OzFclass

Competitor marking is fine by me but makes for a busy day. A lot of older shooters may find it too hard.
Maintenance of ET's should be paramount. NRAA needs to take control and determine minimum test standards that targets must conform to before being able to be used for a major shoot.
NRAA may say it is the responsibility of the state organisers but how can gradings etc be accurate if the targets are not.



Steve

mattk83 wrote:I for one would be happy to remove electronic targets and go back to paper targets with competitor marking. I

History suggests you're not in the majority there.

johnk wrote:

mattk83 wrote:I for one would be happy to remove electronic targets and go back to paper targets with competitor marking. I

History suggests you're not in the majority there.

Competitor marking would make bowls look good to me!
Keith H.

Seriously, though, imagine how joyful you'd feel if you were yanking targets first up at 1000 yards in pairs as it was done back a decade or two ago, then once the second pair come in after they've both shot & scored, finding that by the time you're back, you're next man down & you wouldn't know WTF the flags have been doing so far. Then imagine it was Belmont & you're dragging your gear up from around the 800 yard line before you even get a sniff of the mound.

Mate, competitor marking in major events sucks comprehensively.

The most reliable marking I've experienced was in Raton, two per target, and faster than any manual marking I've seen in Australia. Agreed the days were long, but the way they organised the relays, you had ample time to prepare for shooting on returning from the "pits". No doubt ETs are here to stay - its just a pity that some associations have adopted them for major events before the technology has been ready, or without fully understanding the testing and maintenance requirements. A well designed and well run ET system is preferable to manual marking any day, but for major events, if ET isn't reliable, then its a waste of the high cost of buying them.

Competitor marking does have a draw back ,however what is the alternative? At then end of the day we shoot for a score. If the electronic targets are not accurate then there is no point to them . When you consider the time and effort that goes into an opm or queens why do we sell ourself short just to save pulling targets for an hour? I just dont understand

mattk83 wrote:Competitor marking does have a draw back ,however what is the alternative? At then end of the day we shoot for a score. If the electronic targets are not accurate then there is no point to them . When you consider the time and effort that goes into an opm or queens why do we sell ourself short just to save pulling targets for an hour? I just dont understand

Please define inaccurate! Having shot on competitor and paid marker manual targets all over Australia, NewZealand & Bisley & electronic targets at club & Queens level I think it would be very difficult to suggest one as being more accurate than the other. Both can be as accurate or inaccurate as the other. Manual depending on the maintenance of the target, running gear & the experience & the attentiveness of the marker, so here we CAN have both mechanical & human error. Electronic targets on the other hand require PROPER maintenance & set up, human & technical. Inaccuracies can & will happen with both systems.
Like it or not electronics are the way of the future, so we might as well accept that & work together to refine & make them work to our satisfaction. I believe acceptance & proper maintenance along with cost are what stands in the way of electronic targets, however we need them.
My two cents worth!!!!
Keith H.

I was at a Fly shoot in Canberra last weekend and have it from a very reliable source that ALL the ACT Queens targets will be tested and faces acoustically centred.
I will have no problem with handing over my entry fee given this reassurance.

Ben, I'm with you. Looking forward to a good competition held on reliable well maintained ET's.

Bring on Canberra 2016

Some of you would be aware of the composite Teams event (Tiverton Cup on Friday 18th November).

We need 2 x F-Std and 2 x F-Open. They may let us substitute FTR shooters for F-Open.

I'm looking for some Vic's who would be interested in showing the other states how it's done

PM me if you're interested!

Cheers,

Mike.

bartman007 wrote: They may let us substitute FTR shooters for F-Open.

May??? An FTR setup satisfies all the requirements for FO.

Barry

I'm up for it.
Geoff

Michael,
You missed a golden opportunity last year when you didn't take up my offer to score for the team.
I'm prepared to forgive you for that and make the offer again.
You'll find most of us honest folk from NSW willing to help out where possible

Hi Mike,
where is Tiverton?
Does that range have a 3500ft/lb Muzzle Energy Limit?

Hi Mike,
where is Tiverton?
Does that range have a 3500ft/lb Muzzle Energy Limit?

I'm sure if you bring it they will build it.

Tim how could I be sooooo un trusting of your offer of help. That would be great pay back for loaning you a rifle in SA. Cheers, that will be one less shooter in the NSW team