This will not have any impact on local matches. You do not need to use an electronic system in local matches. Turning targets will still be accepted.
Sorry, but you seem to have missed my point, they will have a very big effect on local matches. It will make them absolutely useless for a competitor to train on for the National Championship matches. Unless you happen to be one the lucky few that has access or money to get them.
I go to great lengths to run a match as closely as possible to the form of the national matches. Targets, rules, timing, commands, scoring, etc. Jerry hit the nail on the head, there are shooters and competitors, and the competitors did not seem respond in favor of the change at this time.
How is a local competitor going to get used to lights or buzzer or pounding out 5 shot string after 5 shot string in the pursit of "getting the matches done faster so we can shoot more relays in a day"?
And the real point that still bothers me is that with all the comments and discussion by the competitors at the meeting did not seem to be met with anything except "Thanks for your input and here's the timetable. Great seeing you."
I like seeing an X in the center of the target. It's what I shoot at and use to put my red dot on when I fire. I wonder if the new electronic targets could / would have a nice white X in the middle.
I tried the electronic targets at Perry and came away wanting to try them in an actual match. Just shooting a few practice strings on a system set up for ISSF shooting didn't give me enough of a feel for how MegaLink would work for Bullseye.
Why is there so much concern about things being different, though? The scoring rings will still be the same size. The time limits might be a bit shorter, in practice, because the half second or so of facing/edging time at the beginning and end of each string won't be there, but I don't know if the timer for the current set up includes turning time or not. The delay between "Ready on the firing line" and the start of each string should be the same.
Won't the competitors who've mastered the fundamentals still come out on top? It's like the weather: when the wind blows, it blows on everyone. When the rain falls, we all get wet. Guys like Zins, Zurek and Lange will still be way ahead of the pack. They should still be shooting 98% or better on the short line with time to spare.
Is the concern that the AMU will dominate even more because they can practice on electronic targets and the civilians can't?
I did not try the electronic targets. There are the issues of crossfires and face appearance maintenance from bullet strikes. Also it is going to be tiring shooting the matches that fast. But this past winter I bought a LP-50 air pistol and a Sius HS-10 electronic target to shoot on. It has helped my shooting significantly and I shot 200+ higher at Perry than last year. I have not found the lack of scoring rings a problem. The size of the black bull area is also not really a problem once you work out the point you have to hold for the size of the black. I do change the mask on mine to different sizes for the different NRA targets. The system lets you scale the target rings for proper scoring at any distance. I can use a 50yd NRA scoring and size the rings to score correctly at the 10 meters I have the target set at. And it feels just like shooting the 50 outside. The system gives the position of every shot immediately and where it would be if the target was actually at 50 yds. Works very well it is not cheap but only costs the price of a good target gun about $2200. This model uses 2 lasers to score the scoring area on the air pistol target no paper roll. For shots outside the laser area it uses sound like the Megalink. There is a 3 laser Sius that uses only laser. I don't know if the larger outside use targets for centerfire etc. are all laser or use sound detection. I think they are also quoting the system to the NRA but I don't know that. I would buy another one of these in a minute. I don't care that there is no X I can't see it any way and if you shoot open sights you shouldn't be looking at it.
The shooters you mentioned, (Zins, etc.) were some of the ones voicing concerns at the meeting. Yes, if you read the previous posts, there is an issue with some competitors having even more of an advantage using electronic targets that the general competitors do not have access to.
I've shot both AP and rifle on eTargets I have no issue with them in fact I feel I stay more focused during a match.
When shooting rifle using eTargets what I like is how much less time it takes to run a match (also no pit duty) and no need for spotting scope. I don't even have to take my cheek of the stock to see POI. What I don't like is how much less time I get to spend with my fellow shooters which usually took place (yep you guessed it) during pit duty.
So it comes down to what I do not like is the time lost with fellow shooters and with bullseye that was during scoring.
Training for Perry in the future, well you could simply run the local match with the targets faced and use a buzzer. Line officers will have to keep track of early and late shots but it could be done.
Dave.
Certified Safety Instructor: Rifle & Pistol
They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
~ Ben Franklin
"Training for Perry in the future, well you could simply run the local match with the targets faced and use a buzzer. Line officers will have to keep track of early and late shots but it could be done. "
If I thought the electronic targets would actually work reliably, this would be an easy issue to solve.
