Using e-targets with multiple target faces

[memilanuk]

Question for those who have some experience with the e-targets...

We are looking at getting some here at our local club - our pits are in sad shape, and compared to spending $50-100k on a complete rebuild, e-targets start looking mighty promising.

The 'problem' is that we have kind of a weird topographical layout... one range for 100-200-300yds, with a set of pits for 200/300, and another separate range for 500/600 with its own set of pits. Before anyone asks; no, there is no physical way to combine them.

About half our matches are Fullbore 300/500/600yd format, which leaves me with an interesting quandary... how to switch between completely different targets using the e-target systems.

Yes, I know you can simply toggle a different target on the display, but that doesn't cover how to handle the different targets down range, what the shooter sees through their scope.

In the one situation, we'd be physically moving everything from the 300yd butts over to the 500/600yd butts - and I'd like to do that without having to do any re-calibration in between. If I have to buy a separate set of sensors that wouldn't be ideal, but not the end of the world either. Three sets - one for each set of target faces - might be a bit much.

I've seen some suggestions to just use overlays with different sized holes to give the correct sized black circle at distance. Great for sling/irons, but not so much for F-class where most people hold off using the scoring rings.

Again, looking for input on what works and what doesn't, based on experience.

Thanks,

Monte

 

[Berger.Fan222]

http://rulebooks.nra.org/documents/pdf/compete/rules/rul_hpr_16.pdf

Sorry for my lack of input on your direct question, but you probably also want to look at the NRA rules on the electronic targets. One club whose matches I attend is trying to figure all this out and there are a number of challenges with the rules in addition to the questions you have raised.

 

[Heman]

Monty here is alink that shows how we are doing it at Atterbury.

http://ingunowners.com/forums/shoot...range-now-electronic-targets.html#post6369824

 

[Jay Christopherson]

Monte, I imagine you can envision moving the sensors between target frames (assuming one set of sensors), pasting up a different center, and changing the display. But I don't see how you would get around re-calibrating each time you do that.

It's possible that *if* you could somehow ensure that each center cutout (300/500/600) is exactly the same size and you accept some level of human error in pasting them on, I imagine you could get away without re-calibrating during a match. The idea being that the size of the rings will change, but the location of the dead center will remain the same between faces. I'm guessing the offset error would stack up over time so you'd probably re-calibrate the day before each match or something.

 

[Heman]

With the SMT targets you DO NOT have to re calibrate. The sensors go in those black brackets which are fixed. Once the calibration values are entered in the targets you are good. For example our target 101 has two calibration values 1 for atterbury and 1 for my farm. When I shoot at the farm I load that one and I'm on. When I'm at atterbury I use the atterbury target. Monte in your case you would have the targets calibrated for your 1-300yd range and then calibrated for the other range. Then just move the sensors load up the other calibration and you are good to go.

You also have to remember it doesn't really matter where the round hits on the paper. That isn't used for scoring, the paper is just for aiming.

 

[memilanuk]

You also have to remember it doesn't really matter where the round hits on the paper. That isn't used for scoring, the paper is just for aiming.

The only potential niggle I could see there is that our 5/600 targets are 72" square(ish). The rule book specifies a certain dimension for the white outside the scoring rings... and offsetting the aiming point from the acoustical center would eat into that in one direction or another.

Of course, if we do end up going with these targets, I imagine building a dedicated target frame for the e-target system wouldn't be that big of a deal. Isn't like I haven't built all the ones we have now

Just curious... why do your target faces have no rings in the white? Don't you folks have wind there?

 

[memilanuk]

Sorry for my lack of input on your direct question, but you probably also want to look at the NRA rules on the electronic targets. One club whose matches I attend is trying to figure all this out and there are a number of challenges with the rules in addition to the questions you have raised.

yeah... I could see someone being particular enough to claim that 3.22 and 10.17 sort of conflict with the use of anything but the hard-wired target displays used by Kongsberg (and maybe Sius Acor?).

