinds them? All the anguish and guilt I'd feel for doing that to another human would be soul destroying and I don't care how many "well it's his fault for wearing wrong goggles" you get told, you'd still have blinded them and I'm fairly sure most individuals who'd been blinded would absolutely blame you for it as society is a permanent blame culture.

 

It's not just them who they are putting at risk by doing this. The site needs to be made aware of THIS THREAD and the denunciation of their practises as a way of getting them to pull their socks up. I'd rather decline a player (regular or not) than risk all of the potential legal and insurance and personal risks to myself and others.

100% spot on , As you say mate anyone want’s to take the risk fine there a twat for doing it , but think about what your doing DON’T dump that guilt on someone else , me personally I know I could brush it off as it’s a result of there own stupidity but others may not be as resilient (or uncaring) as me .

 

[Lozart]

1 hour ago, clumpyedge said:

 

Here is an interesting read, albeit American based.

 

https://blog.safetyglassesusa.com/how-to-identify-ballistic-rated-eyewear/

http://the-lowdown.smithoptics.com/content/guide-ballistic-eyewear

 

"Ballistic Eyewear Ratings:

The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) tests ballistic eyewear with projectiles traveling at 150 fps (feet per second). Glasses and goggles that pass this testing are given the rating, ANSI Z87.1+ and are suitable for civilian or industry use. 

Civilian eyewear that meets a Military Specified impacts (MilSpec) generally meet the ballistic characteristics clause of MIL-PRF-31013 (glasses) or MIL-DTL-43511D (goggles).  For the US military, ballistic eyewear worn for duty must meet the MIL-PRF-32432 Military Combat Eye Protection Standard (MCEPS). Tests involve subjecting eyewear to small metal balls traveling at 650 fps (glasses) and 550 fps (goggles)—more than four times the speed of ANSI Z87.1 testing. Additionally, military eyewear must have UV protection, a comfortable fit, chemical resistance, and environmental stability (resistance to extreme temperatures and environmental changes).

US military-approved ballistic eyewear is listed on the Authorized Protective Eyewear List (APEL)."

 

And then this from Wiley x

 

EN.166S (Safety glasses):
Frame and lens must withstand the impact of a 22 mm steel ball weighing 43 grams dropped from 1,3 meters at a speed of 18 km/h. The lens must remain in the frame and is not to shatter. The frame must remain intact as well.
 

EN.166F (Safety glasses):
Frame and lens must withstand the impact of a 6 mm steel ball weighing 0,86 gram fired at 162 km/h. The lens must remain in the frame and is not to shatter. The frame must remain intact as well.

EN.166B (Safety goggles):
Frame and lens must withstand the impact of a 6 mm steel ball weighing 0,86 gram fired at 432 km/h. The lens must remain in the frame and is not to shatter. The frame must remain intact as well.

 

 

 

Interestingly 162 km/h = 147.63780 Feet per Second where as 432 km/h = 393.70079 Feet per Second but the bearing is made from steel and not what we use for Airsoft.

 

Using FPS is a little misleading here, regardless of the material of the BB used in the test the energy in the 166F test is only 0.87J which does not meet the potential muzzle energy of a 500FPS sniper rifle but the 166B test is 6.16J which exceeds it by a significant margin.

 

 

[GeorgePlaysAirsoft]

11 hours ago, jcheeseright said:

You say that, he plays every other weekend with that eyepro and has done for years and years... some kind of magic bb proof eyeballs I guess!

 

 

You need to be lucky every time but only unlucky once.

 

He can do what he wants - but i think leading by example is good for many things, including running airsoft events.

 

I'm not angry, just dissapointed!

 

[Lozart]

11 hours ago, jcheeseright said:

You say that, he plays every other weekend with that eyepro and has done for years and years... some kind of magic bb proof eyeballs I guess!

 

 

For me as he's a site owner I would have said he has a responsibility to lead by example but if that's what he's comfortable wearing then who am I to argue. Ultimately the HSE will tell you time and again that your own safety starts with personal responsibility. If you're told you should wear full seal eyepro but choose not to then on your own head be it.

[clumpyedge]

58 minutes ago, Lozart said:

 

Using FPS is a little misleading here, regardless of the material of the BB used in the test the energy in the 166F test is only 0.87J which does not meet the potential muzzle energy of a 500FPS sniper rifle but the 166B test is 6.16J which exceeds it by a significant margin.

