Electronic targets/ no hit

[XTR]

I agree that the shots that the targets did not record at 1000 yards 2 weeks ago were likely because the bullets were marginally supersonic. (which is an issue in and of itself, new shooters with a few boxed of FGGM need not bother so show up to shoot, if you aren't reloading at levels that are above the listed maximums you can't play with us at 1000 yards) On the other hand, this past Saturday we were shooting 600 yards. Nobody is subsonic at 600 yards.

In all four cases on my target it acknowledged that it had received a shot (so no bullet blowups). The target message was that it could not resolve the location of the shot.

Everyone points to the case where the pullers can't find your shot and you get a miss. I've only seen that on rare occasion (maybe twice in 7 yrs) at club matches where the target faces are used for too many matches and they are covered in pasters. At a national where the faces get replaced every two or three matches I've never seen it as a problem.

 

[Stumpy1]

HEXTA targets do not have a membrane. That is the Kongsberg system that the CMP has installed. The HEX system is a closed acoustic system, meaning the mics are inside of a box that the bullet passes through; the Shot Marker and Silver Mountain systems are open mic systems.

Hi XTR,

Actually, Hexta targets most definitely have a rubber membrane on both sides of the target (front and back). Shooters generally only see the corroplast that covers the membrane (white plastic 'cardboard'). The membrane, and the corroplast on the back side of the target can definitely develop some very large holes over time, especially from F-class shooters. What effect these holes cause if they get large enough, I don't know.

Additionally from an earlier comment, a message from the target stating 'unable to resolve' generally means a frame hit (in the green area on the edges of the target). You can't expect to generate an acoustic signal to the microphones if the event occurs 'behind' the microphone.

Maintenance of electronic targets is, in my opinion, quite important. The Hexta system allows a rough diagnostic at startup to let you know if all sensors are functional -maybe that isn't happening where you shoot. We have replaced a few sensors and made many repairs to wires that have been cut by bullets passing through them...

In summary;

Are e-targets (any of them) perfect? No.
Are they pretty good? Yep.
Is there a learning curve for shooters and the range operator? Most Definitely!!!

Overall, our shooters like them and trust them to do a reasonable job of scoring their shots.

Frank

 

[XTR]

Hi XTR,

Actually, Hexta targets most definitely have a rubber membrane on both sides of the target (front and back). Shooters generally only see the corroplast that covers the membrane (white plastic 'cardboard'). The membrane, and the corroplast on the back side of the target can definitely develop some very large holes over time, especially from F-class shooters. What effect these holes cause if they get large enough, I don't know.

I learned something. I didn't know that they had membranes. I floated that theory last Sat and was told by the range staff that they did not have membranes. I have a hunch that holes in the membranes are behind the issues I experienced.

Additionally from an earlier comment, a message from the target stating 'unable to resolve' generally means a frame hit (in the green area on the edges of the target). You can't expect to generate an acoustic signal to the microphones if the event occurs 'behind' the microphone.

Maintenance of electronic targets is, in my opinion, quite important. The Hexta system allows a rough diagnostic at startup to let you know if all sensors are functional -maybe that isn't happening where you shoot. We have replaced a few sensors and made many repairs to wires that have been cut by bullets passing through them...


Frank

It was my understanding that the unable to resolve means it was a hit outside of the target area. Take a look at the two matches I posted on the first page and tell me you really think I put one into the target frame, twice, and that two other shooters did the same thing, at 600 yards, in a wind worth at max 1MOA. That argument is beyond the pale. I think the information available shows that there was a problem with the targets. This whole discussion highlights two problems with the systems, one is the absence of any physical record against which the match data can be verified, the shooter has no challenge or appeal; and the steadfast defense of the systems by supporters in the face of some pretty clear evidence to the contrary.

I fully expect that in the next few yrs we will all be shooting on one system or another. I think that i a given, the tech is coming, and a large percentage of the shooting sports participants support the change, but I think we have a responsibility to ensure that that the systems perform up to at least the standard of the current system with regard to precision and accuracy. I'm pretty sure that all of us who have competed for long enough have had a shot that the puller could not find. I may see it happen once ever couple of yrs. I've never seen 4 in one match, from 3 different experienced shooters, have you?

 

[Down South]

I've fired 10 of 1000's of shots at the Hex system and never had an unexplained miss, I'm sure the designer here in Australia would be interested in looking at the log file.
Matt P

Matt,

The problem is not that it's a miss. It's saying unable to resolve the shot etc. The bullet is hitting the target, it's not a case of it not making it there. I've heard guys say well maybe the bullet blew up on the way to the target or you missed the target completely etc. Wrong, if the bullet never hit the target it wouldn't have picked up or said anything at all. Hopefully this is just a simple fix and can be rectified.

