OzFclass

jasmay wrote: Mon Jan 20, 2025 11:55 am I’m more referring to rule changes in general and full adoption of ICFRA rules, not merely focusing on target dimensions.

Fair enough. But I'm not aware of any "all or nothing" rules requirement with ICFRA membership? Just about every FCWC has had its own local rule exceptions. Surely we can make a few exceptions if they're important for the health of the sport in Australia.

I have been retired from shooting for 7 years now.
If numbers are in decline then I can only use my own experience as an example.
The biggest hurdle presented to long range shooting is the closure of ranges which increases travel time or makes shooting on the nearest range a physical impossibility.
I have watched the cost of equipment, components, range fees, etc. reach the level than I couldn’t afford or justify, also the unavailability/shortage of components is a contributing to less shooting unless you have deep pockets which, as much as I love to compete, I don’t have.
My son who also was a keen and capable TR shooter also stopped when our range was closed as he is a young man with a growing family, works shifts, so is time poor and travel and costs are out of his league.
I moved to my current address in 2000, the club had for many years consisted of just 3 or 4 members of older TR veterans so I started shooting FS, copped heaps of derision but within 4 years the number of members *increased* rapidly and ended up mainly FS shooters. Even the aging TR shooters turned to FS so they could continue. We eventually bought electronic targets which, again, helped older members as no more manual targets.
But, we couldn’t beat the draconian requirements for the range safety template so we were effectively closed.
The diminishing/decline of shooters is many and varied but nothing is ever going to overcome range closures and actual costs.
Charging the current marking system to meet an international standard will only see clubs using a tried and tested system struggle and, will only hasten decline.
PS: Our current shooters who go overseas show by their excellent performances that they easily adapt to international marking.

As F S is not recognised by ICFRA, could this proposed alignment with ICFRA be a short cut to getting rid of FS?
There are those who would like to see FS gone.

I have been sent a copy of the draft changes to the SSR by the NRAA for review and trying to work my way through them all, comments regarding these changes are due by the 10/2/25. They were forwarded by SARA to all club Captains and Secretaries during the last hour.
Richard Yunta RC

Pete You have nailed it. I have watched the shooting scene ever so slowly change since I first started in 1957. As times change habits change, unfortunately, some are forced upon us. I could discuss volumes here of what I have seen over the years, but I have also been encouraged by the efforts of many people to promote the sport and, ensure a future. There has always been controversy regarding rule changes but with careful thought and input, pretty much consensus prevails. I agree the numbers will plateau.

As from this year I have retired from the sport and take the opportunity the thank all the people that I have met passed and present for making my time in the sport enjoyable and memorable. Thank you again.

Barry Davies wrote: Mon Jan 20, 2025 2:43 pm As F S is not recognised by ICFRA, could this proposed alignment with ICFRA be a short cut to getting rid of FS?
There are those who would like to see FS gone.

I don't see it that way, Sporter/Hunter is also not an ICFRA event....

As to the scoring changes, how about the Yanks with their 10 & X scoring system. They seem to adapt O.K. to the international system, so why can't we.
After all it is not rocket science, only numbers on paper. The winner will still be the one with the highest numbers regardless it being 50-60 or 100.
I started shooting as a T.R. shooter, changed to "F" Class when it started with.308, and then transitioned to "FO" when that came along. Also in that time there was a change in target dimentions and we all managed that, including the allowance of hand loads.
From how I interept this current kerfolle is that people are getting their knickers in a knot over nothing. Just my two bobs worth from an 85 year old "FO" shooter.
Cheers all'
Trevor.

Maybe just to look at it logically after reading posts so far. The only part of the target we need to be hitting will be the V ring. This just tells me that the good TR shooters are getting better and need more of a challenge to split the field. In competitions you will usually see a lot more 50 with 10Vs than you will see a 60 with 10Xs. May make F Class shooters more focused to stay in front of TR Shooters. I think it will be of the most benefit in Australia to all Sporter Class Shooters.
I can see both sides of the story, but if you truly love your shooting it won't worry you to much. Keep the BITCHYNESS out of the sport be NICE and HELPFUL to the newcomers to your RANGES and it may just work. A scoring system that is the same for all disciplines that is simple for new shooters to understand.
Just Shoot and Enjoy ,because there will always be changes, the best shooters will still win. If the sport stays undivided we will all be winners.
Cheers John

Well said Johno, you have summed it up nicely. There will always be a few who will bitch about anything as that is their nature. The rest of us just want to enjoy our shooting. What we shoot at, or its size is irrevalent. The best shooters will always win.
Cheers,
Trevor.

Maybe I'm missing something,,(a brain ) but the target size is the same, just scored different for fclass,, tr nothing changes,,or I've completely lost the plot,,,,I believe if not broken dont fix it,, Pete pointed out how well the mixed scoring works at the moment,, everybody, have a great day.

Soi, based on the comments so far, what would be the reaction if Sporter was changed to scoring the same as F Class?

I believe we in Aus have the perfect scoring system which allows 5 disciplines with two different scoring systems to shoot mixed up together on the same target with absolutely no hassles.
Why would you want to change that.

Potshot2023 wrote: Wed Jan 22, 2025 1:43 pm Soi, based on the comments so far, what would be the reaction if Sporter was changed to scoring the same as F Class?

Having had a crack at PCO I would fully support an X,6 for that discipline. Maybe leave PC on the V.

That said I would also support everyone (ICRA included) going to a 10 ring target too.

Totally agree Barry why change something that works without fault, leave it as it is.

To All
If you feel strongly about this or any other proposed changes (of which there are a few, with little or no thought put into), YOU need to tell your State body. Unfortunately that's the only way you'll be heard, the NRAA will not accept comment from individuals. Those in states that have passed on the proposed changes think yourselves lucky, some States haven't informed their membership.
Regards
Matt P