Cas City Forum Hall & CAS-L

Special Interests - Groups & Societies => The Barracks => GAF Regulations => Topic started by: Drydock on October 15, 2007, 09:24:35 PM

Title: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on October 15, 2007, 09:24:35 PM
These are meant to be GAF classes at a GAF only match, like a regional or National Muster. GAF classes are Rifle based, not handgun as per SASS and NCOWs.

 Note that handguns will not be cycled with the off hand.  Exemptions may be granted on a case by case basis, but unless such an exemption has been granted, cycling the handgun with the off hand will result in a Points penalty for anachronistic practice.

 Unless specified otherwise, these are 2 gun classes, with the indicated longarm and the period appropriate GAF approved sidearm.

 Ammunition load per stage/run shall be no more than 60 rounds rifle, 20 rounds handgun.  1 gun classes may carry 80 rounds.

MILSPEC REPEATERS (Magazine rifles) shall be operated as designed: IE if your weapon was designed to use en bloc clips, or stripper clips, you may use them.   If it was designed to use loose ammunition, that is how it will be used.  No limited issue or experimental issue loading aids are allowed. 

For all other weapons, Handguns and longarms, no loading aids (Stripper Clips, moon clips, etc.) shall be used.  *EXEMPTION*  Due to safety considerations inherient in the design, those wishing to use a C96 Mauser (Broomhandle) are allowed the use of stripper clips. 

Spencer shooters may use a Blakeslee if desired.  The GAF considers the Blakeslee a mode of conveyance, not a loading aid. 

Much of this is based on the concepts as put forth in the "Battle Rifle" standards.  THese are all 2 gun (rifle and pistol) unless specificaly stated.  Please review the "Battle Rifle" entry.  (See below)

 Handguns shall be Milspec, or of demonstrated military usage, related in period to the rifle used.  "Period" shall be defined as related to the adoption date of the rifle.  Civilian handguns shall be of appropriate period as determined by the rifle used.

Those wishing to use C&Bs may use 2 revolvers, charged and capped with 5 rounds each, carried in appropriate holsters.  Targets not hit by these 10 rounds shall be made up with the longarm.

All Calibers in the Milspec class will be milspec, with case by case exemptions granted.  (Example: a properly outfitted Winchester 95 carbine in .30-06 may be accepted in liu of the Milspec .30 US caliber)

All calibers will be loaded to CAS spec.  Rifle calibers will be all lead, no more than 405 grains lead at no more than 1500 FPS. Calibers greater than .501 may use up to a 480 grain bullet. Gas checks may be used at the Match directors discretion on rifle calibers of .32 or less.  (Call Ahead!)  Handgun calibers all lead at no more than 1200 fps.  Further requirements for minimum pistol loadings are under discussion and may be implemented should need be.  If you are asked to demonstrate your loads a 10% over allowance will be applied.

Handgun Calibers in "Civilian" classes ( Repeater, Buffalo ) will have a minimum bore diameter of .357. All Non Milspec handguns shall have a minimum bore diameter of .357.  Minimum bore for pistol caliber civilian repeaters shall be .357.  Minimum bore for Rifle caliber civilian repeaters shall be .308.

A "Repeater" is any magazine fed weapon. Military Repeaters MUST be in military configuration.  Expample:  The Winchester M1876 is considered a military repeater ONLY in it's NWMP (Short Musket) configuration.

Military rifles shall be classed by type and powder used, with powder being the final determination.    A post 1886 smokeless designed rifle may NOT be loaded with black powder.  Transitional rifles shall be evaluated on a case by case basis.  (The Lee Metford M1888 with single stack 8 round magazine and NO clip feed would be such a rifle)  The determining date is the initial adoption date of the rifle design.  (IE, all Trapdoor rifles are considered 1873 design rifles)

Let me repeat: If you use smokeless powder, you will be scored as a smokeless rifle, regardless of design year.  If you wish to compete only against other BP designs, you must use Black powder, or appropriate substitute, IN a BP era designed (pre 1886) rifle.

1-MILITARY, 2 GUN SMOKELESS {M2S} Rifle and appropriate handgun
2-MILITARY, 2 GUN BLACK POWDER SINGLE SHOT {M2BS} - Pre 1886 design, rifle and appropriate handgun
3-MILITARY, 2 GUN BLACK POWDER REPEATER {M2BR} - Pre 1886 design, rifle and appropriate handgun

4-MILITARY RIFLEMAN SMOKELESS {RS} - Rifle only
5-MILITARY RIFLEMAN BLACK POWDER {RB} - Rifle only (Pre 1886)

6-MILITARY HANDGUNNER BP/SMOKELESS {HB/HS} - Pistol only.  Black Powder / Smokeless

7-CIVILIAN REPEATER {CR} - Civilian repeaters. Appropriate period handgun. Black powder/smokeless.  Military repeaters shot by civilians included here.

8-BUFFALO {CB} - Era Single shot hunting rifles (no ejectors), appropriate period handgun.  Black powder/smokeless.  Military single shots shot by civilians included here.


Note we often refer to hanguns, not single action revolvers.  It means just that.  That they should be related in PERIOD to the rifle used in the Milspec classes gives a great deal of flexibility.  MILITARY classes will be shot in accordance with Battle Rifle Standards


Classes MAY be combined at the Match directors discretion should numbers warrant.  Appropriate classes shall be divided by powder type should numbers warrant.  Any class with less than 3 participants can expect to be combined with the most appropriate class.

Should the match contain a Long Range component,  it will be shot using the same weapon as utilized in the Skirmish runs.  Exceptions being granted for those shooting Handgunner.

You may PM me with any questions.  Drydock

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Milspec/Battle Rifle Standards.


 This is a set of standards for the use of these type weapons in a GAF match, outside of the usual Cowboy style classes.  This may be broken up by action or powder type at the descretion of the Match director. 

-Milspec weapons of the late Victorian era, 1865-1900

-RIfles will be MAIN BATTLE RIFLES and CARBINES, utilizing CAS spec ammunition.  Lead bullets of weight no more than 405 grains, velocity less than 1500 FPS. Calilbers greater than .501 may use up to a 480 grain bullet. Rifle calibers of .32 or less may use gas checks at the match directors discretion.  (Call ahead!)  Examples would be, but not limited to: Krags, Spencers, Trapdoors, Sniders, Enfields, early Mausers. Handguns would be milspec, or of demonstrated military use, related in period to the rifle used.  The rifle is the determing factor here.

