13 replies to this topic

[samboradford]

Top 5 things you would do or have the society do if someone had a magic wand, could fix all the problems / make them go away and we could all, miraculously, work together again.  Sorry, sounds like I've lost it but currently cohesion needs to start somewhere.  For my two-pence :

 

1. Liase with members / ELOs to help them gain their A+Ks

2. Produce a monthly magazine - both to communicate what the society is doing and as a drawcard for membership

3. Investigate alternative ways of expanding the options available within hobby experimental pyrotechnics - I mean looking to extend the 100g rule (contentious I know)

4. Provide a shop / supply of fuse, chemicals, building materials, books, tools etc. Perhaps take on a member to provide this.

5. Work on building the forum - assign people to generate posts and contents to garner discussion

 

Meetups are not on my list because at the moment there isn't the footfall to make it effectively work ( as was tried ) I'd do options 1 - 5 first.

[Rip Rap]

I certainly agree with 1, 3, 4 and 5. Monthly magazine I am not bothered about. Anything that can go in a magazine can be published on the forum "free".

 

I am lucky - my ELO is great and I have A&K and AO licences sorted. The main concerns I have at present concern storage of any compositions or articles before firing. I will be honest and say that I do not fully understand what can and cannot be stored. So an "idiots guide to storing experimental pyrotechnic compositions and constructed articles" would be good.

[David G]

Common sense has arrived. 1,3,4 and 5 are great ideas.

[maxman]

Yep agree with the above comments. I did quite like spark magazine with articles like the traffic light dissection amongst other things.

 

Rip Rap is storage not discussed in the good practice guide? Page 18/ 19 Explosive substance / article storage process map?

 

I thought this was an on going guidance but no one seems to have mentioned it for a long while and no updates that I know of.

 

Was the guidance sanctioned by HSE?

 

Rod

[wayne]

Yep agree with the above comments. I did quite like spark magazine with articles like the traffic light dissection amongst other things.

 

Rip Rap is storage not discussed in the good practice guide? Page 18/ 19 Explosive substance / article storage process map?

 

I thought this was an on going guidance but no one seems to have mentioned it for a long while and no updates that I know of.

 

Was the guidance sanctioned by HSE?

 

Rod

 

Yes it was...at some considerable depth! See the document revision history...

[David G]

Regarding 4, I thought Phil C had a shop? Unless we have a new entrepreneur posting?

Phil does. I retract my agreenent to 4

[Rip Rap]

Yes it was...at some considerable depth! See the document revision history...

I know it was. And I have read it at considerable length! We were asked if there was something we wanted the society to do! So even if it has been discussed "at some considerable depth!" I am still not 100% clear! So it is something that I would like (if that's OK with you???)

 

For example, following the process map to "Is substance listed in schedule 3 of ER 2014?" Schedule 3 then lists things such as - 

 

PYROTECHNIC ARTICLES REQUIRING AN EXPLOSIVES CERTIFICATE

This schedule has no associated Explanatory Memorandum

1.  Pyrotechnic articles which are or would, if packaged for transport, be assigned in accordance with the United Nations Recommendations the UN no. 0350, 0352, 0353, 0354, 0355, 0356, 0462, 0463, 0464, 0465, 0466, 0467, 0468, 0469, 0470 or 0472.

2.  Pyrotechnic articles which—

(a)are or would, if packaged for transport, be assigned in accordance with the United Nations Recommendations the UN no. 0349, 0351 or 0471; and

(are not intended to be used for the propulsion of model rockets or similar articles.

3.  Pyrotechnic articles which—

(a)are or would, if packaged for transport, be assigned in accordance with the United Nations Recommendations the UN no. 0033, 0034, 0035, 0037, 0038, 0039, 0171, 0254, 0291, 0297, 0299, 0399 or 0400; and

(are intended to be dropped as bombs from an aircraft.

4.  Pyrotechnic articles which—

(a)are or would, if packaged for transport, be assigned in accordance with the United Nations Recommendations the UN no. 0451, 0329, 0330, 0450 or 0449; and

(are intended to be dropped as torpedoes from an aircraft or dispatched from an installation on land or a vessel.

5.  Tracers for ammunition which are or would, if packaged for transport, be assigned in accordance with the United Nations Recommendations the UN no. 0212 or 0306. 

 

That may be crystal clear to you, but I must be thick, because it isn't to me.

[wayne]

I know it was. And I have read it at considerable length! We were asked if there was something we wanted the society to do! So even if it has been discussed "at some considerable depth!" I am still not 100% clear! So it is something that I would like (if that's OK with you???)

 

For example, following the process map to "Is substance listed in schedule 3 of ER 2014?" Schedule 3 then lists things such as - 

 

PYROTECHNIC ARTICLES REQUIRING AN EXPLOSIVES CERTIFICATE

This schedule has no associated Explanatory Memorandum

1.  Pyrotechnic articles which are or would, if packaged for transport, be assigned in accordance with the United Nations Recommendations the UN no. 0350, 0352, 0353, 0354, 0355, 0356, 0462, 0463, 0464, 0465, 0466, 0467, 0468, 0469, 0470 or 0472.

