SBS E-Backer Update

[Greg@wfcustom]

FYI,
After discussing it with Dan (Match Director) Lutke, I have decided to start a separate thread from our match results for updating our progress with the e-backer experiment we have been running this year. I am copying the previous post from last months match to this thread and will update this months match also.

From June:

Since i am the one who put the system together, maybe I can help out with a few of the technical questions.
First off, as some have already commented our club decided to invest in new technology rather then rebuild our old, heavy, hard to move, difficult to setup, etc, mechanical backers.
This obviously ran afoul with NBRSA rules & regs, so we decided to unregister this years matches.
As Dan mentioned most of us are getting older, and there are fewer of us to do the work. With our new system 2 guys and a p/u can setup in 30 minutes.
The frames weigh in at @ 30 lbs, and are constructed with heavy wall (11 gauge) 1" aluminum tube with coroplast faces.
With the help of club member Lane Buxton, who new Adam at Shotmarker from F-Class shooting, he and Adam worked on what I think is an elegant way to record shots.
The target face Adam developed for us is set up as a 4x8 frame, but if you look at the tablet screen shot you will notice our 3x8 frames centered in the target face.
This is adjusted in the software. We are only using the system as an e-backer. Although the averages we checked while testing were suprisingly accurate, they are no where near capable of being used in a match as an end result. That technology is coming some day, just not here yet. (At least not affordable!).
As you can see the record shots in the A-B-C-D show up in the score box, while sighter regardless of who shot them count as zeros.
If you need to look at the sighter for some reason you can drill down on the tablet and look at the individual shots. Basically if you have a score of 5 with the appropriate letters to match the shooters on that frame, save the file and move on to the next frame.
Full disclosure: we have had some issues along the way, the biggest one was one frame the sensors were not perfectly square (rectanguler), which is critical to accurate functioning of the system. Some one asked about 5 targets to a frame, here is the issue.
The software thinks that your POI should be frame center and that is where it is most accurate. The further you get from frame center the greater the margin of error, not a big deal for counting but definitely would be if you were using it for measuring.
Also the more shooters per frame the greater chance of doubling and the sensors missing a shot. The numbers from our match were as follows:
900 record shots over 2 days.
897 shots recorded
1 ghost shot (which was a shot)
2 shots unrecorded. Probably doubles, luckily we could determine shots on target.
Each club would have to determine whether this level of accuracy (99.67%) is acceptable for their purposes.
Personally given all the advantages, (portability, no backers, less (or no) target crew), we are moving forward and leaving the dinosaurs wading
in the swamp to wondering what that bright shiny object heading towards them is. We will evolve, with or without a sanctioning body.

July match update:
We had 11 shooters Saturday (110 Targets 550 Record shots)
System recorded all 550 record shots.
We had 7 shooters Sunday (70 Targets 350 Record shots)
System recorded 349 of the 350 record shots. By coincidence it was the Match Director Dan whose shot was missed and although it wasn't
the "worst group in the history of BR" as he claimed, we could determine 5 shots on the target.
So the scorecard for the weekend is 900 record shots taken 899 recorded (99.89% accuracy).
Anyone who has measured as many targets as I have (20 years and counting) knows that there are at least that % of times that the referees have to have the
"yeh that one kind of looks like a double" discussion with paper/card backers. Again it would be up to the individual clubs (or hopefully the Sanctioning Body) to decide what procedure would be appropriate. At our club we try and give the shooter the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.
I am quite please that all the effort looks like it is paying off, it sure lightens the work load.
Questions welcomed, I'm not on here all the time so it may take a bit for a response.
Greg

 

[Greg@wfcustom]

One other very important thing re: System costs,
We had a member (Lane Buxton) make a very generous offer to sponsor the cost
of 1 system ($800.00), if we could get matching donations for 2 more. ($1600.00).
So we held a donor drive requesting shooters/club members who could
to make a donation towards the 5 Shotmarker systems we needed.
The following is a list of contributors:
Mike Brenley
Marty Childers
Bob Eicher
Steve Epstein
Francis Lee
Dan Lutke
George Palms
Ron Pepper
Steve Raeder
Michael Taner
With their generous donations we were able to take advantage of Lane's offer and pay for 3 of the systems.
Our club (Sloughhouse Benchrest Shooters) paid for a 4th from the clubs funds, along with the frame material expense,
and I am loaning my personal one when we need a 5th.
Did not want these folks to go unrecognized as we all know it takes a village to raise a Benchrest Shooter!
Greg

 

[Matthew Schwartzkopf]

I have been wondering about this for the past few years to use for AZ Benchrest Shooters matches. Being a high power shooter and owning my own electronic target I thought surely there was a way to do this.

How do you make the target in the system match your target configuration? Did you work with Adam with Shot Marker to do that?

Also you have to watch out for that Lane Buxton guy

 

[Matthew Schwartzkopf]

Also, I assume that NBRSA does not sanction this, correct?

Have you looked at the difference in actual shot placement vs electronic shot placement for a crossfire? Meaning can you tell the difference between a cross fired shot because the mics picked it up different because it came in at a different angle then the rest of the shots in the group. Or does it show velocities at the target and you might be able to look at the different velocities shot at the different targets and tell if one shot was a cross fire?

 

[Greg@wfcustom]

I have been wondering about this for the past few years to use for AZ Benchrest Shooters matches. Being a high power shooter and owning my own electronic target I thought surely there was a way to do this.

How do you make the target in the system match your target configuration? Did you work with Adam with Shot Marker to do that?

Also you have to watch out for that Lane Buxton guy

Hi Matthew,
Long time no see, 2017 Cactus was the last time I think?
Yea, Lane is getting back at me for getting him involved (sort of) in SR BR by trying to get us to redo everything we do. I know hard to believe right?
Anyway to answer your question the target image you see on the screen shot was created by Adam
(with Lane's input) and is a 4'x8' frame. I do not believe it is part of his current software/target package but may be added in the future if it generates enough interest.
Our frame is 3'x8' so we just center it in the image using the software. Kind of like the way you would offset a HP target. As far as the crossfire question, it is rarely an issue at a SRBR match, with the exception of a couple of well known shooters who will remain nameless. It will show an angle deflection error if the difference was great enough, velocity would be another crosscheck.
Hope to make it to the Cactus next year and see you there.
Any other questions let me know,
Greg

 

[Greg@wfcustom]

Also, I assume that NBRSA does not sanction this, correct?

That is correct, it has been submitted as an Agenda item for trial basis.
We decided not to register our matches this year, the shooters just want to shoot.
G