-NOTE-  Handguns are related IN PERIOD to the rifle used.  It is understood that some handgun/rifle combinations may be difficult to impossible to achieve.  Reasonable substitutions are allowed.  Officers of the period often purchased their own sidearms.  (Notice I say "Handguns"?  Thats right.  Broomhandle fanatics rejoice!  For you DA revolver types, no loading aids of any type.) When in doubt, a single action revolver will always be acceptable.

-Rifles/carbines must be in a military configuration, military caliber.  Example:  the 1895 Winchester is allowed, if in military configuration, chambered in .30 US (.30-40 Krag)Short action lever rifles with tubular underbarrel magazines are specificaly not allowed.  There will be other classes for them.

(reasonable caliber subsitiution may be allowed on a case by case basis.)

-Dress should attempt to be military, matching the weapon used.  Please don't show up dressed for the Rough Riders carrying a Mauser.  Full or partial uniforms are fine, Scouts, field expediencey, irregulars and "Hollywood" are recognized. (caveat:  you want to be an irregular, you might want to have some provenance that shows you to be a fair representation.)  Ladies may adhere to the above, or perhaps better to dress appropriate to the period, with some military "accessories".  Perhaps a Kepi, corded Slouch, or officers sash.  For ladies wishing to really go all out, I would suggest watching John Fords "She Wore a Yellow Ribbon".

BUT! You do not HAVE to have a uniform.  It is encouraged, and is used as a Qualifier for the Brigade Championship.  Boers fought in suits, Mexican revolutionaries in whatever they had.  Both those conflicts utilized about every weapon you can think of!

-Era single shots, ie trapdoors, Martini Henrys, Rolling blocks, are encouraged, loaded to spec.  Course of fire may be different from that of the repeaters at the match directors discretion.

-  EXCEPT WHERE NOTED, All reloads will be of loose ammo, from the person, from appropriate belts/pouchs/pockets, no aids of any kind.  Loading aids may be used to charge the weapon prior to stage start, but none will be used in the stage itself. *EXEMPTION* Due to safety considerations inherient in the design, C96 Mausers are allowed stripper clips.  Spencer shooters may use a Blakeslee if they so desire, as the GAF considers the Blakeslee a mode of conveyance, not a speed loader.

-MILSPEC REPEATERS (Magazine rifles) may be used as designed.  All other weapons are restricted to loose ammunition.

-Modifications allowed: None.  Springs may be replaced/lightened, existing parts polished to improve trigger pull, thats it.  Parts may be replaced only to repair/return to Milspec.

-Don't come to me about the Turks using 1866s at Plevna. Or the Henrys of the 1st DC. There are plenty  of other venues for those.  SASS, NCOWs, etc.  This is for Main Battle rifles.  Henrys and 66s were the submachine guns of their era. In the GAF classification system Lever action pistol caliber rifles are thus restricted to Civilian Class.


EXAMPLES OF ACCEPTABLE RIFLES.

Not final, research ongoing. South American variations on the Comblain are endless!  Where not mentioned, it is expected that these will be in military configuration.  Please submit weapon suggestions by PM for evaluation.  If it was accepted for military service prior to 1902 I'd like to know about it.  Weapons must use a self contained cartridge with integral primer.  IE no muzzleloaders, or breechloaders requiring a seperate percussion cap.

Milspec replicas, such as the various Trapdoor Springfield replicas from H&R and Pedersoli, are recognized.

CARCANO 1891 all models with adjustable sights

COMBLAIN-VARIOUS FROM 1870
 
ENFIELD     .303 MAGAZINE LEE-ENFIELD (First, "Long" model.  NOT the SMLE)
ENFIELD     .303 MAGAZINE LEE-METFORD MARK 1
ENFIELD     .303 MAGAZINE LEE-METFORD MARK 1*
ENFIELD     .303 MAGAZINE LEE-METFORD MARK 2
ENFIELD     .303 MAGAZINE LEE-METFORD MARK 2*
ENFIELD     .303 MLM/MLE associated Carbines.

ENFIELD     .450 MARTINI-HENRY
ENFIELD     .577 SNIDER-ENFIELD RIFLE/CARBINE

FRENCH MILITARY     MODEL 1886 LEBEL
FRENCH MILITARY  "BERTHIER" CARBINE, early 3 round magazine models
FRENCH "CHASSPOTT"
GRAS     MODEL 1874 INFANTRY RIFLE AND CARBINE

SWISS VETTERLI M1867-71 M1878, M1881

ITALIAN VETTERLI M1870, M1870/78
 
DREYSE "NEEDLE GUN"
MAUSER     MODEL 1871 SHORT RIFLE
MAUSER 71
MAUSER  78/80
MAUSER 84
MAUSER  85
MAUSER  86
MAUSER  87
MAUSER  88
MAUSER  89
MAUSER  90
MAUSER  91
MAUSER  92
MAUSER  93
MAUSER  94
MAUSER  95
MAUSER  96
MAUSER 98 LONG INFANTRY VERSION.  NO "K" MODELS.

MANNLICHER M1886 "Straight Pull"
MANNLICHER M1888 "Commission"

STEYR M1895

MOSIN-NAGANT M1891
INFANTRY, DRAGOON AND COSSACK ("HEX" RECIEVER) any 91/30 with a "Hex" reciever is considered a Dragoon, and allowed.  Must be a straight grip stock.

RUSSIAN BERDAN SINGLE SHOT 1ST AND 2ND MODEL.

