WalkedUp Posted February 13, 2022 Report Share Posted February 13, 2022 (edited) I have an ‘open’ ticket but some of my pals on a permission do not. A mosaic of permissions was cleared for “22 centre fire” in 2018. A recent conversation with the FLO about trying to re-rate land for deer calibre rifles suitable for fallow he suggested that “22CF and it’s variants means it cleared for up .270, so a .243 would be fine”. This seems illogical, so I am requesting it being confirmed in writing. Has anyone else been told similar or have any clue why? Edited February 13, 2022 by WalkedUp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Good shot? Posted February 13, 2022 Report Share Posted February 13, 2022 No clue why unfortunately but my permissions are cleared for .222 and I cannot have .223. This makes no sense to me either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 13, 2022 Report Share Posted February 13, 2022 I’m not convinced your FEO knows what he’s talking about. If what he has advised were true you could buy anything from a .22 Hornet to .270, which you can’t. As you’ll know, .22 is 5.56 and .270 is 6.80 or somewhere around there. No RFD will sell you a .270 or a .243 on the basis of being able to buy a ‘.22CF’. Let us know what he says. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkedUp Posted February 13, 2022 Author Report Share Posted February 13, 2022 Yes I agree, I politely suggested this to him but was not in a position to flatly disagree. Every time I’ve recalled this conversation to anyone they act like I am supporting the FEO’s statement, which I am not! The .243WIN is just a necked down .308WIN, it has no relationship with any “22” cartridge that I know of. He was not suggesting that a .243WIN chambered rifle can be bought with “22CF” but that my pal with a closed ticket shooting his .243 over that land would be doing so legally as it is cleared for “22CF”.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HantsRob Posted February 13, 2022 Report Share Posted February 13, 2022 Sorry, could someone perform a google translate and explain this to someone that doesn't have an FAC and understand your foreign language? Genuinely trying to learn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkedUp Posted February 13, 2022 Author Report Share Posted February 13, 2022 I’m no expert but if this helps: FEO = Firearms Enquiry Officer (see FLO) FLO = Firearms Liaison Officer (see FEO) .22CF = ? Should mean a centrefire rifle with a bore diameter of .22”, i.e. its calibre. .222 = .222 Remington (REM) a chambering with a .224” diameter bullet. Father of the .223 and NATO 5.56mm .223 = .223 Remington (REM), a longer more powerful .22 chambering based upon the .222 RFD = Registered Firearms Dealer .243 = .243 Winchester, based upon a necked down .308WIN cartridge firing a bullet of .243” diameter .308 = the civilian version of the NATO 7.62mm 5.56 = the standard NATO rifle cartridge for assault rifles (M16 etc) as a lighter version of the 7.62mm to enable more cartridges to be carried 7.62 = the standard NATO battle rifle and machine gun cartridge based upon a reduced 30-06 30-06 = 30-06 Springfield, of 1906 a .30” calibre that was US standard rifle and machine gun cartridge Necked down = a cartridge created by reducing the diameter of the bullet from an existing cartridge, narrowing the neck to give a chambering that offers a faster, lighter, softer recoiling round. .270 = .270 Winchester a necked down 30-03 (... a sister cartridge slightly predating the 30-06) in .270” calibre .22 hornet = .22” Hornet, historically one of the smallest centre fire cartridges. It’s background is target shooting cartridges not military. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HantsRob Posted February 13, 2022 Report Share Posted February 13, 2022 Thanks for that! now to google cf vs rf, different heads, weights, and practical use of each! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkedUp Posted February 13, 2022 Author Report Share Posted February 13, 2022 Heads = swear word 🤣 10 minutes ago, HantsRob said: different heads Rimfire cartridges have an inbuilt primer and are effectively disposable, single use. Centrefire cartridges use a replaceable primer so the expensive brass case can be reused. They use thicker brass and so can withstand much greater pressures, meaning larger calibres and higher velocities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkedUp Posted February 13, 2022 Author Report Share Posted February 13, 2022 Ignore the suggested quarry, but the comparative sizes may be helpful visual tool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkedUp Posted February 13, 2022 Author Report Share Posted February 13, 2022 (edited) In fact, even the comparative sizes on that image are completely wrong. Edited February 14, 2022 by WalkedUp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windswept Posted February 14, 2022 Report Share Posted February 14, 2022 16 hours ago, WalkedUp said: I have an ‘open’ ticket but some of my pals on a permission do not. A mosaic of permissions was cleared for “22 centre fire” in 2018. A recent conversation with the FLO about trying to re-rate land for deer calibre rifles suitable for fallow he suggested that “22CF and it’s variants means it cleared for up .270, so a .243 would be fine”. This seems illogical, so I am requesting it being confirmed in writing. Has anyone else been told similar or have any clue why? Well, 22CF doesn't seem to be a frequently used term and I would logically assume that's anything from .220 to 229, so basically anything that shoots a .223/224 bullet. Certainly not a .243 or .270. But why are they limiting in to .270, when the guidance states "However, for the larger species (Fallow, Sika and Red deer), .270 and larger are generally more suitable." I also thought they shouldn't force someone to buy another rifle, so if someone has a .308 they shouldn't be forced to buy say a .270 just to meet an arbitary rating for the land? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShootingEgg Posted February 14, 2022 Report Share Posted February 14, 2022 If it is upto 22CF, then is 243 not above 22CF? As .24" is larger than .22" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkedUp Posted February 14, 2022 Author Report Share Posted February 14, 2022 These are all points I agree with. I strongly dislike the ambiguity of .22CF (and .22RF) yet these terms have been used by all three licensing authorities I have dealt with. 23 hours ago, WalkedUp said: .22CF = ? Hence the question mark 👍 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
