|
Post by ducttape on May 5, 2008 13:03:25 GMT -5
usally there are inspections but he rolled it onto the field also it wasnt chronoed before because originally it was a pug Mortar
|
|
|
Post by mushroom on May 5, 2008 16:18:53 GMT -5
Gee smoke....when did you start dating a cheese grater?
|
|
|
Post by Trapper on May 5, 2008 17:25:09 GMT -5
I don't think that the launcher in question had a pop off valve either ... but, only saw pieces of it ...
Spud, inspection of these things is going to be a major issue ... LAWS systems like what you make and DBD have manufactured appear to all have redundant safety features built into them ... however, there isn't anyone on the ref staff at SplatBrothers that I am aware of that can look at a LAWS and say yes it is O.K. and no it isn't ...
So I would expect that SB is going to hold to the rule of only laws specifically manufactured and sold as a Nerf launcher are going to be allowed for awhile.
But, I have no doubt that a properly made LAWS out of PVC (sched 80?) with appropriate regulators, pressure reducers, pop-off-valves, etc. are safe, otherwise I am sure that people like Spud and DBD wouldn't be making them and using them.
|
|
|
Post by spudcrazy on May 5, 2008 19:52:53 GMT -5
Well, like I said, I don't have a problem with Twister's decision. It's a tough, but necessary call. Too many people "try" to make these things and you really do need to know what you are doing. I totally support Twister and Ronn's decision. In the future, I know I and I'm sure some of the DBD folks would be willing to either educate or inspect LAWs at the events...
|
|
|
Post by Vicious on May 6, 2008 0:59:04 GMT -5
I guess it is time to retire Charlotte to backyard fun and begin designs for a metal launcher, lol.
I only have one question. What makes the manufactured products more safe? Are they tested and guaranteed? What possible scenarios are there for failures of that kind of launcher?
I know that pressurized metal containers tend to stay in one piece as a result of failure due to fatigue failure. And that PVC tends to fragment, but shouldn't the manufactured launchers still be checked for fatigue and safety? And if we go through the effort to check these, then why not for PVC also?
|
|
|
Post by VooDoo on May 6, 2008 1:16:13 GMT -5
I think a lot of the issue, at this point, may be the advantage of having a properly insured manufacturer to be able to approach if some sort of (god forbid) loss recovery becomes necessary... in the event of something a lot worse happening do to a failure. Currently there is absolutely no regulation in any form with the home made launchers...no way to properly control the quality of the build from individual to individual. I compare it to allowing everyone who wants to drive an automobile to be able to do so without needing a state drivers license (regulation).
I am saddened over the fact that I will no longer be able to use my home-builds....yet on the other hand, I have always heavily preached the dangers involved with compressed gases and the knowledge and respect they demand from the user. I am certainly torn on the subject, but at the same time, I was always nervous over the recent rise in the amount of builders/users appearing at the fields. Happy about the ruling? No. Safer because of the ruling...most definitely.
|
|
|
Post by Twister on May 6, 2008 5:57:46 GMT -5
Just to jump in here for a second... VooDoo is right with a manufactured launcher it would be certain that the proper safety features would be in place due to any liability issues that might arise.
The jury is still out on homemade launchers. There are some folks that build them with safety first in mind and then performance. However, until we can figure out how to assure the safety of ALL we will have to roll with our first decision...
Ronn & I are not trying to be a buzz killer but we have to make sure that everyone and everything is safe... Please bear with us as we strive to sort this out to the satisfaction of all...
-Twister
|
|
|
Post by prodigy on May 6, 2008 8:59:06 GMT -5
As someone that is new to LAWS I am happy to say I support whatever decision is rendered. I would LOVE LOVE LOVE to bring Charlotte back to Splatbrothers, but if I can't and the field is a safer place for all of us then that is perfectly fine with me. I know I'm just one guy, but that's my two cents.
|
|
|
Post by Aldva on May 6, 2008 10:13:53 GMT -5
I purposely have not weighed in on the issue so far in an effort to personally take in everything that has transpired and to see different peoples perspectives.
SoVa, has not been as active as many of you in the Spudgun arena with Splatbrothers, but our Demo people have worked with and built Pneumatic's for years. Safety is as much our first concern as anyones but a couple of issues have been brought up that I feel is neccessary to address.
First, as Voodoo stated Manufactured guns are nice in with the perspective that you have a viable entity that has liability in case of catastropic failure and also so that you would have a common knowledge of how something is bult, assembled and where all the certain parts should be.
Nothing personal but this concept is only good on the day of purchase in most cases. The first thing any ardent baller does is attempt to make his marker/laws/equipment better. In doing so Manufacturer Liability is null and void. Any tampering, repair or modifacations automatically negates Manufaturers products and completed operations liability.
In addition to this, modifactions to said equipment inherantly changes the dynamics of the equipment. examples here might be, upgrading a reg, changing placement of pop-offs, etc.. there are inumerable possibilites just as there are in marker mods.
It is my personal opinion (We all know what those are like) That outside of requiring unaltered, unmodded, untampered pneumatic equipment as a whole (to include guns, laws, mortars, mines etc..). That the only viable solution is an inspection of equipment to insure that it meets the fields minimum safety requirements by individuals specifically taught on what to look for. This would also require a written set of specs set by the field on what is required.
