Rules Query

[DYI]

Discussion of solid propellants, explosive devices or incendiary projectiles fired specifically from a spud cannon is prohibited, and may result in a permanent banning of your account

The meaning of this is quite clear in most cases: don't discuss solid fueled cannons here. But is there a loophole? A light gas gun often uses black powder or smokeless powder, but not as a propellant. In the case of a light gas gun, hydrogen or helium is the propellant gas, and a solid fuel is used to rapidly compress and shock heat it.

But this f*cks the whole thing over:

Explosive device: Any device that has the capability to release large amounts of stored energy rapidly.

Unless it should have been worded as "Discussion of solid propellants, or incendiary and/or explosive projectiles fired specifically from a spud cannon is strictly prohibited".

Otherwise, it would prohibit discussion of most spud guns, as they have the capability to release large amounts of stored energy rapidly, whether they're combustion, pneumatic, hybrid, or electromagnetic.

And finally:

Discussion of solid propellants, explosive devices or incendiary projectiles fired specifically from a spud cannon

What if they aren't fired from a spud cannon? The rules don't even go so far as to define what a spud cannon is. There are a lot of cannons on here that have never even fired a spud, because it would disintegrate in the barrel from the shock.

So the real questions here:
1. Can light gas guns using a solid propellant to drive a piston and compress the propellant gas be discussed here?
2. Can we discuss eplosive/incendiary projectiles that aren't intended to be fired from a spudgun?

[SpudFarm]

you have an eye for strange loop holes there DYI.

i can't answer tho

[bigbob12345]

Well I guess you could do both those things unless the rules are changed after this, which I suspect they will be.

[rp181]

you could do it, but its understood your not supposed too. Theres always going to be a loophole, its just a matter of finding it.

[Lentamentalisk]

My feeling on the light gas gun, is that no, solid propellants are just way too dangerous to be dealt with here. They are even worse pushing a piston, where they are trapped, than pushing a "spud" where they can escape. Whether the rules say it now or not, I think discussion of solid explosives or propellants or what ever, should be banned. Anyone who wants to kill them selves can go to a gun forum.
That's my 2 cents.

[rp181]

you would need some kind of exhuast, and if that was too small.......

[Fnord]

The main purpose of the rules page is to keep people safe and keep legal crap away from the forum. Being the things mentioned above are illegal in most places, talking about them is not allowed because we don't want people to think we're encouraging this type of behavior, and we don't want stupid teenagers trying to replicated it.

I can see some otherwise dangerous/illegal projects being let pass if they are thought out and conducted properly, and if the user shows they clearly know what they're doing.

For example, pcguy let a BP cannon slide a while back since the guy who made it clearly knew what forces were involved and used appropriate materials/precautions.

[STHORNE]

No offence DYI, but I personally think you are looking too much into this.

I do agree that they aren't as specific as they should be, but they are general to cover more bases. It's all to keep PCGUY out of trouble and to keep the destruction of plywood and milk jugs to a minimum

[PCGUY]

1. Can light gas guns using a solid propellant to drive a piston and compress the propellant gas be discussed here?
2. Can we discuss eplosive/incendiary projectiles that aren't intended to be fired from a spudgun?

Nope and Nope. The rules aren't only to keep spudders safe, they are to keep legal spudcannon material away from illegal material involving solid propellants. I want the image of this hobby to stay a safe, legal one.

[drex]

i agree with pcguy, i don't want this hobby outlawed because someone kills them self or someone else then says "it was just a spud gun" giving them a bad name.

[DYI]

Nope and Nope. The rules aren't only to keep spudders safe, they are to keep legal spudcannon material away from illegal material involving solid propellants. I want the image of this hobby to stay a safe, legal one.

Sounds good. After all, the E&W forum is the place for those things. I just wanted to make sure.

i agree with pcguy, i don't want this hobby outlawed because someone kills them self or someone else then says "it was just a spud gun" giving them a bad name.

No offence, but if they find someone's mangled corpse in a remote location, with steel shrapnel embedded in the surroundings, a bunch of darts lying on the ground, and a 2" steel plate with a hole the size of basketball punched through it stuck in the ground, the last thing they're going to expect is "death by spudgun".

[drex]

lol that was descriptive i wasn't saying that that will literally happen i just use that as an example. i just don't want spud guns to get a bad name.

[BC Pneumatics]

I think this has actually been brought up in the past, but it may have been in a private conversation.
The nice thing is, this isn't a court of law, and moderators can overrule anything that they want. It is like our version of the necessary and proper clause, only even less concrete.
It covers us to take actions against those up to no good, despite what loopholes and technicalities exist. I do however agree that the rules are poorly worded in certain areas, and should probably be edited to be a bit more correct.

[the cats in the bag]

So can we discuss firing rocket propeled smoke bombs from the barrel of a spud gun?

[BC Pneumatics]

Keep the cat in the bag on that one.