6.5 Creedmoor banned on MOD ranges

[Rory]

Our club was informed by Landmarc that 6.5 cm was under a temporary ban due to an incident with special forces trialing the round, our club secretary received an email few days later stating all 6.5 ammunition was now included in the "temp" ban.
Seems to be new rules and restrictions every month

Incorrect, it's just the template issue.

Be interested to know (pm if you like) the Landmarc member who is spreading disinformation.

 

[steveolkinevel]

strange thing for the people running the range to come out with? I don't shoot 6.5 so bothers me not.

 

[borbal]

they're temporarily restricting it's use on MOD ranges.

When was the last time a 'temporary' restriction was lifted...?

 

[Demetrius]

The elbow knoweth not what the arse doeth......

D.

 

[moeggesit]

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6752f73720bcf083762a6ccb/DOSR_RN_2024-06_Use_of_6.5mm_Ammunition_on_MOD_Ranges.pdf

 

[Heym SR20]

Of course its been banned. All the Hype about its high BC Bullets etc and its ability to outshoot even the 105 mm guns mounted on Leopard tanks at 5000m means it is well and truly beyond the danger envelope of even the lowly 338 Lapua Magnum.

According to the Hype, the 6.5cm will be the US’s next attempt to send a projectile to Mars.

How could a poor MoD civil servant, or in the case of civilian ranges, the designated inmate (the senior range officer or club officials) make any other decision with such compelling evidence.

All of the above said with a sense or irony just in case a 6.5cm lover starts berating me.

 

[timbrayford]

Usual civil liberty denying public sector ****, oh I do wish at some point that we'd collectively grow a pair and put them in their place like the French do with their lot!

 

[finnbear270]

If they let the man buns down, could they could sneak back in?

 

[viking90]

There could be a case to sue the MOD for homophobia if they've banned all 6.5 stuff

 

[M@tt]

Usual civil liberty denying public sector ****, oh I do wish at some point that we'd collectively grow a pair and put them in their place like the French do with their lot!

What's it got to do with civil liberties?

The restriction affects civvies as well as military. It is still allowed on ranges with a .338 template.

This is a responsible ROA restricting the use of something they cannot determine is safe or not.
It will change as soon as it is found to be safe.
If it is found to be unsafe, the ban (on that particular range) will stay until any remedial action is taken.

 

[timbrayford]

What's it got to do with civil liberties?

The restriction affects civvies as well as military. It is still allowed on ranges with a .338 template.

This is a responsible ROA restricting the use of something they cannot determine is safe or not.
It will change as soon as it is found to be safe.
If it is found to be unsafe, the ban (on that particular range) will stay until any remedial action is taken.

Come off it, stand in the firing line of any current or historic military round and declare it "safe" if you please.

 

[M@tt]

Come off it, stand in the firing line of any current or historic military round and declare it "safe" if you please.

What?
Stand in the firing line of a .177 air pistol and it wouldn't be safe, can't see what you're getting at.
The point is the Range operating Authorities cannot say that if you stand outside the danger area that you'll be safe, you effectively could be standing in the firing line.

But any Authorising Officer has to make that call. The Range Allocating Authority (and the others involved in the range certification process), must be satisfied that the safety criteria for any range is met for the intended use, and that includes the ammunition to be used as well as the type of shooting to be conducted (as found in JSP 403 Vol1 Defence Range Safety Handbook, Chapter 1).

This is not a conspiracy to stop civilian shooting, otherwise it'd be a blanket ban. As soon as .mil get back to generally shooting 6.5, so will we.

 

[borbal]

But any Authorising Officer has to make that call.

And these days the AO - who will be a career officer doing a stint for a few years as he climbs up the rankings - will figure that he is not going to risk his career by reversing a ban on a known risk. Never in the history of the Universe has a 'temporary ban' for safety reasons been reversed. Dechmont ranges near Glasgow is now set to become a housing estate because an AO refused to take the risk and reverse a 'temporary ban'.

 

[Deermanagement]

Could the 6.5 Cm be the demise of all outdoor ranges just leaving the tunnels safe

 

[Heym SR20]

I don’t have the means to do it, but please can somebody who has the ballistic calculator means please calculate the maximum range that a 6.5 CM or 6.5 PRC will travel if pointed at the optimal angle and how does this compare to 5.56 Nato and 7.62 Nato. 7.62 NATO is about 3,600m.

Given the better ballistics I would expect the 6.5 CM to be a bit further but is 3,700m or 4,500m or further?

 

[borbal]

I don’t have the means to do it, but please can somebody who has the ballistic calculator means please calculate the maximum range that a 6.5 CM or 6.5 PRC will travel if pointed at the optimal angle and how does this compare to 5.56 Nato and 7.62 Nato. 7.62 NATO is about 3,600m.

Given the better ballistics I would expect the 6.5 CM to be a bit further but is 3,700m or 4,500m or further?

There is no doubt that the 6.5 CM ammo will have better ballistics than the 144gn 7.62 x 51 military ball ammo that the current range templates are based on. I mean, why use the stuff unless it is better?? But then the problem is - where do you stop?

Current 308 Win ammo as used by Match Rifle shooters and F class shooters is light years ahead of that old 144 gr military ball. Shoot one of those at 45 degrees at Bisley and the bullet would clear the M4 and land somewhere in Bracknell. The current danger area at Bisley is hopelessly inadequate considering what is shot there these days and that undoubtedly goes for most ranges.

Let us hope the MoD do not scratch a little deeper now they suspect there is a problem...

 

[C h r i s]

Although Rory's touched on it, no one's posted the most recent update?



So as long as there's a 338LM standing order on the MOD range, 6.5CM is fine.

Incorrect. All 6.5mm calibres are banned on gallery ranges, regardless of whether there is a 338 template or not.

 

[Roebuck9]

I find all this hard to believe the 6.5X55 was accepted by the Swedish and French military in 1894 have they just found out someting new about after all these years that I do not know about ?

 

[ASl sniper.177]

I find all this hard to believe the 6.5X55 was accepted by the Swedish and French military in 1894 have they just found out someting new about after all these years that I do not know about ?

Personal,I think all common sense has gone out the window! So,it's only 6.5mm bullets that are mega dangerous. What a load of boll#ks. If I wanted a calibre that would do anything for game,or range work,I'd choose a good 7mm offering. I suspect,there's more at play than we know.

 

[borbal]

I suspect,there's more at play than we know.

Never assume conspiracy instead of c**k up as far as the MoD are concerned.