GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards

[Pitspitr]

I believe gas checks are allowed at Ord But I will need to check with Ned Neiderlander to be certain.

Sgt. Drydock What would be the Battle Rifle ruling on a device similar to the Metcalf device?

[Drydock]

If it was attached to your belt/person it would be a mode of conveyance, attached to the weapon its a loading aid, and is not allowed.

[Pitspitr]

That was my guess. Thanks for the reply.

[voodoo child]

i thought of a solution 2 the broomhandle single loading problem  why not load some stripper clips with only 1 round of ammo   that way you can hold the bolt open 4 loading without risking accidental discharge

[Drydock]

That has allready been discussed, the c96 shooter is allowed one stripper clip to use as he sees fit once the stage has begun. He can use it for a reload, then to manipulate the bolt as needed.

[voodoo child]

since this is the post with the rules i was curious about what the rules are regarding pistols with detachable stocks can someone use them with the stock attached or do they have to remove it?    also is the c96 carbine allowed what class would it be in and does the stripper clip rule for the pistol count for the carbine?

[Drydock]

The c96 is classified as a handgun and will be used as such, you can attach a stock if you want, but it will be used as a handgun to engage handgun targets.  Same with any other detachable stock handgun. Permenant stock Hangun caliber revolving carbines such as the Remington are scout class carbines.

The exceedingly rare original Mauser c96 Carbine was never adopted by anyone, and never enjoyed commercial success.  it does not fit anywhere well in our genre, thus it is not allowed.

[captmack]

Howdy,

Is there a minimum Handgun caliber for shooting in the Milspec Single Shot category?  Is .38 ok or does it need to be .45?

Thanks,

Capt Mack

[Drydock]

Milspec handguns may be any appropriate Milspec caliber, depending on the weapon.  .30 Mauser up to .455 Ely.  Appropriate Non Milspec handguns of demonstrated Military use have a minimum bore diameter of .357. 

Remember, in the Milspec classes, hanguns should be related in period and usage to the rifle being used.  The rifle is the determining factor here.  Some pairings may be difficult/impossible to achieve, reasonable substitution is allowed.  Example.  It can be very hard to find a servicable M1892 New Army to pair with a Krag.  An appropriate 41 frame colt (Army Special, Offical Police) is allowed if in Proper configuration (blued, 6" pencil barrel).   A Ruger Vaquero is considered an appropriate substitution for a Colt SAA in proper barrel length.  While calibers in Milspec classes are to be milspec, resonable substitutions are allowed upon request.  If you're reqesting to use a .38 in your class, Consider it granted.

In the Milspec Single shot classes, If you're carrying say an M1873 trapdoor, you should be using a .45 caliber 7 1/2" SAA or Schofield.  A .38 SAA would be considered a reasonalble substitution for the shooting compition,  Heck, an infantryman not normaly issued a sidearm might well consider a lighter private purchase .38 to carry, say a small top break S&W.  A .38 Ruger is a reasonable substitution as well for the shooting compition, but could cost style points (!) in field uniform judging, a component of the Brigade Champion award     No, we're  not stitch counters, but it is a consideration.

[captmack]

Ok, good deal.  I'm bringing my Sharp's carbine and Trapdoor carbine so I'll stick to the .45 SAA & Schofield Russian for handguns.  Thanks for the info.

Capt. Mack

[Bow View Haymaker]

Is the Ruger Balck hawk allowed in the Scout cataogiry?  I have a EAA Bounty hunter that will be my main sidearm but was going to bring the Blackhawk as a backup if needed.  Otherwise I may borrow a Vaquero. 
thanks

[Texas Lawdog]

I don't think so. I know it is not allowed in NCOWS. It is allowed in SASS.

[RattlesnakeJack]

Although the Ruger Blackhawk is not specifically listed as either a "Allowed" or "Not Allowed" in the firearms section of the NCOWS By-Laws, that is because it clearly fails to meet both of the following general criteria set out therein:
- "Cartridge firearms shall be original to the period or authentic reproductions of original makes and models."
- "Sights for all firearms shall be of original design or configuration."

Having hopefully answered your question (though perhaps not the way you might have hoped), I must thank you for asking it, because while I was checking the specifics on the NCOWS website, I discovered to my absolute horror that the NCOWS "powers that be" have adopted a wording amendment which, by clearly requiring "Birds-head or Banana grips" for (apparently) all Webley revolvers, effectively disallows a great many (perhaps the majority) of pre-1900 non-military Webley designs!
   
I believe I know what they intended, because grip configuration is a fairly good and simple criterion for determining eligibility of War Department "service revolvers".   However, most pre-1900 non-military-issue Webley revolvers do not have such a grip configuration.  I will immediately be posting an alert in the NCOWS Chambers regarding this glaring error!!!