However, based on the comments from people familiar with the Megalink system, there are several technical issues, software issues, and repair issues that the NRA and the manufacturer have no handle on yet.
These concern me a great deal more than the use of a buzzer to signal the start of firing.
Oddly enough, this year was the first time in a long time that I didn't notice any problems with the turning target system at Camp Perry. I didn't see any range alibis, nor did I notice any ranges shut down for repairs.
That and the cool, dry (by Perry standards) weather made for an especially pleasant experience.
Orpanaut wrote:Oddly enough, this year was the first time in a long time that I didn't notice any problems with the turning target system at Camp Perry. I didn't see any range alibis, nor did I notice any ranges shut down for repairs.
That and the cool, dry (by Perry standards) weather made for an especially pleasant experience.
I noticed that also. They said they did some work on the drainage after the mess last year.
Range I was not in use, except as a practice range, because repairs were not finished there.
I think the NRA is tacitly admitting, that it will take more than 12 months to procure, and install a working electronic target system.
The weather was pretty good, until Sunday morning. However, I was on the afternoon relay that go drenched during prelim day.
There was a botched range alibi on Range 4 on 22 day. Also some issues with the speakers,which were apparently blue toothed to the tower.
The tower talker from Range 3 started coming in on the Range 4 speakers.
Makes you wonder how their wonderful plan to Bluetooth control the new electronic target system is actually going to work out in practice.
So that's the solution, use buzzers and non turning targets at the local match using additional people on the line? That's going to increase time sorting out the early and late shots, but who cares about the local matches. SWGC matches are 4th Saturday, March through October. I'll go ahead and sign you up to help out. Thanks in advance for the assistance.
Again, I would like to keep this simple an consistent for the large majority of the shooters. Not to make changes just for the "convenience" of the national matches. Yes, some other shooting sports can benefit from electronics, but others not so much. Bullseye aint smallbore or standard pistol or air or action pistol.
Again turning targets and scoring will work just fine with new equipment that does the same thing. They will still have to set up frames and tables at perry for the matches.
Will there be technical issues - yes, will they become less with time - yes same as with the current turning targets which I'm sure caused much concern when first used.
Fact is if we are going in the direction of eTargets I hope the NRA doesn't end up doing their R&D during Perry! It does sound as if they are full steam ahead, so I am glad I at least got to compete at Perry once (2013) before the change.
I am conflicted about this because I know the possibility of the eTargets even though it will impact the social aspect of the sport. I have enjoyed watching the air rifle and pistol match individual targets online real time. Having my family watch my targets real time from anywhere in the world, now that's cool.
Dave
Certified Safety Instructor: Rifle & Pistol
They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
~ Ben Franklin
dronning wrote:I hope the NRA doesn't end up doing their R&D during Perry! It does sound as if they are full steam ahead, so I am glad I at least got to compete at Perry once (2013) before the change.
Dave
Great point Dave. It would certainly make sense to have practice matches on this new system, and them NOT be the Nationals. Since we could shoot a 2700 all in one day, I bet plenty of shooters would attend at a chance to try the new system.
dronning wrote:I hope the NRA doesn't end up doing their R&D during Perry! It does sound as if they are full steam ahead, so I am glad I at least got to compete at Perry once (2013) before the change.
Dave
Great point Dave. It would certainly make sense to have practice matches on this new system, and them NOT be the Nationals. Since we could shoot a 2700 all in one day, I bet plenty of shooters would attend at a chance to try the new system.
Would be great if you live in Ohio. Not so great if you live in California, or Arizona, and have to make a 4000 mile round trip to do a practice match.
This is why Cecil is justifiably upset about them using a system at Nationals that is not affordable or available at local matches.
Does anyone know the pricing for a one or two shooter set up?
Like a complete package for a small range or competitor could purchase for practice?
I bet I could get my small club to pony up and get a set if they are reasonable. If the sport goes this way, I wanna help get myself and others up to speed with our own set.
Murph wrote:Does anyone know the pricing for a one or two shooter set up?
Like a complete package for a small range or competitor could purchase for practice?
I bet I could get my small club to pony up and get a set if they are reasonable. If the sport goes this way, I wanna help get myself and others up to speed with our own set.
I have heard about 6k per target, but don't know what that includes. These targets are not weather proof.
