Electronic target test report

[XTR]

... Who's going to skip a match because it has one brand of e-target over the other? Please..

Chris, I made no effort to shoot the F class nationals last yr. I decided not to make the effort to get it on my schedule in large part because I didn't want to spend thousands to be a beta tester on a new system. I was particularly concerned after reports of the SMT system failure down in Georgia earlier in the yr.

This yr I'm opting to go to Canada and shoot the mini-palma match in the Maritimes and skip Lodi again.

 

[dannyjbiggs]

Oooopppps...maybe I should answer my own question in that it is being taken in the opposite vein intended!! More than likely, several competitors will opt out of attending ranges that have gone to ET...me being one of them. However, I did go ahead and sign up for the FCNC a couple of weeks ago!

Dan

 

[Heman]

Wildcat Valley Rifle & Pistol Club Selects Silver Mountain Targets for Range Upgrade



Increases range utilization and throughput, and improves access to physically challenged shooters



Senoia, GA. – September 8, 2017



Silver Mountain Targets, a worldwide leader in Electronic Target Systems, announced Wildcat Valley Rifle & Pistol Club in Brookston, Indiana is deploying the company’s newest Plug-N-Play electronic target system.



“Silver Mountain’s advanced Plug-N-Play system represents the latest in electronic target technology, at an affordable price,” said Wayne Forshee, North American distributor for Silver Mountain. “The system is designed to be installed year-round, and easily expanded. The target hardware is weather proof, and powered off of 120VAC, 12 volt battery or a solar panel, providing a high level of reliability. Firing line hardware is battery powered to simplify range infrastructure changes. Communications between the targets and firing line is WIFI, utilizing any internet smart device to display competitor’s shots.”



“Our goal is to extend the value of our rifle range, by increasing throughput, and improving access to physically challenged shooters,” said Steve Reisman, Highpower Discipline Chairman at Wildcat. “In a typical match, we will be able to run more relays in less time, and shooters don’t have to pull targets in the pits. This drastically eases the physical exertion required for our older shooters, or those with physical limitations. We expect a significant increase in the number of competitors at a typical match. Silver Mountain was the best fit for our application at Wildcat”



In early 2017 Wildcat Valley personnel began exploring manufacturers of electronic targets, and visited several ranges to experience various vendor’s systems. After extensive analysis of costs and features, including required infrastructure changes to the existing range, Wildcat selected Silver Mountain’s newest Plug-N-Play system.







About Wildcat Valley Rifle & Pistol Club

Wildcat Valley is a 41 acre facility near Brookston, Indiana, about 20 minutes north of Lafayette. Supported shooting disciplines include Highpower Rifle, IDPA, USPSA, Multi-Gun, Cowboy Action, Silhouette, Trap, Skeet, and a Junior program. The Highpower Rifle program utilizes a 10 point, 300 yard range, and hosts NRA and CMP across the course matches, Military and Vintage matches, and prone matches.



About Silver Mountain Targets

Silver Mountain Targets are designed and manufactured in Canada and Germany.

The authorized distributor for the United States is Stallings Machine in Senoia, Georgia.



Contact

Wayne Forshee

Stallings Machine

Silver Mountain Targets USA

www.stallingsmachine.com

rightsightguy@gmail.com

678-416-9257

 

[Mudeat]

Accuracy, Reliability, Cheap - pick any two. Old engineering saying, I know.

 

[Heman]

Dimitri,

Doesn't matter if the system was calibrated by a user or someone from your company, the calibration was done incorrectly. That is plain and simple fact. We run SMT's at Atterbury and we have NEVER experienced the type of error that your test showed. Why did you not invite SMT personnel to be present when this test was conducted to make sure the system was set up properly?

As far as calibration if the person calibrates at 100yds for 1000yd matches they are doing it incorrectly. Also wasn't the target calibrated and then the shooter moved over a couple points for the test? SMT targets need to be calibrated at the range for which they will be shot the majority of the time. In our case running matches from 200-1000yds we calibrated at 600yds. Also they need to be calibrated and shot with the shooters as close to perpindicular to the target face as possible. From what I read of your report this was not the case.

