Targets are a technical subject when we get down to the dimensions of the ring sizes at the differing ranges, both metric and imperial. I have downloaded the ICFRA TR Rules, NRA Fullbore Rules and the DCRA Rules from Canada.
They all have similar target dimensions but with our current Aussie TR target having the biggest bullet catch zone of all, with our Inner (4 ring) and Magpie (3 ring).
Its a positive move to change our target to an international standard but I would like to know which one we will be using. ICFRA have the same size targets and scoring rings for TR and F-Class from 300-600 yards or metres. Then from 700 to 1000 yards or metres there is a separate F-Class target and TR target, with the F-Class target having smaller scoring rings (good).
I also heard there is a possibility that the ICFRA targets will be used on the shorts (300-600) and the NRA Palma target will be used on the longs (700-1000).
Interestingly ICFRA and Palma define long range differently. For ICFRA targets long range starts at 700 and Palma at 800. The Palma target has a smaller outer ring than the ICFRA, otherwise its the same at 800-1000.
Does anyone know WTF is going on with our 2010 targets and can they please provide me with accurate dimensions of these targets.
I'm sure I'm not the only one concerned about what we will be shooting on next year and would like to be able to read a paper from our own NRAA on what has been decided.
Ian
New Targets In 2010
Moderator: Mod
I was informed on the weekend by our club's SARA rep that SA will be joining with Victoria to oppose the introduction of the ICFRA targets.
From the information given, I understand that both SA and Vic will remain with the targets we are currently using for the foreseeable future.
The rep gave the reason being that the lower grades and older shooters would leave the sport if the targets got changed to the smaller ring ICFRA targets. I would like to know what facts or data support this statement? Perhaps if the converse of that same logic is applied then more shooters will join the sport if the entire target becomes a v-bull and only possibles are shot! Not very likely is it!
It looks like a new generation of Rifle Association committee members in a number of States will be needed before change will be possible. Using an internationally recognised target like ICFRA I thought was a good idea but it looks like it was suggested before its time.
It would take a massive last minute lobby effort by club members to change the direction of SA and Vics Rifle Associations now. It now seems an opportunity has been lost and it will be more of the same TR targets with super centres for sometime yet.
Ian
From the information given, I understand that both SA and Vic will remain with the targets we are currently using for the foreseeable future.
The rep gave the reason being that the lower grades and older shooters would leave the sport if the targets got changed to the smaller ring ICFRA targets. I would like to know what facts or data support this statement? Perhaps if the converse of that same logic is applied then more shooters will join the sport if the entire target becomes a v-bull and only possibles are shot! Not very likely is it!
It looks like a new generation of Rifle Association committee members in a number of States will be needed before change will be possible. Using an internationally recognised target like ICFRA I thought was a good idea but it looks like it was suggested before its time.
It would take a massive last minute lobby effort by club members to change the direction of SA and Vics Rifle Associations now. It now seems an opportunity has been lost and it will be more of the same TR targets with super centres for sometime yet.
Ian
If this is the case then I will be very disappointed, As a new TR shooter(less than 12 months) the current targets do not make you a better shooter. They do not penalise you for bad shooting and thus you get very lax about trying to get better, I can have a very good day and get 45-48, or a bad day and still get 42-45.
-
M12LRPV
- Posts: 429
- Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 9:52 am
- Location: Sydney
- Contact:
Well, we've been shooting on them at Malabar for 4 months now. I haven't heard anyone complaining about members leaving in droves.
If you think possible's wont be possible then think again. First week out saw a few 60's and some 120's. We had one in our first grade shoot (I haven't seen the results for the second grade shoot). I'm sure there have been plenty shot since I just haven't been paying attention.
They do have their own problems though. We keep shooting the 6 ring out of them really quickly which is a pain
Comparing last seasons scores with this seasons scores shows no real difference. Which means that we're all shooting better because the targets make us shoot better.
