• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

E-Target Bashing

I miss scored Trudy Fay at the BSWN Palma match years ago. I got lost in the pile of X's. I scored one less so I was missing a shot. Trudy showed me the box 2 and 15 were shot I only had 2 and 14. Trudy got back into position shot another X. Smiled and told me to pay more attention next time. Some would not have been so easy to work with and we are still friends today.

Any one can make a mistake I am only human. I am sure an ET can make a mistake, it is how you deal with it!

John
 
I find it difficult to believe that someone can shoot a lot of matches with people in the pits and not experience problems. I have seen and heard of many more problems with people in the pits the problems with E targets. I have drilled people with spotters, and been drilled to the point I should have gotten stiches.

I am not lazy, I don't think. I will pull targets to the best of my ability. Mostly I get compliments, never once a complaint. I would much rather have E targets with a delay so everybody gets the same pit service than pull really fast so someone can give me 20 second service. The fairness involved alone is enough of a reason to use them.
 
....... snip............... I'm willing to bet that for most, that opinion would start to change the second they personally experienced a target not recording their score, especially if it changed the outcome of the match.

I can speak not only for myself, but several of my shooting companions. Although malfunctions are rare, they do happen with e-Targets, but I'm not sure they happen any more often as malfunctions associated with human pulled targets. I've shot a string of 20 on manual targets where at least 15 of my shots went unnoticed by the puller requiring me to say "Check Target Two" to the Match Director. That gets old real quick. It never happens with e-Targets.

I think we've all seen a puller put a paster over your fresh shot and then replace the spotting disk into the previous shot hole. Sometimes the puller puts the scoring disk in the wrong position. Sometimes they notice their error and sometimes they don't. This kind of stuff is just part of the game, so you learn to live with it.

Electronic target malfunctions are normally different, but no less frustrating. I've experienced my share of malfunctions and so have my shooting pals. But contrary to your claim, not one of us have lost our preference for e-Targets. Last weekend four of us drove two cars an extra hour and paid double the entry fee just to shoot e-Targets. We had more malfunctions than normal, but we returned the next day and did it again, this time without any malfunctions. Seems there was a loose antenna or something. Anyhow, we could have attended a closer/cheaper match with manual targets had we chosen to do so, but we didn't partially because the heat and humidity is absolutely brutal this time of year and partially because we think that shooting e-Targets is more enjoyable.

The way we shoot and handle missed shots has not ever changed the outcome of the match as far as I know other than it's hard to tell how the missed shot would have scored when compared with the make-up shot. But the same thing can be said for manual targets too. It's rare that the manual puller starts pulling the target just as you squeeze the trigger, but it's happened to me before both when shooting and, I'm ashamed to say, when I'm pulling. Where I shoot, if the target is moving when the round arrives, we simply take a make-up shot.

Both manual and e-Targets targets have problems sometimes and sometimes the malfunctions are frustrating. However, I don't recall any instance when correcting the error wasn't pretty easy.
 
I'll make this short: I am a huge fan of all the claimed benefits of electronic targets but they have to be reliable and as of right now they obviously aren't. I would like nothing better than for them to be as reliable as paper. They insert a level of technical complexity which is both unnecessary and unsuitable for large scale field deployment to a non-technical crowd.

BTW, Calling people liars on this forum is inexcusable.
 
I'll make this short: I am a huge fan of all the claimed benefits of electronic targets but they have to be reliable and as of right now they obviously aren't.
I'd accept that were you to say "the targets I am familiar with" as a preamble to your view on reliability.

