Sind die neuen PSP Regeln ASTM-konform? Dieser Frage hat sich Dale Ford von 68caliber.com angenommen nachdem Wicked Air Sportz in einer Erklärung geschrieben hat, dass die ASTM Bestimmungen nicht eingehalten werden. Dale Ford hat zu diesem Zweck die ASTM befragt. Die Erklärung von Wicked Air Sportz könnt ihr auch bei uns nachlesen.
In a letter recently placed on the Wicked Air Sportz website, the author called into question the legitimacy of the new PSP rules, the apparent legitimizing of Ramping Rate of Fire and trigger bounce, and how the insurance industry would respond to them. “We know that ramping is unsafe.” The letter stated. “In fact, our insurance carrier will not cover this type of shooting mode.” The letter also stated that Wicked Air Sportz would not be complying with the new PSP rules.
JJ Brookshire, Secretary of the ASTM Sub-Committee F08.24 that wrote the standards for paintball, read them and stated that the ASTM definition of a trigger event includes one ball fired per pull and release of the trigger. The ASTM Sub-Committee refers to this as a „Trigger Cycle“. After reading Paintball Sports Promotions 2005 rules, Mr. Brookshire commented that the rules regarding trigger bounce were „vague“ and that the PSP rules were „not in compliance with ASTM Standards.“ He also stated that although the ASTM writes the standards, they do not engage in testing or certification of products.
„The ASTM standards don't mandate a maximum allowed rate of fire,“ Mr. Brookshire stated, quoting standards contained in F2272-03. This is in direct conflict with the assertions contained in the letter to the public that Wicked Air Sportz published which stated, „The ASTM standards for paintball clearly state that a paintball marker must fire in semi-auto mode, have a maximum rate of fire of 15 bps, and have a maximum velocity of 280 fps“
As the investigation moved into the insurance side of the question, sources alleged that a Mr. Ken Isherwood of Market Access Corporation in Palatine, Illinois was the agent handling Paintball Sports Promotions account this year, with the actual underwriting being done by Lloyd's of London.
Unfortunately Mr. Isherwood could neither confirm nor deny any involvement with PSP, and cited that revealing his clients information was not something he would consider an intelligent thing to do, given the competitive nature of the insurance industry. When asked if he used the ASTM's standards to gauge risks, he again refused comment, citing that it wasn't good business practice to reveal methodology. Finally, he very politely refused to answer questions regarding whether or not he knew that the PSP's 2005 rules may not be ASTM-compliant, and again reminded me that he could neither confirm or deny any involvement with the PSP at all.
An email has been dispatched to Robert Rose from the PSP to get comment, and will be published here once it's recieved.
To read the PSP's rules for 2005, go to www.pspevents.com . To read WAS's letter, head to www.wickedairsportz.com/psp.htm .