If the lower grades and older shooters are ready to give up because the targets get harder then I would suggest that they are ready to give up anyway and the target is not the problem
If you think possible's wont be possible then think again. First week out saw a few 60's and some 120's. We had one in our first grade shoot (I haven't seen the results for the second grade shoot). I'm sure there have been plenty shot since I just haven't been paying attention.
They do have their own problems though. We keep shooting the 6 ring out of them really quickly which is a pain
Comparing last seasons scores with this seasons scores shows no real difference. Which means that we're all shooting better because the targets make us shoot better.
If the lower grades and older shooters are ready to give up because the targets get harder then I would suggest that they are ready to give up anyway and the target is not the problem
-
M12LRPV
- Posts: 429
- Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 9:52 am
- Location: Sydney
- Contact:
-
AlanF
- Posts: 7532
- Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 8:22 pm
- Location: Maffra, Vic
- Has thanked: 229 times
- Been thanked: 936 times
M12LRPV wrote:...If the lower grades and older shooters are ready to give up because the targets get harder then I would suggest that they are ready to give up anyway...
My thoughts entirely - if it takes something as trivial as that for someone to leave then its probably doing everyone a favour by providing them with an excuse.
Alan
-
John E
- Posts: 1015
- Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 2:14 pm
- Location: Melbourne
- Contact:
AlanF wrote:M12LRPV wrote:...If the lower grades and older shooters are ready to give up because the targets get harder then I would suggest that they are ready to give up anyway...
My thoughts entirely - if it takes something as trivial as that for someone to leave then its probably doing everyone a favour by providing them with an excuse.
Alan[/quote
Poor form!!!!
-
AlanF
- Posts: 7532
- Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 8:22 pm
- Location: Maffra, Vic
- Has thanked: 229 times
- Been thanked: 936 times
John E wrote:AlanF wrote:...if it takes something as trivial as that for someone to leave then its probably doing everyone a favour by providing them with an excuse...
Poor form!!!!
John,
Okay, that statement's probably a bit strong. But I get a bit tired of hearing "I'll give the game away if blah blah blah..." when minor rule changes are proposed. And this is a minor rule change - just a slight lowering of EVERYONE's scores. And can anyone say that the loss of numbers after the last reduction in target size wasn't just part of the long term attrition rate?
Raven wrote:...are you aware of the rationale behind the VRA retaining the old target??
Richard,
I believe it was decided by getting votes from all Clubs. What logic (or otherwise) was used to oppose the change I'm not sure.
Alan
-
timothi3197
- Posts: 191
- Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 9:46 pm
- Location: Australia
-
John E
- Posts: 1015
- Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 2:14 pm
- Location: Melbourne
- Contact:
Alan,
a complete change of targets is hardly a minor change, and although I haven't expressed an opinion as to whether it's a good or bad move, it is patently obvious that it is the lower grades that will be affected the most, and I have reservations about that. We need to look after these people, not kick them in the guts.
Richard,
the VRA did ask clubs to vote on the subject, but I heard that only a small number of clubs responded. My club didn't respond because we have not had the opportunity to shoot on the ICFRA target, and so couldn't make an informed comment. Although we have had the ICFRA aiming marks and centres on order for quite a long time, they have not been available.
Don't take this for gospel, but the bush telegraph tells me that the VRA Council has similar reservations to mine i.e. the lower grades will be the most adversely affected group, and that will have negative ramifications.
At time when target shooting is going through a period of renewed interest and enthusiasm and the first gain in membership that we have had in years, why do anything to jeopardise that?
I thought I heard that SARA also has reservations about it.
I would like to see my club shoot on the ICFRA targets for a period of time, because our members range from new recruits to top line shooters, both FB and FS, and are representative of a good cross section of the shooting community.
Having said that, I suspect that the super V on the current target would be a better option, shooting for 60.10, even though I know Chop will still be wondering where the 6 came from.