You see, I've presided over three consecutive years of State championships on our Hextas and I have yet to come across a circumstance where their reliability was in question. In every case where a shooter "lost" a shot we have been able to demonstrate either that he had crossfired (the majority), missed a serious condition change, or forgot to come up/down from the last distance. Crossfires definitely are more prevalent on ETs and it seems to be for two reasons. Firstly, the need to check the fall of the shot at a device at the firing point & not downrange, coupled with the lack of a spotter to identify your target has contributed to that issue, I'm sure. The second reason for them being identified is that if shooter A cops an unwelcome extra shot from shooter B on his target, our domestic rules require that it be discounted from the score by a range officer, whereas in the past, shooter & scorers would agree it was a foreigner & proceed without broadcasting the bad news. Yes, there are some whose parents are yet to have formed a permanent relationship. In any case, as I've mentioned earlier, the log for the system can be reviewed after the event and a call confirmed if it came to that. Additionally, our ET crew can immediately review the shot status of a number of adjacent targets by interrogating the CPU from a spare monitor confirm shot count on each.

The issue of the message Cannot discriminate shot can occasionally occur and as it happens at the longer distances, we suspect that it usually occurs when a single bullet has an unstable flight because it's underpowered for the distance or is marginally stabilised. Whatever the case, a shooter automatically gets an immediate reshoot. Of interest though, we seldom get more than an occasional shot from any given shooter and never have experienced a circumstance where a bunch of these occurred one after the other. Cannot discriminate shot probably hit frame, automatically translates as hit frame - miss.

In blustery conditions, we occasionally get a delayed propagation of the shot value on the shooter's monitor and/or the scorer's PC & this might be confused with a miss in the first instance. We have a take it slowly procedure to discriminate between a miss & a slow propagation - if it's not immediately identified as a crossfire.

In our events, results are taken from the Hexta streaming results at the competition in the first instance, firstly because it's quicker and secondly because it permits the results to be checked for unexpected detail, for example, if a shooter has an extra shot for that detail. Simultaneously, the physical scorecards are tabulated for a sanity check.

The essence of our success though is for these main reasons:

  • We learn, learn learn about our equipment.
  • We maintain it to a base level after every weekend club shoot
  • We provide Hexta with an error log and take their advice on what adjustments are needed for optimal performance
  • We provide daily error log interrogation and necessary repair an adjustment each day during an event.
Incidentally, I've also run three consecutive smaller championship on Kongsberg targets and although they have certain limitations due to when they were designed, I've found them to be adequately reliable because of the level of maintenance given to them, albeit they lack some of the bells & whistles of the Hexta.
 
I would have no problem shooting a match even if they have glitches so long as the rules give the benefit of the doubt to the shooter. If some one has been staying inside the 8 ring all day and then a miss is marked(not striking the target) he should get another shot. A person with a high X count then has a miss marked is more likely to occur since the X-ring is getting chewed up. But both should get another make up shot. Now if some one is going 3 o'clock 5, to 9 O'clock 5. Yeah he probably missed. I just want a fair rule. Can you imagine shooting clean and having a miss show up in a Championship match? That would suck to no damn end having it stand as a miss when it was most likely a error on the electronic target.
 
I would have no problem shooting a match even if they have glitches so long as the rules give the benefit of the doubt to the shooter. If some one has been staying inside the 8 ring all day and then a miss is marked(not striking the target) he should get another shot. A person with a high X count then has a miss marked is more likely to occur since the X-ring is getting chewed up. But both should get another make up shot. Now if some one is going 3 o'clock 5, to 9 O'clock 5. Yeah he probably missed. I just want a fair rule. Can you imagine shooting clean and having a miss show up in a Championship match? That would suck to no damn end having it stand as a miss when it was most likely a error on the electronic target.

The target paper face being shot out has nothing to do with a missed shot on most systems. The paper is for an aiming point. Other than that, you dont even need a paper target on the frame and can shoot through a square hole in the frame and the shot will register on your virtual target.
 
I would have no problem shooting a match even if they have glitches so long as the rules give the benefit of the doubt to the shooter. If some one has been staying inside the 8 ring all day and then a miss is marked(not striking the target) he should get another shot. A person with a high X count then has a miss marked is more likely to occur since the X-ring is getting chewed up. But both should get another make up shot. Now if some one is going 3 o'clock 5, to 9 O'clock 5. Yeah he probably missed. I just want a fair rule. Can you imagine shooting clean and having a miss show up in a Championship match? That would suck to no damn end having it stand as a miss when it was most likely a error on the electronic target.

