Accuracy of electronic targets

[spclark]

There really isn't anything you guys can think of that hasn't already been answered by the folks making these targets.

Out of interest only (already shoot on ETs) what is the approach for shooters display? BYOD or event supplied?

Likely a mix of BYOD and supplied. Any browser-capable wireless display device ought to work; Wayne Forshee recommends one or another Kindle with a supplementary battery pack and padded case that acts as a protection shelter from sun glare and maybe rain.

Some post here suggested everyone should be using the same hardware. I guess that's OK but I don't see how a mix would give anyone a competitive advantage.

I've used my iPhone (too small but would work for a casual observer) and my 13" MacbookPro (just bright enough in sunlight if I position it out of direct sunlight) which may be a bit too fragile for frequent use. I want to explore the Kindle line myself, they're not pricey & seem better suited to this than an iPod or sonething similar.

 

[daniel.chisholm]

Got wind of a side-by-side 'evaluation' between HEXTA and SMT systems last Sunday.

No details as to where or outcome so if anybody here reading this was there in some capacity (hopefully as a shooter!) your feedback might be of interest.

It was in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Rick Ratzlaff, N. American dealer for HEX Systems was was there to do a demo on Saturday and ended up staying for Sunday as well. Wayne Forshee, US dealer for Silver Mountain Targets was there to do a demo on Sunday. It ended up being the first time to my knowledge that both Hex and SMT gear ran on the same range at the same time. There were two HEXTA-002 targets set up on around targets#1 & 2 or so, and two SMT targets set up on targets #7 and 8.

Shooting was done at 200y, including some rapid fire, and then it moved back to 1000y.

I wasn't there but I understand that it was a cold (34F) but sunny and pleasant day. I would love to hear any comments, both good and bad, from shooters or observers who were there. From what I can gather second or third hand, shooters enjoyed shooting on both systems.

 

[dannyjbiggs]

DARN...not Oak Ridge, too!!!!!!! Those are the easiest pulling targets in the country. They can be flipped up and down with an "eyelash"!

Dan

 

[SWRichmond]

For the record: no one I know of is questioning how cool ET's are when they work, when set up and maintained by experts. The questions I have posted, and those I have seen posted by others, relate to operational maintenance, longevity, long term operating costs, consistency / repeatability, precision, accuracy, the introduction by their use of new and formerly unknown difficulties and questions, and the impact (immediate as well as long term) of their adoption on real-time conduct of the familiar aspects of an actual match, such as timing etc.

It would really suck to spend big money on something and to not have documented your thorough exploration and satisfaction with all of these areas, and then spend a lot of time doing damage control. But that is not to say that people don't do that exact thing every day.

It's not just a new target that does everything the old targets did except better, which is what some of you would seem to have us believe.

Peace.

 

[6BRinNZ]

There really isn't anything you guys can think of that hasn't already been answered by the folks making these targets.

Out of interest only (already shoot on ETs) what is the approach for shooters display? BYOD or event supplied?

Likely a mix of BYOD and supplied. Any browser-capable wireless display device ought to work; Wayne Forshee recommends one or another Kindle with a supplementary battery pack and padded case that acts as a protection shelter from sun glare and maybe rain.

Some post here suggested everyone should be using the same hardware. I guess that's OK but I don't see how a mix would give anyone a competitive advantage.

I've used my iPhone (too small but would work for a casual observer) and my 13" MacbookPro (just bright enough in sunlight if I position it out of direct sunlight) which may be a bit too fragile for frequent use. I want to explore the Kindle line myself, they're not pricey & seem better suited to this than an iPod or sonething similar.

Ta - the kindles are very popular with TR - F class not so much as the screens seem small. Hopefully people will post with what they find is working as this area is very much a work in progress. Not because a suitable screen can't be found but, things like weather tightness, battery life, weight, browser compatibility etc are influencers. I've been using an iPad inside a box which seems to work well but one day I rocked up and the browser wouldn't stay connected to the site so I couldn't shoot using it, something to do with a site upgrade and safari not being happy together....so maybe there are better devices out there that people will use and post about.

 

[Warren Dean]

Amazon has Kindle 7" tablets for $49 right now. Pretty good price.

 

[Matt P]

More than one F-Class match has been lost by a fraction of an inch.

NOT talking about accuracy David. Talking about offset. The accuarracy is better than you can see. Or maybe your experience with electronic targets are more than mine... and if so I will stand corrected.

Russel

Hi Russel, I have no experience with electronic targets. It is the potential horizontal target offset that causes me concern. Below is a crude attempt to explain why target offset concerns me.



Black is Aiming Target. Red is Acoustic Offset Representation. Green Arrow shows POA-POI for Left to Right Wind. Blue Arrow shows POA-POI in Right to Left Wind Switch. Purple Arrows show how the Effect of the Offset Doubles when you Crossover.
Basically I'm trying to say 1/8 MOA offset could translate into a 1/4 MOA difference in impact when you cross over.