John
Alan, how many Rosedale people are coming to shoot on the electronic target tomorrow?
a complete change of targets is hardly a minor change, and although I haven't expressed an opinion as to whether it's a good or bad move, it is patently obvious that it is the lower grades that will be affected the most, and I have reservations about that. We need to look after these people, not kick them in the guts.
Richard,
the VRA did ask clubs to vote on the subject, but I heard that only a small number of clubs responded. My club didn't respond because we have not had the opportunity to shoot on the ICFRA target, and so couldn't make an informed comment. Although we have had the ICFRA aiming marks and centres on order for quite a long time, they have not been available.
Don't take this for gospel, but the bush telegraph tells me that the VRA Council has similar reservations to mine i.e. the lower grades will be the most adversely affected group, and that will have negative ramifications.
At time when target shooting is going through a period of renewed interest and enthusiasm and the first gain in membership that we have had in years, why do anything to jeopardise that?
I thought I heard that SARA also has reservations about it.
I would like to see my club shoot on the ICFRA targets for a period of time, because our members range from new recruits to top line shooters, both FB and FS, and are representative of a good cross section of the shooting community.
Having said that, I suspect that the super V on the current target would be a better option, shooting for 60.10, even though I know Chop will still be wondering where the 6 came from.
John
Alan, how many Rosedale people are coming to shoot on the electronic target tomorrow?
-
M12LRPV
- Posts: 429
- Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 9:52 am
- Location: Sydney
- Contact:
timothi3197 wrote:I have seen giving members the option of voting with their feet wreck two clubs. Be very careful what you wish for or say.
You can please some of the people some of the time but you can't please all of the people all of the time
my opinion on the subject...
The two examples that I've seen recently ( and I wont detail them because it's not really necessary ) where people have gotten into a huff and voted with their feet have both come from the introduction of initiatives to make the clubs more attractive to new members and to cater for new members.
In one instance those who objected but hung around for a few weeks realised that things were actually better for everyone under the new system and are now leading the charge.
What's most important (and people will not like this but it's the hard truth) is that we need shooters more than we need members. And we need new shooters more than anything.
A lost member is not as bad as a lost shooter. Try and find them another club. If they decide to give up shooting entirely then they were ready to do it anyway. They were just looking for an excuse.
Most importantly... manage change, don't resist it.
Clubs that don't manage change and allow the resistance to build up are on the path to destruction anyway because the greatest source of change is not the rules or targets or ammunition or the equipment. It's new members. And if you resist the change that comes with new members then you can kiss your club goodbye.
just my $0.02 worth
My club to the best of my knowledge (I'm a committee member) knew nothing about the "SARA decision" until we were informed on the weekend.
Club consultation was not a part of the decision making process in SA at least not at my club. Many club members and committee members are surprised at this stance being taken on the change to the international ICFRA target.
As a club we were looking forward to implementing the new target as of 1 Jan 2010. We also realise that as a club we need to shoot on a target that is sanctioned by our Rifle Association.
Sooner or later the decision will be made to change to a more challenging and internationally recognised target and if its not by the current Rifle Association committee members then it will be left for the next generation to arrange. All that's happening now is that our current Rifle Associations have delayed the date of change to a target more suited to modern target rifles and left it for members with a clearer vision for our sport to put in place.
Ian
Club consultation was not a part of the decision making process in SA at least not at my club. Many club members and committee members are surprised at this stance being taken on the change to the international ICFRA target.
As a club we were looking forward to implementing the new target as of 1 Jan 2010. We also realise that as a club we need to shoot on a target that is sanctioned by our Rifle Association.
Sooner or later the decision will be made to change to a more challenging and internationally recognised target and if its not by the current Rifle Association committee members then it will be left for the next generation to arrange. All that's happening now is that our current Rifle Associations have delayed the date of change to a target more suited to modern target rifles and left it for members with a clearer vision for our sport to put in place.
Ian
Menu
Newest members