 

 

 

Agreed I was merely stating the difference of material of how they measure it/quantify it.

[Tackle]

43 minutes ago, Lozart said:

 

For me as he's a site owner I would have said he has a responsibility to lead by example but if that's what he's comfortable wearing then who am I to argue. Ultimately the HSE will tell you time and again that your own safety starts with personal responsibility. If you're told you should wear full seal eyepro but choose not to then on your own head be it.

I've seen some site owners do some immensely stupid shit, more often than not involving larking about with loaded guns/pyro etc in the safe zone, where not one person has been wearing eye pro, they're usually larking about with friends or just being a dick 'cos "Hey I'm the boss here".

talk about leading by example...........NOT 😏

[Lozart]

19 minutes ago, clumpyedge said:

 

Agreed I was merely stating the difference of material of how they measure it/quantify it.

 

I figured, just thought I'd clarify for the hard of thinking

[Druid799]

And it would appear to further compound the monumental breakdown in safety , apparently the site posted this am that any re-posting of the picture would be rewarded with a site ban ! Which was later changed to this .

[E21A]

6 minutes ago, Druid799 said:

And it would appear to further compound the monumental breakdown in safety , apparently the site posted this am that any re-posting of the picture would be rewarded with a site ban ! Which was later changed to this .

 

Wow. Basically offering people out over Facebook! Nice! 😂😂😂

[clumpyedge]

14 minutes ago, Druid799 said:

And it would appear to further compound the monumental breakdown in safety , apparently the site posted this am that any re-posting of the picture would be rewarded with a site ban ! Which was later changed to this .

 

7 minutes ago, E21A said:

 

Wow. Basically offering people out over Facebook! Nice! 😂😂😂

 

 

That's exactly what that sounds like isn't it... glad it wasn't just me that took it like that. Unfortunately like anything i doubt we will ever know the full facts as not many ways it could go without putting them in a bad light.

[EvilMonkee]

Another site for the avoid list....

[E21A]

1 minute ago, clumpyedge said:

 

 

 

That's exactly what that sounds like isn't it... glad it wasn't just me that took it like that.

 

Yep. Ironic that they mention keyboard warriors then basically offer people out, via a keyboard 😂

[Rogerborg]

If it was noticed and dealt with, there will be a near-miss incident recorded in the site accident log.

 

Won't there?

 

 

[ImTriggerHappy]

1 hour ago, clumpyedge said:

 

 

 

That's exactly what that sounds like isn't it... glad it wasn't just me that took it like that. Unfortunately like anything i doubt we will ever know the full facts as not many ways it could go without putting them in a bad light.

 

I don't read it that way at all. Not a very eloquent response but he is not threatening violence just saying come speak to me personally.

 

Site messed up and that is inexcusable but if that is classed as offering people out then I must be throwing down every fucking time I open my mouth.

 

 

[djben9]

 

1 hour ago, Rogerborg said:

If it was noticed and dealt with, there will be a near-miss incident recorded in the site accident log.

 

Won't there?

 

of course there will! 

 

so why didnt he walk to the safe zone and fix the issue like most people would?,

why is he holding his gun in the pic as to shoot someone in play if wearing unsuitable eyepro, which they know is as they mentioned it was noticed and dealt with.....

if he had caught a ricochet or full on hit (assuming he took it as some dont ) ,we would be discussing something else today!! 

 

The site is embarrassed by this response the pic got but the pic should have not been posted or had some kind of disclaimer. if needed......

[clumpyedge]

2 hours ago, ImTriggerHappy said:

 

I don't read it that way at all. Not a very eloquent response but he is not threatening violence just saying come speak to me personally.

 

Site messed up and that is inexcusable but if that is classed as offering people out then I must be throwing down every fucking time I open my mouth.

 

 

 

After re-reading it a few times yeah I see what you are saying. Definitely hasn’t set the tone well with the keyboard warrior comment though hence it sounds slightly aggressive.

[Tackle]

2 hours ago, ImTriggerHappy said:

 

Site messed up and that is inexcusable but if that is classed as offering people out then I must be throwing down every fucking time I open my mouth.

 

 

YOU TALKIN TO ME 😜