Instead of focusing on the "engineering friend" of Wayne which doesn't matter why not accept that your test is invalid and the SMT target was not calibrated properly.

 

[Heman]

Bruce,

Your statement that range misalignment should not affect the accuracy of the SMT is false. If you shoot into the target at an angle vs. straight in you can induce error. Furthermore this was increased by you moving over a couple of points from where you calibrated at 200yds for 1000yds. If I were to conduct a test on any target system I would want to reduce errors especially if I was going to be saying my product is better than theirs to show the validity of the test. From reading the report it basically sounded like you did a half assed job calibrating the system as instructed by the owner who does a half assed job for his matches, then moved over a couple points to induce an error that you knew would happen. Also using an anemic load to further increase errors on the system for which an open mic system will have a harder time picking up than a closed mic system. Then you turn around and say yup there system isn't as accurate as ours. The whole point is mute as it doesn't really matter because a properly calibrate SMT is accurate enough for highpower. The facts you don't address is for many ranges they can't afford your system, and the closed systems are big and bulky and are not practical for people who have to set up a range for a daily match or transport the targets. I can carry all of our 9 SMT's in the back seat of my car. I can't do that with Hex targets.

 

[brucedaniel]

Bruce,

Your statement that range misalignment should not affect the accuracy of the SMT is false.

Heman,
I'm not sure I ever said this, and I'm not sure where you quoted me from. If you reproduce the quote I'll be happy to respond.
Cheers

 

[Keith Glasscock]

I read through the results of both tests. All finger pointing and marketing tom-foolery aside have a serious question. This is not to single out SMT, nor Hex as I believe that all of the acoustic targets suffer the same accuracy issues to varying extents.

How many shots have all of us seen where the difference in score was less than .040" (~ 1mm)? I know that in F-class, I score one or two of those per day.

Now, consider the independent Australian testing... I'd bet that none of the targets used for competition in the US are anywhere near the "perfect" setup described. Nonetheless, even the "perfect" setup in the final test resulted in impact location errors that exceeded 1mm on 29 out of 30 shots. 24 of the 30 had linear errors exceeding 2mm. 2 of the 30 had linear errors that exceeded the bullet diameter.

If we consider the results from the "imperfect" setups (consistent with what I have seen on the US) the problems are highly magnified.

So, if you were heading off to a state, regional, national, or world championship with the skills and equipment to win, and you knew that accoustic targets were to be used, how would you feel about it's "ability" to up or down score a line shot randomly?

How would you feel if you lost and you knew the winner got a random "gift" that was enough to beat you, or you had a shot down-scored due to errors? What if you "won" as the result of a "gift" from the system?

Isn't it time to start looking for a better way?

I feel this post is important and evocative enough to warrant cross-posting between threads. Please forgive me for doing so...

 

[Stralyanshooter]

How the heck do these targets get used for major competitions when up until now no proper testing has been done on them and no documented accuracy reports or certification. Not even by the manufacturers or the major event organisers??
Surely they should have to prove their worth not just say they are up to the job. What happens when another cheaper newer system with bells and whistles comes on the market and says yeah we are better than the others with no proof or test results. Will they be used for big comps too?
Wouldn't ever happen in Australia!

 

[243Mendoza]

...

How many shots have all of us seen where the difference in score was less than .040" (~ 1mm)? I know that in F-class, I score one or two of those per day....

Keith
We have to agree that 1mm or 2mm error is small. How much stretch or shrinking does your paper target have compared to your competitor because of excessive glues or paper wrinkling or target centers not being centered. All paper targets are not equal.

 

[Keith Glasscock]

Steve,

Yes, indeed, .040-.080" is a very small amount, but more and more, I see matches won and lost by very small distances. At the most recent Washington State 600 yard championship, three f-open shooters cleaned the 80 shots and were separated by only 3 Xs. I don't even want to imagine how many 10s were within .080" of the X ring.

I agree on the paper targets.

Let's not go down that rabbit hole right now. Let's think about ways to either build redundency into this generation of ETs or replace them with better technology.