 

[243Mendoza]

Monte
At the Cascade club, a few members have bought two sets of SMT for their private use. Gary Rasmussen and others staple a 200 yd center on top of the 600yd face for their offhand and sitting rapid practice and then take off the 200yd centers for 600yd practice. I'm not sure if they load another set of calibration files between yard lines. Send him a email enquiry.

 

[Heman]

The only potential niggle I could see there is that our 5/600 targets are 72" square(ish). The rule book specifies a certain dimension for the white outside the scoring rings... and offsetting the aiming point from the acoustical center would eat into that in one direction or another.

Of course, if we do end up going with these targets, I imagine building a dedicated target frame for the e-target system wouldn't be that big of a deal. Isn't like I haven't built all the ones we have now

Just curious... why do your target faces have no rings in the white? Don't you folks have wind there?

Our frames aren't square. We added distance in the vertical to move the acoustical center down. So you have the 6x6 chloroplast target backer but the frames themselves are larger so the sensors are mounted (for sake of conversation) 8x6.

We don't have the rings in the white on the aiming targets because people shooting irons only see the black and the fclass shooters aren't holding off that much. We do have wind but not as much as Ben Avery windy matches can be 20-25. Have to remember the paper targets are just used for aiming through calibration you can put the accoustical center anywhere you want. If you want an X to be at 8 oclock on the 7 ring of the paper target you can. Paper targets are just for aiming anymore.

 

[memilanuk]

We don't have the rings in the white on the aiming targets because people shooting irons only see the black and the fclass shooters aren't holding off that much. .... Paper targets are just for aiming anymore.

Well... you might want to read 10.17.1 (b) of the rules update that BergerFan linked to. It says that for F-class the scoring rings should be visible.... I would take that to mean *all* the scoring rings.... regardless of whether you use them or not. We don't use those outer rings very often either... but @ our Fullbore match last month, I was holding off 4-5 moa @ 600 yds, and was dang glad the lines were there

 

[Keith Glasscock]

I personally would prefer to have all of the landmarks possible on the target face. It's not like I've *had* to hold on the 6 ring of my neighbor's target. I could have just changed the scope out for one with more windage travel

I also believe that the new rules require all of the rings be present for f-class.

Back to the subject Monte, I have no experience with calibration of the silver mountain targets, but I understand how they work. So long as the sensor positions are the same (For the target calibration being used) when you reinstall them onto the frames, they should be right on.

On the other hand, most of us have removed and reinstalled a scope into the same position it came off of and found that the zero changed some.

Sounds like some testing is in order.

 

[Heman]

Well... you might want to read 10.17.1 (b) of the rules update that BergerFan linked to. It says that for F-class the scoring rings should be visible.... I would take that to mean *all* the scoring rings.... regardless of whether you use them or not. We don't use those outer rings very often either... but @ our Fullbore match last month, I was holding off 4-5 moa @ 600 yds, and was dang glad the lines were there

Well I saw that also. I interpreted it as you can't use the black non-lined bladder of the Kongsberg system. As I could see places running a match on Kongsbergs like at Anniston and the f-class shooters or any rifle shooters with scope being left out. Since the rule doesn't say "all" then I don't interpret it to mean all as we have scoring lines visible.

As far as people challenging the rules, we had a similar issue a little last year when I incorporated convertible sighters into traditional long range, mid-range, and course matches (slow fire only) when only 2 sighters were used along with infiltration block time. My approach to that was, this is what we are doing and how we are doing it. If you don't like it then don't shoot at our place. So taking that to the extent of how our targets are. 1.) we've let them know ahead how the target faces are. 2.) the majority of rings are there. Since the rule doesn't state all, then we satisfy the rule. So if people want to complain they don't have to shoot.

 

[memilanuk]

Well... lets just say you and I have very different interpretations of how that rule reads. If thats the way you guys want to run your matches, more power to ya. I've been there too, when you try something different and the old guard blows a gasket because you moved their cheeze