PEABODY 1871

REMINGTON     U.S. NAVY M1867 ROLLING BLOCK CARBINE
REMINGTON     REMINGTON KEENE MAGAZINE BOLT RIFLE
REMINGTON     REMINGTON LEE MAGAZINE BOLT RIFLE
REMINGTON     U.S. NAVY "ANNAPOLIS CADET" MILITARY RIFLE
REMINGTON     U.S. ARMY MODEL 1870 "EXPERIMENTAL" CARBINE
REMINGTON     U.S. ARMY MODEL 1870 "EXPERIMENTAL" MILITARY RIFLE
REMINGTON     U.S. NAVY MODEL 1870 (TYPES 1 & 2) MILITARY RIFLE
REMINGTON     U.S. ARMY MODEL 1871 MILITARY RIFLE
REMINGTON     ANY ROLLING BLOCK IN MILSPEC CONFIGURATION

SCHMIDT-RUBIN M1889, M1896, M1897, M1900
 
SHARPS     .50/70 CARBINES
SHARPS     .50/70 RIFLES
SHARPS     SPRINGFIELD/SHARPS MODEL 1870-1871
SHARPS     MODEL 1874
SHARPS     MODEL 1878 SHARPS-BORCHARDT

SNIDER     Various INFANTRY RIFLE/CARBINE

SPENCER     MODEL 1860 ARMY RIFLES
SPENCER     MODEL 1860 CARBINES
SPENCER     MODEL 1860 NAVY RIFLES
SPENCER     MODEL 1865 ARMY RIFLES
SPENCER     MODEL 1865 CARBINES
SPENCER     MODEL 1867 ARMY RIFLES AND CARBINES
SPENCER     NEW MODEL ARMY RIFLES AND CARBINES
SPENCER     SMALL-FRAME MILITARY CARBINES
SPENCER     SPRINGFIELD ARMORY RIFLE MUSKET CONVERSION OF SPENCER CARBINES

SPRINGFIELD ARMORY     MODEL 1870 ROLLING-BLOCK RIFLE, U.S.N.
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY     MODEL 1871 ROLLING-BLOCK RIFLE, U.S.A.
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY     MODELS 1866, 1868 RIFLES
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY     MODEL 1870 RIFLE
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY     MODEL 1873 CADET RIFLE
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY     MODEL 1873 CARBINE
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY     MODEL 1873 RIFLE "TRAPDOOR"
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY     MODEL 1875 OFFICER?S RIFLE FIRST TYPE
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY     MODEL 1877 CADET RIFLE
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY     MODEL 1877 CARBINE
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY     MODEL 1877 RIFLE
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY     MODEL 1879 CADET RIFLE
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY     MODEL 1879 CARBINE
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY     MODEL 1879 RIFLE
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY     MODEL 1880
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY     MODEL 1884 RIFLE "TRAPDOOR"
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY     MODEL 1888 RIFLE "TRAPDOOR"

SPRINGFIELD ARMORY (KRAG)     ARSENAL-ALTERED TO M1896 STYLE
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY (KRAG)     M1892-DATED 1894
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY (KRAG)     M1895 CARBINE
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY (KRAG)     M1896
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY (KRAG)     M1896 CADET RIFLE
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY (KRAG)     M1896 CARBINE
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY (KRAG)     M1898 CARBINE
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY (KRAG)     M1898 NRA CARBINE
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY (KRAG)     M1898 RIFLE
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY (KRAG)     M1899 CARBINE
SPRINGFIELD ARMORY (KRAG)     M1899 PHILIPPINE CONSTABULARY CARBINE

DANISH KRAG M1889
NORWIEGIAN KRAG M1894, 95, 97

WINCHESTER     HOTCHKISS RIFLE
WINCHESTER     MODEL 1876 NWMP SHORT MUSKET
WINCHESTER     MODEL 1895 NRA MUSKET
WINCHESTER     MODEL 1895 RUSSIAN MUSKET
WINCHESTER     MODEL 1895 CARBINE
WINCHESTER     MODEL 1895 FLATSIDE MUSKET
WINCHESTER     MODEL 1895 MUSKET
WINCHESTER     MODEL 1883 (HOTCHKISS REPEATER)
WINCHESTER     MODEL 1895 LEE STRAIGHT PULL RIFLE

The above lists most of the major issue small arms of the period.  For those of you determined to field the rare and exotic, you can find just about everything here:

http://www.militaryrifles.com/                 

Please remember that short action lever rifles with tubular underbarrel magazines are NOT allowed in this concept.  There are other venues for those.  IE once again, I know the Turks used 1866s at Plevna, don't care, not allowed.  Not allowed in the Military catagories.  We have civilian classes for such.

The Lee Enfield is NOT the SMLE, but the first, longer version.  The SMLE was developed in response to the Boer war, and fielded after 1903.

Upon request, I'm compiling a list of acceptable sidearms.  We'll start with US sidearms, and add more as I research.  Please PM me with any suggestions, all are welcome.  Experimental issues may be covered in another entry.

United States:
-1865- Colt M1860 (Army) Colt 1851 (Navy)
-1870- S&W #3 .44 American, 1000 issued
-1871- Colt M1871 (Richards Conversion).44 Colt. 1200 Issued.  Navy began issue of .38 SC conversions of the 1851.
-1873- Colt M1873 Single Action Army .45
-1875- S&W #3 "Schofield" M1875, .45 S&W
-1889- Navy issues Colt M1889 DA revolver .38 LC (.41 frame)
-1892- Colt M1892,4,5,6,01,03 DA revolver .38 LC (41 Frame)
-1895- Reissue of modified Colt M1873 with 5.5" barrel.
-1899- S&W M1899 M&P, 3000 issued for use in Phillipines. .38 LC (K frame, round butt)

Those wishing to use the later model Colt .41 frame models (Army Special/Official Police) may do so if in the following configuration: 6" unshrounded light barrel, fixed sights, blued,  Square butt.  "Officers" models may be allowed if proper to the portrayal. 

Later S&W K frames may also be used if having a 6" unshrouded light barrel, blued, fixed sights, ROUND butt.  NO "Officers" models allowed.  S&W did not offer such a model in this era.

Many found here:   http://coolgunsite.com/pistols/usarevpage.htm

British Empire:
-1856- Beaumont-Adams DA revolver
-1880- Enfield MK I, MK-II,.476 Enfield
-1887- Webley MK-I, II, III, IV, V.

France:
-1873- St Eteinne 11MM
-1892- Lebel M1892. 8MM

Germany:
-1879- M1879-1883 Reichsrevolver 10.6MM
-1896- Mauser c96 .30 Mauser and 9mm.

Russia:
-1870- S&W #3 .44 Russian
-1895- Nagant m1895 7.62 Nagant

Spain:
-1856- Adams 10.5MM
-1858/63- Lefaucheax 11MM
-1874-S&W #3 11MM
-1884- S&W#3 System ONA 11MM
-1887- Merwin Hulbert 11MM

Canada:
-1855- Colt 1851 .36
-1885- Colt 1878 .45 Colt
-1899/1900- Colt New Service .45 Colt

AUTOMATICS: MAUSER C96, SWISS LUGER .30 LUGER.

Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Pitspitr on October 15, 2007, 09:48:06 PM
This needs stickied!
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: US Scout on October 16, 2007, 03:48:34 PM
I'm also going to have these posted on the GAF Website.

US Scout
GAF, Commanding
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: RattlesnakeJack on October 16, 2007, 09:16:17 PM
I agree that this post needs to be "stickied" here in The Barracks, to keep it "front and center" ...
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on October 24, 2007, 11:03:24 AM
BTT
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Bull Schmitt on October 24, 2007, 11:24:15 AM
I am working with Sgt. Drydock to develop a couple of web pages for this.


Col Bull
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Dusty Tagalon on October 31, 2007, 03:30:01 PM
No loading aids, include or exclude Blakeslee Quickloader.

Dusty
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on October 31, 2007, 09:55:21 PM
The Blakeslee is more of a ammo carrying device than a loading aid, and is allowed.  I'll make a note of that in the regs.  Frankly, I've timed several folks using Blakelsees, as opposed to simply grabbing a handful from a pouch, or single loading, and the Blakeslee is the slowest of the methods.  Looks cool though.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Bull Schmitt on November 09, 2007, 12:47:28 PM
The GAF web site has been updated to include the Battle Rifle material. To access the material use the "Competition" tab. You may have to do a "refresh" to get the latest versions.

Col Bull
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: River City John on November 09, 2007, 11:07:47 PM
Col. Bull Schmitt,
just visited the site, and all updated material displayed for me without refreshing.
Thank you.
RCJ
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: RattlesnakeJack on September 13, 2008, 10:15:43 AM
With the Grand Muster fast approaching, I thought it would be appropriate to bump this thread to the top for ease of reference. 

(I gather it wasn't 'stickied' here because the information is accessible on the GAF website, but it may be more convenient to do a quick check here than switching URL's ...)
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on October 01, 2008, 08:57:16 PM
Indeed, and thankee kindly Jack.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Bow View Haymaker on October 10, 2008, 10:01:35 AM
Forgive for I am but a lowly civillian.
I have a question regarding the buffalo Scout class.
Would the H&R buffalo classic and/or the handi rifle be alowed in this class with the ejectors disabled? 
I know they wern't aound back in the day but are close to some that were. 
Or is this class just for sporter and target vesions of the sharps, rolling blocks etc..
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on October 10, 2008, 11:01:28 AM
Yes.  WIth the ejector disabled, the various H&R single shots are indeed allowed in Buffalo Scout.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Bow View Haymaker on October 10, 2008, 08:06:12 PM
Thank you for the quick reply.

Here is another thought to ponder.

We are thining of offering the GAF classes along with the SASS classes at a couple of our monthlly shoots next year.  Still working our the details. 

Basicly the rlfe caliber shooters would shoot half the rifle rounds but have tio reload to shoot all 10 pistol rounds on some of the stages but on others they would shoot all the rifle rounds reloading as nessecary but only shot the 1st 5 pistol shots. 
We would just have to make sure that our thicker targets are used for the rifles and maybe rifle distances would be a bit far compared to some of the other SASS matches in the area. 

I am thinking that this can be like a mini-muster but those Cowboys that don't know about GAF would also get a chance to shoot the way they are used to and see the GAF classes at the same time. 

We are also considering offering Wild bunch as a shooting class in the main match.

Any thoughts? opinions?


Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on October 13, 2008, 08:43:52 PM
You are certainly free to do that, as long as your range officers are comfortable with the weapons and ammunition used.  Certainly the reason for our "Scout" classes is to allow CAS shooters to use CAS guns.  But make sure everyone understands the requirements, particularly the ammunition. 
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Bow View Haymaker on October 14, 2008, 07:02:59 AM
I thnk as long as we keep the standard SASS max for rifle ammo we should be OK.
Our range is set up for High power shooting and we do our cowboy stuff about 50-75 yards back fromthe big berm.
most of our targets were made to handle jacketed pistol ammo for action pistol so I think the big lead bulets shouldn't be a problem. 

My main reason to try it together is that last summer I tried to have a SASS day on one day ans a GAF match on the next.
I had a decent turnout for the SASS match but couldnt get anyone of them to come back for the GAF match. 
I thought with doing it together we can show the battle rifle classes to SASS shooters so that next time they will want to try it.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: ColonelFlashman on November 24, 2008, 11:49:59 PM
Sgt. Drydock;

Great post!

But, the C-96 Mauser was NEVER sold W/O the Stripper Clips, as there is no practical way of loading one otherwise w/o them. ???
It is the only way to properly disengage the Bolt Hold Open Mechanism after the rounds are stripped off into the magazine & it is pulled out from the slot it rests in for loading purposes & the disengagement of the B.H.O.M. w/ that removal. ::)
Most all of those I know that are involved in G.A.F. have rather Large Hands w/ fingers to match, which would make it extremely difficult to attempt to single load the C-96, which it wasn't designed to do in the first place. :P
So you either need to allow the use of the Stripper Clips or disallow the Use of the C-96 completely. :-*
I can point you in the proper direction for Lit. on the C-96 if you wish to view that my statement is rather accurate. ;)

As for the Ladies attire, there is enough Photographic & Written Evidence to prove that they completely matched what ever the Uniform that they were Aping, w/ the exception of the Inclusion of the Skirt. Basically they were a Female Version of the Uniform O&R's. Yes, they even wore Trowsers under their Skirts while on Campaign & Horseback riding back home. The most popular form of Head Cover seems to the Kepi from the same sources previously mentioned. ;)

As I recall, Webley took out their first Patent on a Speed Loader was in 1883 & the First U.S. Patent was out of Ordnance Dept. in 1889 for issue to the Navy. So to disallow Period Speed Loaders seems rather silly to me. ??? I can see Mordern ones, but ones of the Period? :o

Cheers
Flashy
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Old Top on November 25, 2008, 01:50:48 AM
Col. Flashman,

Good to see you on the wire, have not seen your excellent comments in a while.

Old Top
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: ColonelFlashman on November 25, 2008, 02:03:14 AM
Glad to be here & see you still around, O.T. 8)
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Charles Isaac on November 25, 2008, 08:23:50 AM
Sgt. Drydock;

Great post!