I have shot on Hex targets for the past 3 years, the system in my opinion is the best available at the moment but keeping the sound chamber sealed and in good condition is important even with the 8 sensor technology.
Above is a perfect example of one of the issues with ALL ET systems, getting the electronic and visual centres aligned, which IMO is very important, some (many) will say just wind your sights which is fine but if and when the wind crosses the centre line you'll have more or less wind than what the flags are showing, this is also very frustrating when moving along the line and your wind zero changes with each target if the visual aiming marks aren't set up correctly (in line with the electronic centre).
Regards
Matt

 

[SWRichmond]

More than one F-Class match has been lost by a fraction of an inch.

NOT talking about accuracy David. Talking about offset. The accuarracy is better than you can see. Or maybe your experience with electronic targets are more than mine... and if so I will stand corrected.

Russel

Hi Russel, I have no experience with electronic targets. It is the potential horizontal target offset that causes me concern. Below is a crude attempt to explain why target offset concerns me.



Black is Aiming Target. Red is Acoustic Offset Representation. Green Arrow shows POA-POI for Left to Right Wind. Blue Arrow shows POA-POI in Right to Left Wind Switch. Purple Arrows show how the Effect of the Offset Doubles when you Crossover.
Basically I'm trying to say 1/8 MOA offset could translate into a 1/4 MOA difference in impact when you cross over.

I have shot on Hex targets for the past 3 years, the system in my opinion is the best available at the moment but keeping the sound chamber sealed and in good condition is important even with the 8 sensor technology.
Above is a perfect example of one of the issues with ALL ET systems, getting the electronic and visual centres aligned, which IMO is very important, some (many) will say just wind your sights which is fine but if and when the wind crosses the centre line you'll have more or less wind than what the flags are showing, this is also very frustrating when moving along the line and your wind zero changes with each target if the visual aiming marks aren't set up correctly (in line with the electronic centre).
Regards
Matt

Are you saying that changing wind blowing across an electronic target changes the acoustic center (and hence moves the reported impact point)?

 

[memilanuk]

Are you saying that changing wind blowing across an electronic target changes the acoustic center (and hence moves the reported impact point)?

Supposedly it can be, on the targets with external microphones (i.e. SMT). The Hexta literature implies that it is a serious problem; the article by Bryan at the beginning of this thread would seem to indicate otherwise.

 

[Matt P]

More than one F-Class match has been lost by a fraction of an inch.

NOT talking about accuracy David. Talking about offset. The accuarracy is better than you can see. Or maybe your experience with electronic targets are more than mine... and if so I will stand corrected.

Russel

Hi Russel, I have no experience with electronic targets. It is the potential horizontal target offset that causes me concern. Below is a crude attempt to explain why target offset concerns me.



Black is Aiming Target. Red is Acoustic Offset Representation. Green Arrow shows POA-POI for Left to Right Wind. Blue Arrow shows POA-POI in Right to Left Wind Switch. Purple Arrows show how the Effect of the Offset Doubles when you Crossover.
Basically I'm trying to say 1/8 MOA offset could translate into a 1/4 MOA difference in impact when you cross over.

I have shot on Hex targets for the past 3 years, the system in my opinion is the best available at the moment but keeping the sound chamber sealed and in good condition is important even with the 8 sensor technology.
Above is a perfect example of one of the issues with ALL ET systems, getting the electronic and visual centres aligned, which IMO is very important, some (many) will say just wind your sights which is fine but if and when the wind crosses the centre line you'll have more or less wind than what the flags are showing, this is also very frustrating when moving along the line and your wind zero changes with each target if the visual aiming marks aren't set up correctly (in line with the electronic centre).
Regards
Matt

Are you saying that changing wind blowing across an electronic target changes the acoustic center (and hence moves the reported impact point)?

Sorry no, what I'm trying to say is if the visual and electronic centres aren't aligned your rifles still air zero will be out compared to the electronic zero.

 

[aussiepowderburner]

And if set up haphazardly the acoustic centre versus optical centre will vary from target to target across the range.
Effectively changing your wind zero each time you transition to another target.
Any seasoned competitor knows how critical a proper wind zero is to our sport!
APB

 

[Rtheurer]

Good thing here in the USA we don not move over 5 targets every yard line like our Aussie Brother and sisters do.

 

[brucedaniel]

memilanuk wrote:

Supposedly it can be, on the targets with external microphones (i.e. SMT). The Hexta literature implies that it is a serious problem; the article by Bryan at the beginning of this thread would seem to indicate otherwise.

A word from HEXTA probably wouldn’t go astray here.

Yes, we at HEX Systems do consider crosswinds a problem with open sensor targets. It magnifies the real windage effect, but consequently the error tends to be masked by it, so it's not so easy to detect. But the fact remains that you don't want the target to be adding variability at all.

The acoustic chamber solves this problem, which is why it has been “conventional” for decades now.

I think that Bryan plays down the importance of the crosswind effect by saying that only crosswinds at the target face will cause it, using the argument that the wave front moves out radially along the surface of the target. This is not correct – in fact the wave approaches the target in a conical shape. So the “boundary layer” effect he describes does not come into play.

More generally, we welcome Bryan’s article. It’s an important step towards understanding the accuracy issues, and it’s great that he is making a practical proposal for an accuracy requirement.

Bruce Daniel
HEX Systems