 

[Down South]

I learned something. I didn't know that they had membranes. I floated that theory last Sat and was told by the range staff that they did not have membranes. I have a hunch that holes in the membranes are behind the issues I experienced.



It was my understanding that the unable to resolve means it was a hit outside of the target area. Take a look at the two matches I posted on the first page and tell me you really think I put one into the target frame, twice, and that two other shooters did the same thing, at 600 yards, in a wind worth at max 1MOA. That argument is beyond the pale. I think the information available shows that there was a problem with the targets. This whole discussion highlights two problems with the systems, one is the absence of any physical record against which the match data can be verified, the shooter has no challenge or appeal; and the steadfast defense of the systems by supporters in the face of some pretty clear evidence to the contrary.

I fully expect that in the next few yrs we will all be shooting on one system or another. I think that i a given, the tech is coming, and a large percentage of the shooting sports participants support the change, but I think we have a responsibility to ensure that that the systems perform up to at least the standard of the current system with regard to precision and accuracy. I'm pretty sure that all of us who have competed for long enough have had a shot that the puller could not find. I may see it happen once ever couple of yrs. I've never seen 4 in one match, from 3 different experienced shooters, have you?

This post is spot on IMO.

 

[Stumpy1]

I learned something. I didn't know that they had membranes. I floated that theory last Sat and was told by the range staff that they did not have membranes. I have a hunch that holes in the membranes are behind the issues I experienced.



It was my understanding that the unable to resolve means it was a hit outside of the target area. Take a look at the two matches I posted on the first page and tell me you really think I put one into the target frame, twice, and that two other shooters did the same thing, at 600 yards, in a wind worth at max 1MOA. That argument is beyond the pale. I think the information available shows that there was a problem with the targets. This whole discussion highlights two problems with the systems, one is the absence of any physical record against which the match data can be verified, the shooter has no challenge or appeal; and the steadfast defense of the systems by supporters in the face of some pretty clear evidence to the contrary.

I fully expect that in the next few yrs we will all be shooting on one system or another. I think that i a given, the tech is coming, and a large percentage of the shooting sports participants support the change, but I think we have a responsibility to ensure that that the systems perform up to at least the standard of the current system with regard to precision and accuracy. I'm pretty sure that all of us who have competed for long enough have had a shot that the puller could not find. I may see it happen once ever couple of yrs. I've never seen 4 in one match, from 3 different experienced shooters, have you?

Hi Again XTR,

None of this is directed only at you, and is meant to help folks understand generally how the HEX system (and really any ET) works in our hands.

Like I said, it GENERALLY means a hit in the frame -that assumes a correctly functioning target with all sensors firing. If several sensors aren't working due to cut wires or a damaged sensor, all bets are off. The target software tries to coalesce all the data received to arrive at a shot location plotted with good confidence. If there is insufficient data, it can't do that, so that might be what is going on.

That said, at one of our 1000 yard matches recently, a shooter was absolutely hammering the 10 and X ring, then landed one of those 'unable to resolve' shots. He scored a miss, and when we went down to take the targets down, we found a hit in the green border that wasn't there before. Bad bullet? Who knows, but it can and does happen from time to time, just like crossfires. Last year, folks were really reluctant to accept a crossfire, no matter that a shot showed up next door (or two doors down). This year, with more experience using the targets, shooters who don't have a shot show up are hollering for the scorers next door to check their targets for an additional shot, and we (so far) have always found one.

Can things happen to cause a target to malfunction? YES. Absolutely. What I would ask that anyone shooting on e-targets do, is not be so quick to dismiss the shooter/shooting system as at least a part of the problem. If you can, work with the match director to come up with a way to fairly and consistently treat the shooters when something does happen. The match director needs to have a plan in place before any contingencies show up. The guys 'down under' have a whole lot more experience with these targets than we do here in the states, and can likely offer up some tips and information to help us out as we get these bugs worked out.

Another thing to consider would be to volunteer to help the match directors/range operators to assist with maintenance of the targets -I know from personal experience that they can use the help, and you would learn a lot about how the system works, and maybe be able to make it better.

Respectfully submitted,

Frank

 

[Mozella]

........ snip..................

I fully expect that in the next few yrs we will all be shooting on one system or another. .............snip...............

I suspect not. Most of us shoot pretty good rifles, but a look up and down the firing line, even at the very highest level, will reveal many different brands of rifles and all sorts of combinations of barrel, powder, bullet brand, etc. Yet, many of these shooters have the capability to win.

I think that it will boil down to a number of manufacturers who have fine tuned their e-Target system to be more and more reliable as time goes on. As they improve, popularity will increase and there will be price competition which will make the cost decrease. Perhaps a brand new technology could emerge in the next few years like the Magnetospeed chronograph. As it turns out, the Magnetospeed system works just fine and is very popular, but it doesn't dominate the chronograph business. I think e-Targets will follow a similar path.

