pauleamonn

Almost everyone has this condition applied when it's a new licence. However, you can ask to have it reviewed after a year or two.

Yeah, my FEO was a lot happier with my application once he'd realised that I had 1000 acres to shoot on and that he already knew that it had been cleared for .243.

Thank you - Yes, I do have my moments. Sadly, however, they are few and far between. Now I need to retire to a darkened room to recover from my efforts.

I think it needs to be done the other way around - he will need to apply for an FAC and then have the gun converted otherwise there is the danger that he will be refused an FAC and then be stuck with an overpowered gun that he can't take delivery of but must pay for the conversion and then sell at a loss. Regarding the idea of going for a rimmie or a .17 instead, it is a valid point. However, I suspect that the rimmie's bad habit of sending rounds ricocheting all over the place, may make the success of an application for a .17 more likely.

Well, in that case, you may want to consider going down the route of joining a club with suitable facilities to shoot whatever it is you buy. That will give you the good reason you'll need to own the rifle. Then, once you've got it, you could call in the FEO and ask his opinion on turning your plot into your personal shooting range.

Sable - I think the thing that the other posters have not really made clear (although Mick Miller did allude to it) is that, when you apply for an FAC you need to have 'good reason' and, in my opinion, you don't - certainly not to buy an air rifle that is capable of killing bears and bison. If you are looking at an air rifle that will shoot and kill at 100yds you may be better to consider a Daystate Wolverine. It fires a .303 pellet and would do the job you are looking for. However, were I your FEO, I would be concerned about the possibility of you 'over-shooting' your plot. Still, as Dekers said, there is no harm in asking.

Yep that's correct. But, to repeat my question - what do you mean by 'true' and 'true' in relation to what? As far as I'm concerned, each mildot can be 'arranged' to show a variety of POA/POI by adjusting the magnification and/or zeroing at a certain distance.. For example, on my scope/with my gun/on x10 mag/zero'ed at 25yds, my centre of reticle is obviously 25yds, my first half mildot is 35yds, the first mildot is 40yds, the next half mildot is 50yds. I have taken it up to 60yds which is three mildots down. But this was all discovered by trial and error, by putting targets out at known distances, shooting at them and then measuring the POI in relation to the POA on my reticle.

True in relation to what?

Yep, that's about it. A bit crude but. short of getting a rangefinder, about all we've got. The combination of the clear view and the lack of reticle movement are the signs.

Yep, I totally agree with Beardo and Dekers on the range finding aspect. Most 'normal' (cheap?) scopes are pretty **** at that. That is why the FT shooters who rely on parallax focus for range finding pay thousands of pounds for a scope. It's also why they have the very large wheels on the parallax turret. So they can minutely adjust the knob rather than swing it about like we mere hunters do. If you want to use your scope as a range finder you'll need to go down the route of setting out some targets at known distances and then looking at them through the scope and adjusting the parallax until the target appears to be in focus. Then you can look at the numbers on the AO and make a comparison. If you note both the distance of the target and what the AO says, you can still use it for range finding even though the numbers are inaccurate. Another way to see how parallax affects your POA/POI is to make rings out of your thumb and forefinger on each hand. Now hold the left hand ring at arms length and the right hand ring about a foot away from your face. Now line up your dominant eye through both rings and look at an object a bit away from you. Now move your head a few inches to one side. When you do this you will no longer be able to see the original object nor be able to see through both rings. In order for you to, once again, see through both rings (with your head still shifted to the side), you will need to move one of the rings and, once you do, you will no longer be looking at the original object. This is what you get if your parallax is not adjusted properly and you don't put your eye in exactly the same position behind the scope.

Yeah, if you follow Si's advice you won't go wrong. Personally I think it is quite important for you to set the parallax correctly for each distance for two reasons. The first one is that it means it's not so crucial that you align your eye behind the scope in exactly the same place each time you shoot (although you should try and do so by using the same hold and putting you cheek to the stock in the same place each time). If the parallax is not set properly and you don't put your eye in the same place your point of impact will change even if the crosshairs are in the right place. This will lead to missed shots and, if you are not aware of the importance of parallax, total confusion. The other is that, if the distance you are shooting at is vastly different to 25yds, the target will be more in focus. This will help you achieve better results from your shooting.

That's correct but the most important point is - how far out is the pellet's zenith? To explain it easily I'll use exaggerated distances as examples. If you zero your scope at 10yds and then shoot through a paper target at the zero'ed distance so as the pellet carries on going (bad form, I know but humour me), the pellet would hit the target while on the rise and then will continue to rise until it reaches its zenith or peak on the other side of the target. Equally, were you to zero at 35yds and then shoot through a paper target at the zero'ed distance in the same way, the pellet would be falling as it hit the target and then continue to fall after the target. The trick to avoid hold under is to discover how far out (usually about 20-25yds with a sub 12ft/lbs air rifle) the pellet hits the zero'ed distance with the flight path level. In other words, the point of travel where the pellet neither rising or falling. This will result in you being able to shoot at your targets at the zero'ed distance using the centre cross of the reticle. When shooting at anything closer or further away than the zero'ed distance you'll only need to use holdover.

Darno - have you done as suggested by Mole? It would be a shame to lose the opportunity to use such a nice scope due to not trying all the options.

Actually, Mole is correct. If you think about it, the line of sight to the target (what you see through the scope) is being crossed from below to above by the pellet. That is shown by the fact that the pellet is striking high. This means that the front of the origin of the line of sight (the scope) needs to be raised in order to make the point at which the line of sight hits the target coincide with the POI of the pellet. Hence the need to pack up the front of the mount.

Alternatively, if you don't have any thin plastic or film negative to hand, you can use folded foil.

Here is a by David James on the one I think you're referring to.

Hi Axeman As the other members have said, it is best to buy an FAC as is rather than buy a sub 12ft/lb then pay again to have it turned up. I have actually got an HW100 in FAC and am quite pleased with it. There again, maybe my expectations and requirements are different to others. There was a lot of talk (and still is in some quarters) about it being inaccurate. Well, as I say, maybe what I want is different to other people and so I find my 1" groups at 60yds sufficient for what I want. They are very pellet fussy. I eventually found that AA Field Extras (18.4g) were the best for mine after having shot a lot of Bisley Magnums through it. I also think that they may take on the 'challenging' attribute of the springer in that (I suspect) it is a bit hold fussy too. This may be where people currently get the idea that it is inaccurate when, in actual fact, it is simply showing up their poor shooting habits. The historical questions about accuracy came from Weihrauch using a polygon barrel as far as I'm aware. Regarding the question of adjustable power. The thought of having to either adjust my zero or make the necessary allowances doesn't appeal to me but it may you. As usual, the best way to go about it would be to appeal to other users of the forum who own FAC air rifles to allow you to try them out. It will involve a bit of travelling on your behalf but at least you'll be able to actually shoot the guns in FAC and ask the owners on their thoughts.