But, the C-96 Mauser was NEVER sold W/O the Stripper Clips, as there is no practical way of loading one otherwise w/o them. ???
It is the only way to properly disengage the Bolt Hold Open Mechanism after the rounds are stripped off into the magazine & it is pulled out from the slot it rests in for loading purposes & the disengagement of the B.H.O.M. w/ that removal. ::)
Most all of those I know that are involved in G.A.F. have rather Large Hands w/ fingers to match, which would make it extremely difficult to attempt to single load the C-96, which it wasn't designed to do in the first place. :P
So you either need to allow the use of the Stripper Clips or disallow the Use of the C-96 completely. :-*
I can point you in the proper direction for Lit. on the C-96 if you wish to view that my statement is rather accurate. ;)

As for the Ladies attire, there is enough Photographic & Written Evidence to prove that they completely matched what ever the Uniform that they were Aping, w/ the exception of the Inclusion of the Skirt. Basically they were a Female Version of the Uniform O&R's. Yes, they even wore Trowsers under their Skirts while on Campaign & Horseback riding back home. The most popular form of Head Cover seems to the Kepi from the same sources previously mentioned. ;)

As I recall, Webley took out their first Patent on a Speed Loader was in 1883 & the First U.S. Patent was out of Ordnance Dept. in 1889 for issue to the Navy. So to disallow Period Speed Loaders seems rather silly to me. ??? I can see Mordern ones, but ones of the Period? :o

Cheers
Flashy

Sir,

I understand your reasons for concerns on the awkwardness of single loading of the Mauser Military Automatic and the lack of speed loader usage for the Service Revolvers. Please allow me to express my views and some solutions to these issues.


The banning of the speed loaders and clips levels the playing field quite a bit. Weapons of various eras may compete fairly without the technological advantages of a more advanced system giving a shooter such a large mechanical edge. For example, the clip loading feature of the various Mausers, Mannlichers, Nagants and the M1895 Navy Rifle give them a decided advantage over the tube fed rifles like the Winchester Hotchkiss, Remington Keene, M1871/84 Mauser and single loading rifles such as the Remington Lees, Krags and early Lee Metford.


Most 19th century revolvers do not lend themselves to the use of a speed loader. The M1873 Colt, Lebel and Nagant revolvers are a few examples. The Smith & Wesson top breaks and hand ejectors, the Colt New Model Army and Navy Revolvers and Webleys have enough of an advantage with their faster ejection over the previously mentioned designs.

There are two ways to load the Mauser Military Automatic without a clip. A tool could be inserted into the clip slot that would hold the bolt to the rear while cartridges were inserted singly, but I do not know if this is legal for the GAF. The way I load the Mauser without a clip is to wrap
my fingers under the magazine and trigger guard and place my thumb over the retracted bolt and give it all a firm squeeze. This effectively retains the bolt to the rear so that it does not go home when the first cartridge is inserted. Some people place their thumb on the hammer and pull back on the bolt with the pointer and index fingers of the same hand, but I find this method awkward.

I would hate to see any of the allowed rifles and pistols disqualified. The experience of seeing all of these historic firearms manipulated and fired at one event is unprecedented!
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Dusty Tagalon on November 25, 2008, 10:22:45 AM
On the C96, I wonder if it would be premitted to use the stripper clip to hold open, while inserting rounds manually, (to fit the single load method. I have tried this on my C-96, & I could load that way. If not, I would have to go along with having a strip of metal to hold open while manually loading.

However, my C-96 isn't operable to shoot, chamber is too wide, shells expand, & won't extract.

Dusty
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: ColonelFlashman on November 25, 2008, 04:48:27 PM
Sir,

I understand your reasons for concerns on the awkwardness of single loading of the Mauser Military Automatic and the lack of speed loader usage for the Service Revolvers. Please allow me to express my views and some solutions to these issues.


The banning of the speed loaders and clips levels the playing field quite a bit. Weapons of various eras may compete fairly without the technological advantages of a more advanced system giving a shooter such a large mechanical edge. For example, the clip loading feature of the various Mausers, Mannlichers, Nagants and the M1895 Navy Rifle give them a decided advantage over the tube fed rifles like the Winchester Hotchkiss, Remington Keene, M1871/84 Mauser and single loading rifles such as the Remington Lees, Krags and early Lee Metford.


Most 19th century revolvers do not lend themselves to the use of a speed loader. The M1873 Colt, Lebel and Nagant revolvers are a few examples. The Smith & Wesson top breaks and hand ejectors, the Colt New Model Army and Navy Revolvers and Webleys have enough of an advantage with their faster ejection over the previously mentioned designs.

There are two ways to load the Mauser Military Automatic without a clip. A tool could be inserted into the clip slot that would hold the bolt to the rear while cartridges were inserted singly, but I do not know if this is legal for the GAF. The way I load the Mauser without a clip is to wrap my fingers under the magazine and trigger guard and place my thumb over the retracted bolt and give it all a firm squeeze. This effectively retains the bolt to the rear so that it does not go home when the first cartridge is inserted. Some people place their thumb on the hammer and pull back on the bolt with the pointer and index fingers of the same hand, but I find this method awkward.

I would hate to see any of the allowed rifles and pistols disqualified. The experience of seeing all of these historic firearms manipulated and fired at one event is unprecedented!


Leveling the Playing Field has never worked & Never will. I've been in this shooting sport long enough, 1984, to have witnessed all attempts @ this & it's only changed things for the worse! >:(

I am Specifically made my statement about the C-96 Mauser Semi-Auto Pistole, which as I stated Previously, is not designed to be single loaded , the two methods of single loading cartridges you mentioned, while a good attempt, aren't worth a damn & can Only lend itself to an A/D because someones fingers wont be strong enough for the job, as for a special tool to hold the bolt open, one just might as well use a Stripper Clip in the first place as it was designed to be used. Plus I made No statements about Rifles that used stripper clips.  :P

There were also a style of period pistole stripper clip speed loader for single actions made out of Bakelite & a semi-ridged rubber used exparamently by various militaries around the world & in the U.S. :o

Oh & as I recollect, the Lee-Medford used a type of stripper clip for loading purposes, but it had a Magazine Cut-Off so that its 8 rounds were held in reserve & then single rounds were then dropped onto it for volley firing. The Magazine Cut-Off was only disengaged & the 8 round magazine employed in emergency situations only, as in your position possibly being over-run by a Fuzzy-Wuzzy mass charge. :P
A magazine cut-off was also employed w/ the Winchester-Hotchkiss & used in the Same method & under the similar circumstances as the Lee-Medfords. ;)