[quote=] If the sport goes this way,[/quote]
We all need to vehemently voice opposition to this.. The direction of the sport is being forced down our throats... Seems to be the current trend in all politics these days.. CMP changes, $100 penalties for registration after an arbitrary date..Which implies to me, a direct effort to discourage registration after that date.. $100 is rather severe.. WE pay heavily to shoot, with training, equipment, lodging, travel, and should not be penalized by someone with idealistic motives. This sport has endured for many decades, and 660 competitors for 2014 tells me there is still a dedicated following despite the economic down turn and scarce components..Call, write, and complain...I first joined the NRA in 1962... my loyalty is being tested.
Jerry
Last edited by Jerry Keefer on Thu Jul 17, 2014 10:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
Murph wrote:Does anyone know the pricing for a one or two shooter set up?
Like a complete package for a small range or competitor could purchase for practice?
I bet I could get my small club to pony up and get a set if they are reasonable. If the sport goes this way, I wanna help get myself and others up to speed with our own set.
I have heard about 6k per target, but don't know what that includes. These targets are not weather proof.
Not Megalinc but about a year ago I was looking at these:
The BBBT was designed for serious shooting. This big bore box electronic target is equipped with a powerful system that can process thousands of shots at a time to include automatic fire. The BBBT target system can utilize a military grade monitor or laptop for ultimate shot and scoring information. Plus, the target’s flexible wired or wireless capabilities and weatherproofing (rain, snow, and hail safe) makes this versatile system a great target for ranges, shooting clubs, individuals, or outfitters.
Certified Safety Instructor: Rifle & Pistol
They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
~ Ben Franklin
Some random answers to some things I see here. If I missed something, please ask again.
First, remember Dennis is the first active competitor to hold his position at NRA in over 30 years. He is working real hard to make the best decisions, with the best interest of the sport at heart. I believe that.
Second, yes, I was there demoing the MEGAlinks, and I attended the competitors meeting. I think it was very unfortunate that many of the er folks against electronics left before the end of the meeting. Toward the end, one of the volunteers, who has maintained the turning targets system for a number of years, was telling of the difficulties in keeping it going every year, they are often out there till 8 or 9 oclcock, as volunteers, mind you, trying to get the targetsthat were installed in 1954 back up and turning.
I don’t know the big picture of all the costs of new turning targets and scoring labor expenses, versus electronics and instaneous feedback. I don’t have access to that info. That’s information for Dennis to come up with and the number crunchers above him to confirm. And I think we all agree about NRA number crunchers and they have not been kind to competitive shooting overall. But in general it seems that they think, that the electronic targets are the cheaper and best alternative right now.
I am very new taking over MEGAlink sales from Martin Edmondson, and my prep time to come to Perry was really less than a week. In that time, we had to make a run to the Coast Guard Academy and borrow the targets. I did not know until I got there, that there was no 50 yard and 25 yard software in the targets. So we were trying to make do with what we had. And it was a time in Norway when its their annual entire country wide vacation time*, so getting the software created was not really possible while we were there, even though the actual process should be simple, just telling it the size of the scoring rings since the math application is the same.
But in answer to Isabel’s concern, manufacturing the targets should take 6 -8 weeks, and installing them at Perry a 8-12 days. There is talk of creating a portable setup with them, that could be used for regionals in other parts of the country.
Someone mentioned a target failure? I don’t know of any target failures while we there. The Coast Guard targets are three years old and I personally showed a lot of people that the foam backer were shot away prior to our arrival, 4 inches or more in diameter, and the rear rubber sound chamber sheet , was shot away about 2” in diameter. The targets were scoring perfectly despite these non perfect conditions. In a National Championship, I am sure virgin foam and virgin rubber will be installed, just like it is at Benning , Colorado, Anniston or other places were electronic targets are used. The rolls get run through multiple times over the year as practice, but when important events occur, everything goes back to perfect , as new conditions, with unused expendables.
There were LOTS of questions about crossfires. How will the system handle them? The same way you do now. None on your target, more on somebody elses. Maybe you can identify them with the computer, since there will be the time sequences that that will be off, but that’s still kind of guessy.
lots of statememts about untried systems. Seriously? these targets have been around 30 odd years now, by multiple manufacturers and are in use even for biathlon. Just because you are not familiar with the systems, does not mean that they are new. (the MEGAlinks are in use 27 years now)
There were/are challenges. Many we were discussing and analyzing as each day went by, and trying different things the next . There are some things in discussion to these challenges that I think you may like. Some may not. That’s human nature.