So I doubt if e-Targets will evolve and distill down to one company or even one technology. But I'm willing to bet that they will become much better and get at least a little bit cheaper.

 

[foxguy]

E-Target / ShotMarker


Getting good reviews / $800 per Target / 900.00 with Tablet.

They are getting cheaper and Like computers getting better.

Younger shooters are going to want Electronic Target Scoring, us older shooters are happy to Shoot.

 

[swd]

We shot a 1K F grudge match last Saturday. The guy next to me was using a Shot Marker. It seemed to work very well and the computer screen was easy to see and read. I was impressed!

 

[JohnKielly]

Additionally from an earlier comment, a message from the target stating 'unable to resolve' generally means a frame hit (in the green area on the edges of the target). You can't expect to generate an acoustic signal to the microphones if the event occurs 'behind' the microphone.

There is/was depending on software version two unable to resolve messages on Hextas:

• the first states unable to resolve without further qualification & refers to an issue where the resolution of the shot exceeds the system acceptable standard. Hereabouts, the shooter automatically got a another shot.
• The other includes the qualification probably hit frame & we accept that it has indeed landed outside the scoring area & is bad news for the competitor.

 

[Bindi2]

The comment about holes in the back of the target is correct and does have a large effect on the target accuracy. The sound chamber is being affected by outside wind noise making accuracy readings inside difficult. Solution is glue membrane rubber on the outside this holds the coreflute self seals for longer. Ets have a shooting life from 300 to about 1200 shots depending on how good the shooters are. Sound chamber maintenance is very critical.

 

[SWRichmond]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.webopedia.com/amp/TERM/A/alpha_version.html

"A very early version of a software product that may not contain all of the features that are planned for the final version. Typically, software goes through two stages of testing before it is considered finished. The first stage, called alpha testing, is often performed only by users within the organization developing the software. The second stage, called beta testing , generally involves a limited number of external users."

You guys are beta-testing this product. You are what is known in tech as "early adopters". Vendors love early adopters.

Anyone remember Windows 2.0?

I have been critical on these forums of these products because I am familiar with software, hardware and the software development cycle.

Someone had to launch these products and I am glad someone did. The issues are common to new software products: they work most of the time.

In about 5 years or so we will be two generations deeper (like Windows 3.1) and the targets will be more functional and widely adopted. That is simply the way this works.

You make decisions and then you live with them.

 

[JohnKielly]

The comment about holes in the back of the target is correct and does have a large effect on the target accuracy. The sound chamber is being affected by outside wind noise making accuracy readings inside difficult. Solution is glue membrane rubber on the outside this holds the coreflute self seals for longer. Ets have a shooting life from 300 to about 1200 shots depending on how good the shooters are. Sound chamber maintenance is very critical.

Bindi

What ET systems are you conversant with - what's used where you shoot?

John

 

[Matt P]

Matt,

The problem is not that it's a miss. It's saying unable to resolve the shot etc. The bullet is hitting the target, it's not a case of it not making it there. I've heard guys say well maybe the bullet blew up on the way to the target or you missed the target completely etc. Wrong, if the bullet never hit the target it wouldn't have picked up or said anything at all. Hopefully this is just a simple fix and can be rectified.

I have spoken with the designer/owner of Hex and he has had a look at the log files and found many maintenance issue that would account for the issues that the shooters experienced. Six of the targets had at least one sensor out and one target had 4 out !!! How is the system meant to resolve shot placement with half of the information !!! There is simple code that the LED spits out when power is applied to the target that would have showed up that sensors where out.
In the case of the system being unable to resolve the shot, the shooter should be given an optional sighter and continue on with the shoot.
I'm not saying any of the ET systems are perfect but in this case I think it's unfair to blame the system.
Matt P

 

[jsthntn247]

I have spoken with the designer/owner of Hex and he has had a look at the log files and found many maintenance issue that would account for the issues that the shooters experienced. Six of the targets had at least one sensor out and one target had 4 out !!! How is the system meant to resolve shot placement with half of the information !!! There is simple code that the LED spits out when power is applied to the target that would have showed up that sensors where out.
In the case of the system being unable to resolve the shot, the shooter should be given an optional sighter and continue on with the shoot.
I'm not saying any of the ET systems are perfect but in this case I think it's unfair to blame the system.
Matt P

I have spoken with the designer/owner of Hex and he has had a look at the log files and found many maintenance issue that would account for the issues that the shooters experienced. Six of the targets had at least one sensor out and one target had 4 out !!! How is the system meant to resolve shot placement with half of the information !!! There is simple code that the LED spits out when power is applied to the target that would have showed up that sensors where out.
In the case of the system being unable to resolve the shot, the shooter should be given an optional sighter and continue on with the shoot.
I'm not saying any of the ET systems are perfect but in this case I think it's unfair to blame the system.
Matt P

You saying the owner of hex can look at the log files of any of the systems he has installed and find errors?