Read and understand rule 10.17.8 (b). The rule does favor the shooter, and if anyone tries to give you a miss just because it didn't register tell them to go read the rulebook again. Our system (ShotMarker) is able to tell when shots are truly missing, and tell where they're crossing the target plane even if the shot is off target - the only thing it can't help with is shots that go so low as to hit the safety berm. Under the rules if a shot is alleged to have dropped, adjacent targets and the logs are to be consulted to rule out a crossfire and as best as possible rule out a genuine miss, and if you've been hitting the rings (not even 8s or better, but getting any score at all) then you can refire that shot. If the second shot does not register, it's assumed to be a target malfunction and you are moved to a new target following the same procedure as if a carriage had failed leaving a pulled target unable to go up and down.
 
Wade's post is worth a second look. It's funny how often the E-target fanboys will say "I'm willing to put up with a few of the idiosyncrasies of E-targets" in order to gain whatever they might happen to think are the advantages over paper targets. I'm willing to bet that for most, that opinion would start to change the second they personally experienced a target not recording their score, especially if it changed the outcome of the match.

My experience with Paper

I'm running 3rd in a regional xxxxxx(hit the spotter) M. WTF no way. Turns out spotter blew a big hole which wasn't patched properly and next shot went through that hole causing no shot found M. I'm outta contention match outcome changed.
Weirdly enough I didn't say paper targets are crap and demand that ETs should be installed.
It was a protocol, training and target maintenance issue. Same issues being discussed in this thread.
 
Seems to be a pretty obvious double standard being applied here.

Folks are saying ET's need to be "as reliable as paper."

A hole that you can put your finger into requires no faith to believe in, sure. But the true comparison isn't really between electronics and paper.

A System of people administering electronic targets makes for a more fair contest than a System of people administering paper targets.

And nothing even needs to be said about any person's intentions.
 
The target paper face being shot out has nothing to do with a missed shot on most systems. The paper is for an aiming point. Other than that, you dont even need a paper target on the frame and can shoot through a square hole in the frame and the shot will register on your virtual target.
I'm curious about this... exactly where would your hold off be for, let's say, a 14mph wind quartering from the left during changing conditions?
The target paper face being shot out has nothing to do with a missed shot on most systems. The paper is for an aiming point. Other than that, you dont even need a paper target on the frame and can shoot through a square hole in the frame and the shot will register on your virtual target.
Of course you can shoot at a blank target board with a square hole in the middle and the ET will mark your shot on the virual target but I'm curious about this one...where would you hold on a blank target if let's say, the wind was 14mph and quartering from the left???? Yeah, I'm pretty sure a paper target would be required. I'm sure there are plenty of indivduals who prefer to hold off rather than turn windage knobs like they're throttling a motorcycle. Now if your angle is using pre-printed synthetic self-healing target boards with the appropriate target dimensions, then you may be onto something.
 
I'm curious about this... exactly where would your hold off be for, let's say, a 14mph wind quartering from the left during changing conditions?

Of course you can shoot at a blank target board with a square hole in the middle and the ET will mark your shot on the virual target but I'm curious about this one...where would you hold on a blank target if let's say, the wind was 14mph and quartering from the left???? Yeah, I'm pretty sure a paper target would be required. I'm sure there are plenty of indivduals who prefer to hold off rather than turn windage knobs like they're throttling a motorcycle. Now if your angle is using pre-printed synthetic self-healing target boards with the appropriate target dimensions, then you may be onto something.

Of course you wouldnt not use a face, it was analogy just to make the statement that people say they shoot through tore up targets and cause a miss, and that is not true. You could aim at a rock through the empty frame and your shot will be scored.
 