[Drydock]

For Handguns outside of our military concern, we generaly follow NCOWs practice, so no, the Blackhawk is not allowed.  Basicaly the only Ruger that can be used is the Vaquero/Bisley Vaquero.

HOWSUMEVER!  While we follow NCOWs practice in many ways, we are not part of NCOWS, we have our own rules package and requirements.  Our handguns shall be Milspec or of demonstrated Military use in the Victorian era.  This thus allows all Webleys of Jacks concern.  It also allows the use of the SAA and its clones, of which the Vaquero is considered to be one.  The Blackhawk does not meet this criteria.

[Dalton Masterson]

Bowview, I have a spare SAA if you need a backup gun.

So, where NCOWS directly states that Birdshead Vaqueros are not legal, and they are not military, are they illegal in GAF as well?
The gun is the same, its just different grips and grip frame.
Doesnt matter for the Muster, but it is what I normally shoot in SASS, so am curious.
DM

[Drydock]

"Or of demonstrated military use in the Victorian era"

Folks keep missing that for some reason.  Birds head gripped weapons were private purchased and carried by military personel in some instances.  Particularly by civilian scouts.  The Merwin and Hulbert pocket models, as well as the Colt DAs come to mind. 

In any case, for GAF, all Vaquero models are allowed, as they are considered a Colt Clone, regardless of grip configuration.  As always, if in uniform in a Milspec class, you will be judged on your uniform as a consideration for Brigade champion, and the sidearm is part of your uniform.

[Bow View Haymaker]

Thanks for the info,
O'll leave the blackhawk at home.

[pony express]

I discovered to my absolute horror that the NCOWS "powers that be" have adopted a wording amendment which, by clearly requiring "Birds-head or Banana grips" for (apparently) all Webley revolvers, effectively disallows a great many (perhaps the majority) of pre-1900 non-military Webley designs!
   
I believe I know what they intended, because grip configuration is a fairly good and simple criterion for determining eligibility of War Department "service revolvers".   However, most pre-1900 non-military-issue Webley revolvers do not have such a grip configuration.  I will immediately be posting an alert in the NCOWS Chambers regarding this glaring error!!!

I read that, and what I assume they mean by "bannana grip" is the usual webley grip, kind of round cross section, not much curve, kind of like if you cut a bannana in half. What I THINK they are not allowing is the really blocky shape grip, like on some of the later .38 cal ones.

[RattlesnakeJack]

I read that, and what I assume they mean by "bannana grip" is the usual webley grip, kind of round cross section, not much curve, kind of like if you cut a bannana in half. What I THINK they are not allowing is the really blocky shape grip, like on some of the later .38 cal ones.

Pony Express -  if I correctly understand your definition of "banana grip" - namely, that it would also allow grips shaped like those on the RIC models illustrated in the NCOWS Chambers topic I started on this issue  -  I suppose that would alleviate part of the problem, so long as that indeed was either the intended meaning or the actual interpretation in practice.  

However, that would still leave a major problem with many other pre-1900 non-military Webley models which do happen to have a "blocky" grip of the sort apparently banned - such as the No. 4, No. 5 and WG models also pictured in the above-noted NCOWS Chambers thread.

In any event, since Webley military service revolver models are apparently the only specific examples cited in the By-Laws ("MK1, MK2, MK4, MK5") -because the term "Mark" to designate a particular variant was strictly War Department (i.e. military) terminology - such a listing would be understood by persons familiar with  Webley revolvers to refer specifically to the military service revolvers only, leading in turn to the definite impression that the grip shape mandated by the rule must refer solely to the "birds-head" grip shape which all of those military service models have, like this. -



Actually, there is even one other wee problem with the current wording (which I have intentionally avoided mentioning so far.)     Strictly speaking, there are no such 19th-century Webley revolver models as are listed in the By-Laws!   When designating various "Marks" of a firearm (or any piece of military equipment) the Victorian-era British War Department invariably employed capital Roman numerals .... so the examples given would be correctly called "Mk I, Mk II, Mk IV, Mk V" ....  

Nitpicking?   Perhaps ..... yet when governing By-Laws are mandating what is allowed or disallowed, correct terminology is mighty important!

[Grapeshot]

I have a question.  Before I ask it let me say I think that the Grand Army of the Frontier is a great organization that puts out a lot of good info and upholds the Golden Era of Victorian Militaria.

Would the use of the Winchester M1876, NWMP configuration be allowed in this venue?  I know the original were in .45-75 but I have seen reprodutions in both .45-75 and .45-60.