If you've never seen a Period Cylindrical Speed Loaders, they look & function Nothing like Modern Cylindrical Speed Loaders, are rather clumsy to use & unless handled expertly have tendency to dump the rounds before you are able to insert them into the chambers & because of this they give no real advantage.  :P
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Charles Isaac on November 26, 2008, 10:49:18 AM
Leveling the Playing Field has never worked & Never will. I've been in this shooting sport long enough, 1984, to have witnessed all attempts @ this & it's only changed things for the worse! >:(

I am Specifically made my statement about the C-96 Mauser Semi-Auto Pistole, which as I stated Previously, is not designed to be single loaded , the two methods of single loading cartridges you mentioned, while a good attempt, aren't worth a damn & can Only lend itself to an A/D because someones fingers wont be strong enough for the job, as for a special tool to hold the bolt open, one just might as well use a Stripper Clip in the first place as it was designed to be used. Plus I made No statements about Rifles that used stripper clips.  :P

There were also a style of period pistole stripper clip speed loader for single actions made out of Bakelite & a semi-ridged rubber used exparamently by various militaries around the world & in the U.S. :o

Oh & as I recollect, the Lee-Medford used a type of stripper clip for loading purposes, but it had a Magazine Cut-Off so that its 8 rounds were held in reserve & then single rounds were then dropped onto it for volley firing. The Magazine Cut-Off was only disengaged & the 8 round magazine employed in emergency situations only, as in your position possibly being over-run by a Fuzzy-Wuzzy mass charge. :P
A magazine cut-off was also employed w/ the Winchester-Hotchkiss & used in the Same method & under the similar circumstances as the Lee-Medfords. ;)

If you've never seen a Period Cylindrical Speed Loaders, they look & function Nothing like Modern Cylindrical Speed Loaders, are rather clumsy to use & unless handled expertly have tendency to dump the rounds before you are able to insert them into the chambers & because of this they give no real advantage.  :P

Good Day Sir!

While I may disagree with some of your reasoning, I do respect your opinion and look forward to meeting you on the field at Ft. Hartsuff come next October.


However, my C-96 isn't operable to shoot, chamber is too wide, shells expand, & won't extract.

Dusty

Dusty, Sir,

You may have already looked into having your pistol relined, but I must say that  I used  Redmans as part of the resurrection process  of one of these unusual weapons.   http://www.redmansrifling.com/mauser.htm  They are a bit more expensive, but reasonable, and thier work is superb. Many have used them and all are very satisfied with thier work, but  I can not say the same for the other commodities that perform this service.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on November 26, 2008, 11:46:36 AM
Ah, Flashie, yer a pip, and its good to hear from you.

As for Speedloaders in general, its a technological limitation independent of time period, moreover I do not see the need to have folks scrabbling around looking for the rare preserved period loader, or spending money to recreate one, in an attempt to one-up other folks on the firing line, using what was largly an experimental item.  "Leveling the Playing field" really has not much to do with it.  Rather than say "You can use this one, but not that one"  simpler just to get rid of the things all together.

Now you bring up a highly valid point on the C-96.  I was not aware of the limitations you express in the Mauser design.  I'll research this per your request, and see what I can come up with.  I like seeing the Winston Churchills favorite sidearm on the line, we may need to make an allowance for it, as it is the only significant self loader seen in our time period. 
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Bull Schmitt on November 26, 2008, 07:34:54 PM
Gentlemen,

Just a thought. If we eliminated the time element from the matches and emphasized accuracy the use of speed loaders would not be an issue. The time element is something we inherited from CAS and may not be appropriate for GAF.

Of course I have been out in left field before.

Col Bull
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on November 26, 2008, 09:01:34 PM
No, this is a combat match, take away the timer and it becomes a target shoot.  In combat, speed of engagement is critical, and we are nothing if not a combat scenario oriented outfit.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Bull Schmitt on November 26, 2008, 09:19:19 PM
I thought I would just run it up the flag pole and see if anyone saluted it. I think you are probably right.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Pitspitr on November 27, 2008, 08:09:36 AM
No, this is a combat match, take away the timer and it becomes a target shoot.  In combat, speed of engagement is critical, and we are nothing if not a combat scenario oriented outfit.
I agree. I also think we need to incorporate some stages that make you think a little.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Bow View Haymaker on November 27, 2008, 06:58:34 PM
I kind of like the full pistol reloads.  I thought I was getting better at it with my Remington conversion by the end of the Grand muster ;D
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Shotgun Steve on April 15, 2009, 10:00:56 AM
 Hello Gentlemen,

In the GAF list of approved firearms for use in GAF Marksmanship competitions... you have the
Colt 1871-72 OPEN TOP MODEL RIMFIRE listed. As I am sure most everyone here knows that there
are no repros that I am aware of that are made in rimfire. So why is it listed as such?

 I am planning on shooting in the Scout catagory using an 1866 Yellow Boy short rifle and an 1871-72 Open
Top both in .44 special caliber but loaded with black powder. Are these two firearms acceptable
in that catagory? Thank you in advance for any help.

 Shotgun Steve
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on April 16, 2009, 01:21:22 AM
Yes, both weapons are acceptable.  While weapons are often listed in their orginal calibers, the GAF recognizes the need for reasonable caliber substitutions.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Shotgun Steve on April 16, 2009, 12:29:16 PM
Thanks Sarge. I thought that was the answer I would recieve, but I don't like to assume anything. ;D
 Take Care
 Shotgun Steve
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Texas Lawdog on June 01, 2009, 02:40:35 PM
I am in the process of aquiring a Krag rifle for the GAF Muster in the fall.  I am not a reloader, so is ammo available in this caliber?
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on June 05, 2009, 11:35:33 AM
Unfortunatly, while Remington and Winchester do make runs of .30 US every year, it is loaded with a 180 jacketed soft point at 2450 FPS.  This ammo cannot be used at a GAF shoot, which requires a CAS spec lead bullet (Gas check allowed at Match discretion) at no more than 1400 fps.  I'm afraid you either need to reload, or find someone who does. 

Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: RattlesnakeJack on June 05, 2009, 03:12:06 PM
TL -

Lots of reloading info and components available, if you can find someone to load for you ......

Although original ammunition had jacketed bullets, safety and target preservation dictate use of cast bullets only in this type of shooting, of course ......