team tractor Posted February 21, 2022 Report Share Posted February 21, 2022 On 13/02/2022 at 20:27, HantsRob said: Sorry, could someone perform a google translate and explain this to someone that doesn't have an FAC and understand your foreign language? Genuinely trying to learn. Ha Ha your me around 10 years ago . I started off with a 17 hmr and discovered it wasnt right on fox . 223 -243 then I started reloading and it just keeps going . I remember my mate going on about a .222 . I wondered what the hell he was on about . The best way to learn is sitting in someone’s gun /reloading room and picking up different cases . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zipdog Posted February 21, 2022 Report Share Posted February 21, 2022 I have never really understood the system for clearing land. It always seems very arbitrary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oowee Posted February 21, 2022 Report Share Posted February 21, 2022 3 minutes ago, zipdog said: I have never really understood the system for clearing land. It always seems very arbitrary. Arbitrary and a complete nonsense. At one time I had land in three force areas each with a different approach. I had to write my approvals on each set of access notes to make sure to take the right calibre. My paddock was cleared for .243 but a 500 acre farm was cleared for rim fire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zipdog Posted February 21, 2022 Report Share Posted February 21, 2022 1 minute ago, oowee said: Arbitrary and a complete nonsense. At one time I had land in three force areas each with a different approach. I had to write my approvals on each set of access notes to make sure to take the right calibre. My paddock was cleared for .243 but a 500 acre farm was cleared for rim fire. Exactly. And just because its cleared doesn’t mean its safe to shoot in all directions! So you really do have to ask yourself what point is it achieving. Why not just vet firearms applicants throughly regarding gun safety for a start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted February 22, 2022 Report Share Posted February 22, 2022 7 hours ago, zipdog said: Exactly. And just because its cleared doesn’t mean its safe to shoot in all directions! So you really do have to ask yourself what point is it achieving. Why not just vet firearms applicants throughly regarding gun safety for a start. Because to do so the authorities would need to A. Understand it all and B. Employ staff who understand it all and could work with it. The system is far from perfect, BUT, could be a whole lot worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
team tractor Posted February 22, 2022 Report Share Posted February 22, 2022 8 hours ago, oowee said: Arbitrary and a complete nonsense. At one time I had land in three force areas each with a different approach. I had to write my approvals on each set of access notes to make sure to take the right calibre. My paddock was cleared for .243 but a 500 acre farm was cleared for rim fire. I was told I haven’t got land passed for my 12g 5 shot 😂😂😂. my mate didn’t realise I’d got a farm passed already for 22hornet but he was only allowed 22lr . 22cf is about your limit around here but I have 243 on 2 bits of ground . My worry is loosing the 243 as hs2 is going through that ground . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
team tractor Posted February 22, 2022 Report Share Posted February 22, 2022 The other thing in question is if land is passed for 22lr can you use a hmr ? In theory it’s smaller but then it’s twice the power Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted February 22, 2022 Report Share Posted February 22, 2022 29 minutes ago, team tractor said: 22cf is about your limit around here but I have 243 on 2 bits of ground . My worry is loosing the 243 as hs2 is going through that ground . You just have to promise not to shoot at any trains, it's a sub condition! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
team tractor Posted February 22, 2022 Report Share Posted February 22, 2022 22 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said: You just have to promise not to shoot at any trains, it's a sub condition! I didn’t realise 😂. We have 2 lines destroying Tamworth 😢. Most have complety sold off Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walker570 Posted February 22, 2022 Report Share Posted February 22, 2022 9 hours ago, zipdog said: I have never really understood the system for clearing land. It always seems very arbitrary. It is. Many moons ago I ran a syndicate down in Herefordshire , close to 800 acres in a natural bowl. At the start I put in my renewal and asked to incude this ground. I had a police officer(before civilianisarion) turn up look at it a declare the only back stop was a disused railway line at the southern end of the area. This was in fact absolutely level with the fields and he was looking at the ordnance map. After walking him around and 'educating' him the area was cleared. He did not even understand the advantage of high seats. I hope things have improved since then. Nathan. Just point out that you will be putting in high seats to work from. Indicate the safety angles available etc., basically inform him you actually know what your doing. I did this for one of my farms when the owner put in for a centre fire and they would only allow him a 22CF I got this upgraded to 243 . It was explained that I had been shooting the ground safely for 15 years on an open ticket and explained my background. The application went through like hot butter off a knife. There is so much ignorance coming out of the Home Office, I once questioned their logic and had one of there staff try to lecture me on the fact that they just couldn't let anyone run around with a 50 cal as if anyone would want such for deer stalking/management. In my view by far the best alround calibre for killing anyhting in this country from fox to red deer and wild boar is the 308 Winchester. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old'un Posted February 22, 2022 Report Share Posted February 22, 2022 Although I am not into rifles as much as some people I do have a .22lr on an open ticket, my understand of the term “open” means I can shoot with this rifle on any land (approved or not) that I feel safe to-do so, or am I wrong? This question is for those with a lot more knowledge than me, if you have an open ticket with a number of calibres on it to shoot anything from a rabbit to a red deer do you still need the land approved for that calibre? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miki Posted February 22, 2022 Report Share Posted February 22, 2022 On 13/02/2022 at 21:00, HantsRob said: now to google cf vs rf, different heads, weights, and practical use of each! Here you go, it's important to get the terminiology right ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.