While some of this may have sounded a bit overboard (referencing guns laws, mortars, mines etc), please remember that if a standard is set by an entity that requires safety requirements on one specific set of equipment then Liability is increased on equipment that doesnt have the same guidelines. Minimum safety standards should be set and administered unilaterally.
It is my personal hope, that the spirit of Paintball and its inventive participants is able to continue on, but safety of all has to be the paramount concern for those involved. Myself and team SoVa stand behind Splatbrothers and their decisions, as we know they hold the safety of its players and the spirit of the game in the highest of their thoughts and concerns.
As always SoVa and myself are available for any assistance or aid we may lend to paintball, the field and its players.
|
|
|
Post by spudcrazy on May 6, 2008 11:46:05 GMT -5
That the only viable solution is an inspection of equipment to insure that it meets the fields minimum safety requirements by individuals specifically taught on what to look for. This would also require a written set of specs set by the field on what is required. Minimum safety standards should be set and administered unilaterally. As always SoVa and myself are available for any assistance or aid we may lend to paintball, the field and its players. As am I, available. I can help write standards too if you wish. Believe it or not, the standards can be made VERY simple and can be easily administered as well as the inspections (as I pointed out in a previous post). The big thing is that the inspections CANNOT be overlooked and a simple bright colored band on the LAW to mark that they have been inspected should be placed on them so that ANYONE on the field can clearly see that the LAW is permitted to take the field.
|
|
|
Post by socoj2 on May 6, 2008 20:29:25 GMT -5
Soco From the blackhearts, never made it to Splat but i have played with several people that have posted so far.
Based on the description of what every body posted, The PVC failed and turned into a Bomb due to over pressurization. Not Fatigue failure.
If the person is using <100 PSI as most launchers should be if they have a 24" barrel and about a 1-1 chamber to volume and a 1" valve. There should be a Pop then a vent to atmosphere.
PVC generally turns into very deadly shrapnel around 250-300 PSI. It definatly sounds like a shot gun upwards of 400 PSI.
Spud has done his homework.
From a sport that a lof people think that if you get shot in the mask enough it will generally shatter, there is a lot of Knee Jerking over very poor design.
Over the next few weeks. If i can find time between Finishing my Mini-Gun and Auto-Cannon. I will put up the definitive PVC-Nerf Launcher Guide and that should help field owners a lot.
I still see people showing up to games with NSF-DWV fittings, i want to just take it and smash it prior to anyone airing it up.
Does anyone have a picture of said cannon in a pre-exploded condition?
PS. Ball Valve Launchers should never be allowed as it is VERY easy to beat the crono then get on the field and shoot 350 FPS.
|
|
|
Post by spudcrazy on May 6, 2008 21:16:41 GMT -5
Spud has done his homework. ;D ;D ;D Just about 20 years in the making of Spudlaunchers, hence the name Spudcrazy. Like I've told people here, "spudding" is what got me into paintball, not the other way around. I have been building these things since the day of ducttape, tin soda can's, lighter fluid, and swinging it around until you get the perfect air/fluid mixture, then a little match at the bottom hole and WHOOF!!!! They were tennisball mortars back in the day. So yes, you could say I've done my homework!!!! Not to mention winning 1st place for farthest "chuckin'" of a potato in the 1996 Delaware Pumpkin Chunkin' contest!!!!
|
|
|
Post by ducttape on May 7, 2008 5:45:54 GMT -5
DUCT TAPE!!!!!!!!!!
WHERE!
|
|
|
Post by socoj2 on May 7, 2008 6:18:39 GMT -5
Spud has done his homework. ;D ;D ;D Just about 20 years in the making of Spudlaunchers, hence the name Spudcrazy. Like I've told people here, "spudding" is what got me into paintball, not the other way around. I have been building these things since the day of ducttape, tin soda can's, lighter fluid, and swinging it around until you get the perfect air/fluid mixture, then a little match at the bottom hole and WHOOF!!!! They were tennisball mortars back in the day. So yes, you could say I've done my homework!!!! Not to mention winning 1st place for farthest "chuckin'" of a potato in the 1996 Delaware Pumpkin Chunkin' contest!!!! You see my new Automatic launcher on SpudFiles? 55 PSI. if i get to 70 PSI its over 300 FPS. The version for my tank will have a 5 foot barrel instead of 3. and whill be 40 PSI. I can currently Put rockets in a Large Coffe can at 30 yards. and a Trash Can at 100 yards.
|
|
|
Post by spudcrazy on May 7, 2008 8:37:44 GMT -5
Awesome...
Ahh, Spudfiles, I haven't been there in a long time. Outstanding source of information.
A neat thing to do in the winter (below freezing) (especially if you have kids in grade school) is to fill your barrel up with water (after pressurizing the air chamber) then shoot the launcher. Put the pressure to something fairly high, in your case, probably 60-70psi, so that it can push all the water out and atomize the water. When the water atomizes, it freezes rapidly in freezing temps and you create a cool little snow blower.... This makes for a great demonstration at your local elementary school.
|
|