There are some commercial custom loaders who offer .30-40 loads, but you would have to ensure that they will do them with cast bullets.
Here is one loader who offers it  (Hard Cast Lead 165 gr. bullet; price $30.94/20) - http://www.customcartridge.com/products/browse_legend.php (http://www.customcartridge.com/products/browse_legend.php)

Here is one writeup you may find of interest - http://www.frfrogspad.com/kragrifl.htm (http://www.frfrogspad.com/kragrifl.htm)
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: RattlesnakeJack on June 07, 2009, 02:35:05 PM
.... a GAF shoot ..... requires a CAS spec lead bullet (Gas check allowed at Match discretion) .......

Are gas-checked bullets are allowed on the range at Ord for the GAF National Muster?


"And now for the rest of the story ...."
I am pondering a rather significant change of pace this year .... i.e. entering in the Mil-spec Repeater class, and using my .303 'Rifle, Magazine, Lee-Enfield'  (MLE) .....
(http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i219/GrantRCanada/Enfields/enfields_mle.jpg)

Unfortunately, the bandolier in that photo is actually a rather glaring anachronism .... it is a Pattern 1903 bandolier, designed to accommodate cartridges held in 5-round chargers which came in with the introduction that year of the 'Rifle, Short, Magazine, Lee-Enfield' (i.e. SMLE)  The design of the MLE requires the magazine to be charged one cartridge at a time, so the correct accoutrement for it is the Pattern 1888 Bandolier.  I do have one of the rather nice reproductions of that bandolier offered by IMA .... just haven't ever gotten around to re-photographing my MLE with it ....
(http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i219/GrantRCanada/Enfields/P88bandolier_sepia.jpg)

As an aside, here is one image of a Canadian Boer War serviceman with his Magazine Lee-Enfield rifle and revolver (almost certainly either a Colt Model 1878 or Colt New Service) and equipped with a Pattern 1888 bandolier .....  Trooper, Lord Strathcona's Horse -
(http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i219/GrantRCanada/Enfields/TrooperLSH.jpg)
This Boer War mounted unit was composed mainly of former North West Mounted Police (many of them still actively serving but granted leaves of absence to serve in South Africa) and western stockmen.  The unit was raised and equipped at the personal expense of Baron Strathcona and Mount Royal (Scottish-born Canadian financier and politician Sir Donald Smith, former Governor of the Hudspn's Bay Company, and President of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company.) 

Lord Strathcona's Horse was commanded by Colonel (later Sir) Samuel Benfield Steele ..... who has been referred to as the "Quintessential Mountie".   He was the third man to enroll  in the newly formed NWMP in 1873, and held the rank of Superintendent when assigned in 1898 to NWMP command in the Yukon Territory during the Klondike gold rush.  In 1899 he was granted leave of absence to serve in the Boer War.  Here he is in his uniform as Officer Commanding Lord Strathcona's Horse -
(http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i219/GrantRCanada/Steele/Samuel_Benfield_Steele2.jpg)
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on June 07, 2009, 03:08:34 PM
You would need to ask Pitspitr that, though I've yet to encounter any problems with the Gas Checks on my .30 US rounds.  BTW, was there a carbine version of the MLE?  Or the MLM for that matter?
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: RattlesnakeJack on June 07, 2009, 10:37:16 PM
Greetings, Sergeant!

Yes, there were standard carbine versions -

Carbine, Magazine Lee-Metford -
(http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i219/GrantRCanada/Enfields/MLMcavalrycarbine.jpg)

Carbine, Magazine Lee-Enfield -
(http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i219/GrantRCanada/Enfields/MLE_carbine.jpg)

These carbines were designed for issue to cavalry, primarily, and have no provision for a bayonet.  They had shallower 6-round magazines in lieu of the 10-round magazine of the MLM MkII  and MLE rifles (the MkI MLM rifle had an 8-round magazine.)

A special "contract carbine" model was produced for New Zealand, starting in 1900 ....  these were modified  MLM and MLE carbines with a shortened fore-end and nosecap with bayonet mount  for the Pattern 1888 bayonet -
(http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i219/GrantRCanada/Enfields/LE_NZcarbine.jpg)

Finally, in 1903, a similar contract carbine was produced for the Royal Irish Constabulary -
(http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i219/GrantRCanada/Enfields/MLE_RIC_carbine.jpg)

The Boer War was a great learning experience for the British military - they started out fielding traditional infantry and cavalry for the most part, but as the war progressed mounted infantry proved to be by far the most useful troops for the conditions encountered in South Africa.   However, the long infantry-pattern rifle was rather cumbersome for such troops,  as will be quite evident in these photos of Canadian Mounted Rifles ....

The standard method of carrying the infantry rifle on horseback, with the butt resting in a "short bucket" and steadied by a strap from the fore-end going around the right arm, is illustrated in these first two photos -
(http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i219/GrantRCanada/Boer%20War/na-5107-1222.jpg)  -  (http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i219/GrantRCanada/Boer%20War/shortbucket.jpg)

To be "at the ready" and able to dismount quickly,  the rifle was generally carried in one of these ways -
 (http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i219/GrantRCanada/Boer%20War/na-5107-902.jpg)  -  (http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i219/GrantRCanada/Boer%20War/na-5107-872.jpg)

Note that both of the fellows above have regular slings on their rifles.  In this image of the 2nd Regiment of Canadian Mounted Rifles on the march, the fellow on the left  in front carries his rifle slung over the back, while the man beside him carries his across the saddle pommel (the arm strap is clearly visible dangling from the fore-end of that rifle -
(http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i219/GrantRCanada/Boer%20War/2nd_Regiment-Canadian_Mounted_Ri-1.jpg)

At any rate, the unsuitability of the long rifle for mounted carry and the desire to have a standardized weapon in lieu of rifle and carbine versions resulted in the adoption in 1903 of the "Rifle, Short, Magazine Lee-Enfield"  - the renowned "SMLE" which served the British Empire so well during WWI -
(http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i219/GrantRCanada/Enfields/SMLEMkI_sm.jpg)
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on June 08, 2009, 03:47:07 AM
Its interesting that the Americans and British, both engaged in irregular campaigns at the turn of the century, came to the same conclusion at the same time, both developing "Short Rifles" in 1903.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Pitspitr on June 12, 2009, 10:57:19 PM
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?