2.  Pyrotechnic articles which—

(a)are or would, if packaged for transport, be assigned in accordance with the United Nations Recommendations the UN no. 0349, 0351 or 0471; and

(are not intended to be used for the propulsion of model rockets or similar articles.

3.  Pyrotechnic articles which—

(a)are or would, if packaged for transport, be assigned in accordance with the United Nations Recommendations the UN no. 0033, 0034, 0035, 0037, 0038, 0039, 0171, 0254, 0291, 0297, 0299, 0399 or 0400; and

(are intended to be dropped as bombs from an aircraft.

4.  Pyrotechnic articles which—

(a)are or would, if packaged for transport, be assigned in accordance with the United Nations Recommendations the UN no. 0451, 0329, 0330, 0450 or 0449; and

(are intended to be dropped as torpedoes from an aircraft or dispatched from an installation on land or a vessel.

5.  Tracers for ammunition which are or would, if packaged for transport, be assigned in accordance with the United Nations Recommendations the UN no. 0212 or 0306. 

 

That may be crystal clear to you, but I must be thick, because it isn't to me.

 

Firstly, if you're asking for help, your attitude is pretty poor.  I've no idea what triggered such as response!

 

Secondly, AFAIK, there is no "Is substance listed in schedule 3 of ER 2014?" in the process map?  There is "Is substance listed on schedule 2 of ER 2014?" and "Are any articles listed in Schedule 3 of ER 2014?"

[Rip Rap]

I apologise for any offense - this can be a problem with forums, texts etc - the tone can be misinterpreted

 

However, there is no need to be quite so pedantic with your response - I made an error by typing "substance" instead of "article". The point still stands that Schedule 3 does not make easy reading (to me anyway) when trying to assess if an article is on the list.

Edited by Rip Rap, 02 March 2016 - 03:54 PM.

[wayne]

Agreed, the tone can be misinterpreted as I wasn't trying to be pedantic, just trying to clarify your question and help!

 

The process maps attempt to lead you through the relevant questions you need to ask yourself regarding storage when you are manufacturing substances or articles.  In this particular instance (Are any articles listed in Schedule 3 of ER 2014?), its asking if the device you've manufacture for experimental reasons falls into schedule 3.  Its up to you to decide that from the UN numbers listed in the schedule  In most experimental cases is would guess that the answer would be "no" if you examine the UN numbers (Articles, explosive, N.O.S, Bombs, with bursting charge)!  If the answer to this question was "yes", then is suggests that a explosive certificate is required.  In any case, you would probably have a explosive certificate if you are manufacturing BP at some level.

 

Cheers,

 

Wayne.

[martyn]

As this post is being read at the moment, here might be a good place to mention....

As of tomorrow, 3rd March, it will be illegal to possess a regulated substance without an EPP licence.

Up 'till now, any stocks held which were acquired before 26 May 2016 were legal to possess even without an EPP licence.

2 years inside  doesn't sound great.

Cheers

 

Edit - ignore me - just read another post by Wayne in another section where he points this out

Edited by martyn, 02 March 2016 - 05:33 PM.

[David G]

Good post you left out the business side of things tho
ugh, right you lot your all going to jail, sun is up at 7.15 make sure you’re ready to go.

Nice Kenneth. Not me though,I have my EPP

[samboradford]

No problem, Phil has been around for a long time I think the OP might want to rethink that request, Phil has been great in his products and input, not blowing smoke up your arse Phil but fairs fair.    

 

I certainly have no designs on running a "shop".  Yes Phil runs an excellent shop and has done for sometime as you point out.

 

If the society chose to, membership funds could be used to procure items and have these stored at a premises.  It might make sense for these premises to be already in use for pyrotechnic sales or it may not.  The point of this would be for society members, not for private commercial gain.  This would be a clear and immediate benefit to being a member of the society.  For example, if a business can procure Potassium Perchlorate at £5 - £6 per Kilogram including shipping then members could access this at cost, as has in fact been suggested in the past.

 

Cohesion is needed, clarity of posting and information and not making posts that are overtly critical of one-another or otherwise derogatory of the society or it's committee.  Constructive feedback is a different entity entirely and a useful one.

 

There is no harm re-iterating the legal standpoint as many times as necessary, given it's importance - accepted it can be frustrating.  Wayne has often unfairly been shot as the messenger in my book.

 

A magazine might be useful if it contained some meat - a focus on a different legislative topic each issue, new techniques or processes, adverts from pyrotechnic companies and discounts, etc etc - there is no reason why it couldn't be mailed as a pdf rather than hard copy if required.

 

More suggestions I think would be useful.

[samboradford]

6. Reinstate staff / moderation privileges for some members.