I did hear a lot comments about keeping the traditions of the turning targets. As for me, in most things, I am a traditionalist, and in this matter I like the look and feel of turning targets, that what I feel comfortable with, what I have shot on back when I did. But I am sure that when the turning systems were first installed , there were those in absolute opposition to them too because flat paper targets on stilts were traditional . But at the same time, there are those same “traditionilsts” who wanted the turning targets, but at the same time did not want to lose the X to aim at with their non traditional scopes or dots. I’m definitely a curmudgeon in this regard, If I was king, heads would roll and pistol shooting would be done with iron sights, period. But I’m not, and the rules are what they are , Pistol shooting traditions were broken to allow those modern sighting methods and the sport goes on, and I suspect that the sport will go on with the breaking of the tradition of paper targets.
* Can you imagine the entire United States taking off 4 weeks in the summer?
Scott, first of all, thank you for that detailed explanation.
I am not personally opposed to electronic targets, as I have stated before.
And whatever you think about iron sights verses optics, I have been told by people who know the history of bullseye, that conventional pistol, has always been an "any sight" match.
I think it should remain so.
My biggest concern is that I feel the people in charge of this acquisition are neophytes at procurement, and they have put the cart before the horse.
I have no doubt that the manufacture time for the "in production" target system, is probably six to eight weeks.
However, that is not what the NRA has asked for at Camp Perry. They have asked for targets that are weather hardened, portable, with significant software, and hardware changes to stand up to large caliber guns, which you never see in the European competitions that these targets were designed for.
They have also asked for 150 of them, presumably to be in operation at the same time.
Can you point to any range in Europe that fields this number of Megalink targets, under match conditions, on uncovered firing points, with the calibers in use at Camp Perry?
And have these ranges, if they exist, provided a break down of maintenance and operating costs, to allow the NRA to make a valid comparison to a new mechanical system?
An experienced procurement expert, would not commit to a system like this until they had done a head to head life cycle cost study against the most viable alternatives,
They would also have priced out the system, with the required modifications, and have a firm delivery date, (not a guesstimate),
They would then sign a binding contract, that will not leave the national matches in chaos, if something goes wrong in the manufacturing process, and the system is not delivered in time to allow two or more beta tests before the national matches.
The fact that the demo which you had to manage, was arranged so hastily, with little forethought, indicates to me, that all the decisions being made by the NRA, appear to be done in precisely, the wrong order.
I have an extensive background in both procurement, and contract law. My concerns come out of my professional background, and not out of a personal gripe with Dennis Willing, or an emotional reaction to changing the format of the national matches.
I think a lot of us will be quite comfortable with this, if and when we see some evidence of an orderly procurement process, a realistic timeline, and all these questions answered.
Isabel,
My lateness into the Perry scheme was more due to my transition into the MeGAlink sales line, than any slackness on the NRA’s part.
We left the system up and running through those downpours at Perry last week, and those were temporary installs, with wires running across the ground. They are very weatherproof. I have no concerns there.
The shot data is stored four places simulateonusly . At the target, at the control box below the target (servicing every 20 targets), at your monitor display on the firing point, and at the central ranking system computer. It is not likely to get lost.
MeGAlink targets are installed at 2000 ranges worldwide. About half outdoors from what I understand. They are installed at Lake Placid in use by the US biathlon team. That’s some pretty tough weather too. The guys from the Puerto Rico team were telling us at lunch last week at the picnic table by the AMU van , that one of their 25 meter targets, (same as what we were demoing), got hit by a direct lightning strike . Only the circuit card had to be replaced . Honestly, that’s pretty amazing to me. For the record , MEGAlink does recommend that in the event of lightning, that the cables be removed, so that it doesn’t travel through the whole system. Just like any other computer or electronic item that you own recommends. I would suspect for the Perry application, that when the range is called for lightning. the control boxes for every 20 targets would be disconnected as a precaution.
MEGAlink started out 27 years ago making targets for the 300 meter world, so any of the Bullseye pistol calibers are nothing compared to high powered rifles at 1000 yards.
I really think all considered, there are no real worries for the system overall. And I am sure most all of this applies to the other vendors of electronic targets trying to get the bid.
As I understand it, Dennis is going to Europe next month to visit the various factories and see these target in use at major ranges. Honestly, everything you are noting for procurement , is in the works, it just not to that stage yet, maybe by late fall or early winter these various calculation will be done, before any determination is made.