 

[243Mendoza]

...

I agree on the paper targets.

Let's not go down that rabbit hole right now. Let's think about ways to either build redundency into this generation of ETs or replace them with better technology.

Yes, I suspect someone will come up with another technology with higher accuracy once the existing technology makes money, otherwise why invest.

But i would not avoid existing technology because someone who won on paper targets may have won because his paper target was more stretched or better centered

 

[camac]

But don't worry there is more SMT tests coming.

Regards,
Shawn Agne

Yes Please Shawn - please conduct at 1000 yards and be sure to include 223 and 308 that are transonic at that range as we see them everyday in all competitions and they deserve not to be discriminated against.

 

[camac]

Yes Please Shawn - please conduct at 1000 yards and be sure to include 223 and 308 that are transonic at that range as we see them everyday in all competitions and they deserved not to be discriminated against.

I should point out that the general public want these tests to be done scientifically by independent groups such as the Smith/Stewart report (and they have done Kongsberg and Hexta testing) No one enjoys the major companies taking it to each other, or defending themselves with sales pitches.

It is a great pity Peter and Dave did not have access to a 1000 yard range for the extensive work they did.

ps errors of 10-15mm at 300 yards is not good enough in my book. and looking at their results I would be expecting very significant errors at 1000 with transonic loads.

Lets just get to the scientific facts so the consumer and shooting bodies have a clear understanding of what they are buying.

 

[Ray Gross]

Steve,
I agree on the paper targets.

Let's not go down that rabbit hole right now. Let's think about ways to either build redundency into this generation of ETs or replace them with better technology.

I believe this is where we actually do need to start. How can we set a standard for electronic targets when we have never quantified what the typical error is for competitor pulled & marked targets?

 

[Keith Glasscock]

I believe this is where we actually do need to start. How can we set a standard for electronic targets when we have never quantified what the typical error is for competitor pulled & marked targets?

I see your point now. While perfection is always attractive, having a standard to compare to makes sense.

How do we study it?

 

[DRNewcomb]

Look at someones trace next time your at a match. You will clearly see the arc headed towards the neighbouring target on a windy day, at about halfway to the target will be the widest arc correct?(assuming the same wind speed from the muzzle to the target) When your bullet travels through the target it'll be close to a right angle no matter the amount of wind it just encountered.

Because of gyroscopic stability, the bullet will be in pretty much the same orientation as it was when it left the barrel, which generally is a few MOA up and into the wind. The path it travels will be a few MOA downward and downwind.

 

[Keith Glasscock]

A little calculus can some the problem of the immediate path of the bullet at the moment it passes through the target.

If someone would take the time to post the equation for wind drift, I can give it a crack - not that I'm that good at the math, but we have some people on here that can check and correct my work.

*update*
Doing a little digging and playing with JBM shows that the last yard to the target at 1000 yards has a path as follows (horizontally)

10mph std day:
30 cal 155.5 fullbore @ 2995, 30 cal 185 LRBT @ 2750, and 7mm 180 hybrid @ 2800
all had drift within .1" of one another. They averaged a path relative to the direction of fire of 19 MOA.

When I increased the wind to 30 mph, the numbers effectively tripled. The 155.5 fullbore showed a path slightly greater than 1 degree from direction of fire. The 185 and 180 hybrid weren't too far away coming in right at 1 degree and just under 1 degree respectively.

If these numbers are correct, how can we ensure that the target reports correctly in reference to the direction of the incoming shots? What if it's switchy?

 

[243Mendoza]

How about using the 300 m ISSF standard for electronic targets whatever that is?
They have been using etargets for ever.

 

[Keith Glasscock]

By my reading of the ISSF rules, the rings are broken into 10 decimal values. The 300m rifle 10 ring is 100mm, so the rings are spaced in 5mm intervals from each side. The rules state that the accuracy requirement is one half of one decimal ring.

I'm thinking that the rule requires a precision of 2.5mm (~.100") to be certified. I did notice that Sius makes optical targets that meet those requirements.