NRAA SSRs Jan 1 2010

[Peter Hulett]

The NRAA has just posted the Jan 1 2010 version of the SSRs. Guess what? The target dimensions listed are the old 2002 dimensions. So now if we run a Queens or a prize meeting then if we use ICFRA targets we are not shooting to SSRs but if we don't we are shooting against the wishes of our national body.
I don't think that the communication channels are too open up there in Qld.

[AlanF]

We need to be patient Peter - the NRAA is substantially besmitten with the 2011 LRWC - in 2012 when the euphoria has abated, we will hopefully be able to make more sense of what emanates.

Alan

[Woody_rod]

We need to be patient Peter - the NRAA is substantially besmitten with the 2011 LRWC - in 2012 when the euphoria has abated, we will hopefully be able to make more sense of what emanates.

Alan

Not much of an excuse for a lack of correct info though is it.

[timothi3197]

"oops" said the doctor, "I have cut the wrong leg off- I was too busy thinking about next years medical conference- we will get around to cutting the right one off once the conference is over"...........................................

Same thing really.

[VickiMcc]

Peter, Tr wasnt singled out here, F Open still have the Championship target written as the preferred target!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Paul

[Lynn Otto]

Peter, Tr wasnt singled out here, F Open still have the Championship target written as the preferred target!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Paul

Well aren't they?? Where's the mistake there?

[ger]

The SSR's that came into effect 1 Jan 2010 were actually produced back in March. That they were not posted on the NRAA website was an oversight by me - basically I forgot about them so I'll have to wear any resulting flak on teh chin.

And yes, they are obviously out of date in some areas - obvious ones being ICFRA targets, SuperV's and so on.

I have been told (unofficially) that 1 April 2010 is the aiming point for a new set of SSR's. Yes. I note the date...

Geoff Roberts.

[Peter Hulett]

Thanks Geoff, At last a comment from the NRAA that makes sense. Congratulations! I guess it is too much to ask that you take over all the NRAA communications? Replies that I have recently received from chairman NRAA and executive NRAA about queries give a pretty fair indication that they have not read my emails and the stock standard reply is "it is on the website" when clearly it is not.

[johnk]

Geoff,

It seems that the rules are yet to be updated.

John Kielly

[Mark Hamersley]

Don't think the SSR's have been updated yet. The championship target is still specified for F Open along with 3 sighters. What does this mean for the WA Queens given both the ICFRA and the championship target are just a few button presses away on the electronic scoring system?

Are there unannounced rules requiring ICFRA targets to be used?


best regards


Mark

[AlanF]

Mark,

I have been trying in vain to get an answer to the F-Open target question for the best part of a year now. My advice for WARA would be to go with the flow of Tassie, Vic and Queensland Queens and put us all on the ICFRA target with mixed squadding, and scoring 6.1 for both Std and Open. Even though most F-Open shooters would prefer the open target, and separate squadding, its becoming increasingly clear to me that our best interests in the long term will be served by mixing fully with TR and F-Std. If we push to stay on our own target, we may find ourselves at some point in the future at our own state championships. That's certainly not what I would like to see.

Alan

[Mark Hamersley]

Hi Alan

Thanks for the comments, however with electronic target scoring systems it is easier to satisfy more people. At Swanbourne, everyone shoots at the same targets with mixed squadding during weekly club shoots anyway. All scoring and sight adjustment is done off the monitor so the option exists for selecting ICFRA or championship target scoring (per target) with a few button pushes. I guess you can say we are all mixed up here aiming at the same thing! We also have to remember that not all ranges are electronic and probably won't be for quite a while yet.

Going with the flow as you say would provide uniformity and I do agree it would be nice to have the matter settled.

best regards


Mark

[AlanF]

Yes I see what you mean re the versatility of the Kongsberg targets Mark. But wouldn't the actual sighting target need to be same as the electronic target? Otherwise aiming off could be very difficult. I aim off in relation to the lines on the target, not tick marks on my scope reticule.

Alan

[Mark Hamersley]

For aiming off I find it best to do so with respect to the central aiming point as the position of your shot is marked on the monitor only. Whichever target you are being scored on, you need to know the dimensions of the scoring rings to do this well.


best regards


Mark

[AlanF]

Hmmm - I just think we should have the same image on the monitor as the target face. It has always been done that way at Geelong. To me that is more important than which target we use - open or 2002 std or ICFRA are all fine with me.

Alan