 

[Down South]

I have spoken with the designer/owner of Hex and he has had a look at the log files and found many maintenance issue that would account for the issues that the shooters experienced. Six of the targets had at least one sensor out and one target had 4 out !!! How is the system meant to resolve shot placement with half of the information !!! There is simple code that the LED spits out when power is applied to the target that would have showed up that sensors where out.
In the case of the system being unable to resolve the shot, the shooter should be given an optional sighter and continue on with the shoot.
I'm not saying any of the ET systems are perfect but in this case I think it's unfair to blame the system.
Matt P

Now that makes sense, I'm glad you looked into it and found out that it's just a maintenance issue that can be fixed. Thanks for the information, hopefully all these issues can be resolved.

 

[Matt P]

You saying the owner of hex can look at the log files of any of the systems he has installed and find errors?

Kind of, the log file needs to be sent by the owner of the targets, but he is able to decipher the in-fo. That's my understanding of how it works.
Matt P

 

[GeoffR]

Kind of, the log file needs to be sent by the owner of the targets, but he is able to decipher the in-fo. That's my understanding of how it works.
Matt P

My ET system - Ozscore - also has this capability. Users routinely send me the system log/audit trail files for analysis - especially when misses have been recorded. They are invaluable when trying to determine who did what, when, and to who! Seriously, valuable engineering data set out in chronological order for such analysis is in my opinion essential in a modern ET system. For numerous reasons. As far as I know all ET developers/manufacturers provide this capability in some way.

Geoff.

 

[Ned Ludd]

Kind of, the log file needs to be sent by the owner of the targets, but he is able to decipher the in-fo. That's my understanding of how it works.
Matt P

Identifying [potential] errors from the log that might account for certain unacceptable behaviors is only a very small part of the solution. The much larger part of the solution is to understand why the errors occurred in such a way that they can be prevented by system updates and/or preventative maintenance. Until that happens, these systems are clearly not capable of performing at an acceptable level in all venues at which they are being used.

Arguing that a given system has "X" number of shots without failure makes little difference if the source of the errors hasn't been clearly identified and the underlying cause rectified. No matter how many shots have been fired to date without error, the potential for errors still exists and the odds increase with every additional shot. It's pretty easy to downplay someone else's missed shot, but it's an entirely different thing when it happens to you. Further, the discussion of how the rules should be specifically changed to accommodate missed shots is ludicrous. Who cay state with a straight face it isn't possible for an e-target to fail to pick up one shot, but work fine for the next? Until the reason(s) for such errors are fully understood, the answer is that no can make such a claim. That means that whenever such a "missed shot" situation occurs, it currently is almost impossible to distinguish in the context of a match the difference between a true miss and a target error. As a competitor, I do not find it acceptable to possibly award a shooter that actually fired a miss an extra shot to redeem their error. Nor do I find it acceptable to penalize a shooter that actually did hit the target as intended by making them fire another shot, which could A) register as hit, possibly at a lower score than the previous shot, while simultaneously giving them a "0" for the previous so-called "miss", or B) also fail to register as a "miss", whereupon they might have to move to a different target to complete their string, or something even more ridiculous. Please don't try to tell me that this is rational, or that paper targets currently cause anything even close to these kinds of problems, because I know differently.

This whole E-target story seems very much like like what we've been observing in the mainstream media over the last couple years. That is, an almost complete loss of rational thought and behavior. Any reasonable person not directly connected to this sport would read through this thread alone and be asking themselves why people would be using E-target systems when they clearly still have significant issues. However, there are those that for reasons I can't fathom always seem ready to defend their use, almost to the death. I simply don't get it. As has been already pointed out, the technology will eventually be far better than it is now. Why is it such a problem to admit the obvious, which is that they aren't quite there yet? Once such an admission is made, the solution becomes simple. Folks will continue to use them in places that have invested in them already. In doing so, the reliability over time will either be improved to an acceptable level, or they will simply go away. Until such time as that happens, they should certainly not be for big matches at the Regional and/or National level. People that attend those matches have far too much time, effort, and $$$ invested to potentially be subjected to this foolishness. Although such failures may be extraordinarily rare events, even one is too many if you happen to be the one to which it happens.

 

[IdahoSharpshooter]

what is that saying, "to err is human; to really FUBAR* requires a computer..."?

If I were still a traveling competitor Electronic Scoring would be the deciding factor in deciding whether or not to spend thousands of dollars on travel expenses to attend a match. I can screw things up myself, don't need help.

Rich

* the last four letters are for words Up Beyond Any Repair.