(http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/6073/1000684y.jpg)
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on July 08, 2009, 11:08:59 PM
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.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Pitspitr on July 09, 2009, 06:51:25 AM
That was my guess. Thanks for the reply.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: voodoo child on July 13, 2009, 09:21:57 PM
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
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on July 13, 2009, 09:45:35 PM
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.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: voodoo child on July 25, 2009, 03:51:39 PM
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?
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on July 26, 2009, 12:24:47 PM
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.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: captmack on September 01, 2009, 01:37:13 PM
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
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on September 01, 2009, 05:34:04 PM
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   :D  No, we're  not stitch counters, but it is a consideration.

Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: captmack on September 02, 2009, 11:33:45 AM
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
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Bow View Haymaker on September 25, 2009, 11:25:08 AM
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
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Texas Lawdog on September 25, 2009, 11:36:47 AM
I don't think so. I know it is not allowed in NCOWS. It is allowed in SASS.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: RattlesnakeJack on September 25, 2009, 12:33:30 PM
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!
 :o  :-[  ???
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!!!
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on September 25, 2009, 12:36:17 PM
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.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Dalton Masterson on September 25, 2009, 01:30:08 PM
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
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on September 25, 2009, 05:00:32 PM
"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.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Bow View Haymaker on September 26, 2009, 03:17:46 AM
Thanks for the info,
O'll leave the blackhawk at home.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: pony express on September 26, 2009, 04:50:36 PM
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!
 :o  :-[  ???
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.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: RattlesnakeJack on September 26, 2009, 08:26:07 PM
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. -

(http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i219/GrantRCanada/Webley%20and%20other%20revolvers/WebleyMkIandII.jpg)

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!
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Grapeshot on March 22, 2010, 06:40:18 PM
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.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: pony express on March 22, 2010, 08:41:34 PM
I believe you can BUT, not in any of the "main battle rifle" categories. I remember reading some discussion about that, probably in the thread about battle rifle standards.

Edit: It would be classified in the "militia class, according to the first post in this thread. Lever action, rifle caliber, under barrel magazine.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on March 26, 2010, 03:58:04 PM
Sorry, my computer crashed for a few days.  The Winchester M1876 in NWMP configuration is considered a Militia class weapon.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Windy City Joe on March 26, 2010, 09:23:25 PM
Hey there guys, here is some info on Birdshead and Bisley Vaqueros. Neither one is allowed in NCOWS, reason being is the Colt birdhead came in DA only and the new Ruger is SA. As for the Bisley Vaqueros the grip is no way near what the Colt was. I own a pair of both and can not use them when I shoot with NCOWS, with SASS it does'nt matter.
By the way I woulld be willing to trade them.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Patrick Henry Brown on March 28, 2010, 08:41:39 AM
What about the muzzleloading arms and breechloading carbines of the American Civil War era? These were certainly in the time period that GAF states, and many were still in use up until the early 1870's in Army units and later in militia units. I'm thinking of the Springfield and Enfield rifle muskets, the Smith, Maynard, Sharps (percussion), Hall, Gallagher carbines, etc.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on March 28, 2010, 09:02:54 AM
No, 2 reasons: they cannot be properly integrated into a modern multigun combat format, and they allready have organizations that provide a suitable venue, IE NSSA among others.  

Our timeline allows the use of those early cartridge weapons such as the Spencer and Henry.  That there is some technogical overlap is both normal and inevitable.

Thus we concentrate on the milspec cartridge weapons of the Victorian era, which previously have had no suitable format, and we require the use of fixed ammunition with self contained priming, as stated in the first paragraph of "Examples"
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Dusty Tagalon on August 01, 2010, 07:58:44 PM
I have a 1894 Mountain Carbine, Swedish. If I were to put together an outfit, could I sub a Russian Nagant revolver for a Swedish? The mountain carbine was expensive enough, the 7.5 Swede Nagant is more expensive then the rifle.

Brian
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on August 01, 2010, 08:43:54 PM
Yes!  The GAF applauds and encourages such efforts!  Remember as well, when in doubt, a single action will always be acceptable.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Dusty Tagalon on August 06, 2010, 06:17:14 PM
Actually, thinking about it, if I do get a costume together, initially shoot as infantry man, & not worry about the revolver at this time.

Brian
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on July 24, 2012, 09:21:16 AM
Just to expand a bit, the Russian 1895 Nagant revolver would work well for any european portrayal outside of Germany or Great Britian.  If they did not have a Nagant, they had something that looked just like one!
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Good Troy on July 20, 2015, 07:32:23 AM
Drydock,

I have sent a PM regarding battle rifle qualifications.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: DeaconKC on August 15, 2021, 07:07:02 PM
Okay, I have a couple of questions.
1. Is a C96 "Bolo" legal due to it's shorter barrel and grip?
2. Are the 5 1/2" "Artillery" versions of the Colt 1873 Legal?
3. Are the 5" version of the Schofield and the 5" versions of the Open top Legal?
Thanks
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Major 2 on August 15, 2021, 09:44:38 PM
Okay, I have a couple of questions.
1. Is a C96 "Bolo" legal due to it's shorter barrel and grip?
2. Are the 5 1/2" "Artillery" versions of the Colt 1873 Legal?
3. Are the 5" version of the Schofield and the 5" versions of the Open top Legal?
Thanks

I have a stake in this answer  ;)
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Drydock on August 16, 2021, 01:52:21 PM
Yes, yes and yes.  Usage should be appropriate to the period portrayed.  The Bolo is an appropriate substitute for any C96.
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: DeaconKC on August 16, 2021, 03:29:46 PM
 ;D ;D ;D ;D
Thank 'ee Sir! Much obliged!
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: Major 2 on August 16, 2021, 04:25:48 PM
Kinda figured that, great to see it written in Black and white  :D

Holster by London Jack , I made the belt and the pistol box is replica Gaylord by CD Jernigan
Title: Re: GAF Class Structure and Battle Rifle Standards
Post by: RattlesnakeJack on August 16, 2021, 10:42:46 PM
Like many of us, I'd love to have a C'96 Mauser pistol!

Canadian connection ... Samuel Benfield Steele, NWMP NCO and Officer, CO of "Steele's Scouts during the 1885 North-West Rebellion, CO of Strathcona's Horse during the 2nd Angl-Boer War, CO of 'B' Divisopm. South African Constabulary under Major General Robert Baden-Powell ...