Of course you wouldnt not use a face, it was analogy just to make the statement that people say they shoot through tore up targets and cause a miss, and that is not true. You could aim at a rock through the empty frame and your shot will be scored.

...and...the aim point, being offset from the electronic target center, does not get shot out. You still have the same target face/rings for hold-offs as you do when shooting a pulled target.
 
I'm curious about this... exactly where would your hold off be for, let's say, a 14mph wind quartering from the left during changing conditions?

Of course you can shoot at a blank target board with a square hole in the middle and the ET will mark your shot on the virual target but I'm curious about this one...where would you hold on a blank target if let's say, the wind was 14mph and quartering from the left???? Yeah, I'm pretty sure a paper target would be required. I'm sure there are plenty of indivduals who prefer to hold off rather than turn windage knobs like they're throttling a motorcycle. Now if your angle is using pre-printed synthetic self-healing target boards with the appropriate target dimensions, then you may be onto something.

You missed the point. Someone claimed that an E-target with a shot-out center would be more prone to fail to record a shot. The reply was, No, most e-targets will score shots just fine with a shot out center or no paper at all. The reply wasn't mean to say that matches should be conducted without paper targets, only to point out that the paper condition has nothing to do with the accuracy of the target system.

Of course, we all like to aim at something and everywhere I've shot, the paper targets are maintained in good condition, both conventional and E-targets; except for one place. I shot a hundred or so practice rounds on a very wind day at the Talladega CMP range with Kronsberg e-Targets. The aiming point was a 36" diameter black spot; no center marking, no rings, no nothing! Just a huge black dot. The display at the firing line showed a correct F-Class target.

As you can imagine, trying to adjust my hold to improve a 10 to an X was a little tricky. The self-important range master assured me that it was impossible to fit the Kronsberg targets with a proper F-Class target or any marked aiming bull for that mater.

As it turns out the range master lied, not for the first or last time as it turns out. I never returned to that range, but I hear they have since fixed the lack of aiming points.
 
You missed the point. Someone claimed that an E-target with a shot-out center would be more prone to fail to record a shot. The reply was, No, most e-targets will score shots just fine with a shot out center or no paper at all. The reply wasn't mean to say that matches should be conducted without paper targets, only to point out that the paper condition has nothing to do with the accuracy of the target system.

Of course, we all like to aim at something and everywhere I've shot, the paper targets are maintained in good condition, both conventional and E-targets; except for one place. I shot a hundred or so practice rounds on a very wind day at the Talladega CMP range with Kronsberg e-Targets. The aiming point was a 36" diameter black spot; no center marking, no rings, no nothing! Just a huge black dot. The display at the firing line showed a correct F-Class target.

As you can imagine, trying to adjust my hold to improve a 10 to an X was a little tricky. The self-important range master assured me that it was impossible to fit the Kronsberg targets with a proper F-Class target or any marked aiming bull for that mater.

As it turns out the range master lied, not for the first or last time as it turns out. I never returned to that range, but I hear they have since fixed the lack of aiming points.

Exactly what I was trying to say. The bullet does not need to hit paper inside the sensors to register a score.
 
Need electronic moving backer, servo controlled, a foot or so behind primary.
Before/after backer software reset you can confirm all shots (what happened), and see shots from other benches as clear path deviations.
Smallbore matches have a fixed backer. Works great and eliminates any question as to number of shots, cross fires or misses.
 
I ser what you mean. I guess this whole Etarget debate has made be a little frustrated. As I stated in the beginning, when/if the system reaches a point of acceptability, I will probably resume participation. In the meantime I suppose I will just continue to forward my attention to venues that do not incorporate Etargets. I for one have no issue with pulling targets or how quickly I can finish the match, especially when I am investing quite a bit of time, travel and finances.
 

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Forum statistics

Threads
166,227
Messages
2,213,866
Members
79,448
Latest member
tornado-technologies
Back
Top