F Class Disciplines in AU

[Southcape]

There has been some confusion on the different F Classes in Australia, and in which class people are actually shooting. Hope this helps clear it up a little.

F Open:
A rifle shot over a rest, using any sights, with unrestricted bullets or powder up to 8mm caliber, with maximum weight of 10 kilos and unrestricted trigger weight.

F Std:
A rifle shot over a rest weighing 8 kilos, using only 223 Remington or 308 Winchester cartridge, with NRAA approved projectiles and powder only, with 1 kilo minimum trigger weight.
F Std can also be: a rifle using bipod only, weighing maximum of 10 kilos, using only 223 Remington or 308 Winchester cartridge, with NRAA approved projectiles and powder only, with 1 kilo minimum trigger weight.

F/TR ICFRA:
A rifle using bipod only, weighing maximum of 8.25 kilos, using only 223 Remington or 308 Winchester cartridge, with unrestricted bullets or powder and unrestricted trigger weight.

[Southcape]

I have listed F/TR Std because I have found that some people are thinking that because they have a bipod on, they are shooting F/TR ICFRA.

[Barry Davies]

Linda,
There is no such discipline as F/TR Standard.

The list is FOpen, F Standard. and F/TR

You only tend to confuse the issue by introducing F/TR Standard - it simply does not exist..
F Standard is as you say with rifle limited to 8 kg. If you shoot off a rest it is 8 kg and if shot off a bipod it is still 8 kg with an overall limit including bipod of 10 kg

Barry

[phillh]

Linda,

the weight limit you mention may seem ambiguious to the newbie. Maybe you should mention the weight limit is for the rifle, rest/bipod, scope, bolt etc included.

Phill

[bruce moulds]

barry you are correct.
the best way to introduce ftr is keep it simple in order to minimize confusion that will happen.
ftr std is a non existent thing.
no offence linda.
keep safe,
bruce.

[M12LRPV]

Wow. A new class: F/TR standard. Must have missed that one in the rule book.

Do we need to go back and disqualify everyone shooting off a bipod in the NSW Queens held a couple of weekends back? After all It was only F-Open and F-Std shot in that competition.


What about the next OPM where there is F-Open and F-Std on offer. Don't turn up if your using a bipod!!!

I would have to say that the F/TR proponents are really getting ridiculous in their attempts to push that discipline. Is it desperation or just low moral standards that they attempt to reclassify an existing class in order to generate numbers in F/TR.

[AlanF]

In fairness to Linda, she is only attempting to clarify things. There seem to some who want to confuse things.

To anyone who genuinely wants to know the basic specs for F/TR here they are again :

• 308 or 223 any powder any projectile
• 8.25 Kg max all up rifle weight including bipod (no pedestal rests)
• Any sight, safe trigger, rear bag

We had 6 shooting F/TR on Saturday at Rosedale (c.f. 5 F-Std, 7 F-Open). I think its going to be good.

Alan

[M12LRPV]

In fairness to Linda, she is only attempting to clarify things. There seem to some who want to confuse things.

To anyone who genuinely wants to know the basic specs for F/TR here they are again :

• 308 or 223 any powder any projectile
• 8.25 Kg max all up rifle weight including bipod (no pedestal rests)
• Safe trigger

We had 6 shooting F/TR on Saturday at Rosedale (c.f. 5 F-Std, 7 F-Open). I think its going to be good.

Alan

So how many of those were genuinely shooting F/TR and how many were reclassified to falsely generate F/TR numbers?

It's the underhanded way that people are promoting F/TR that really rankles.

Like confusingly adding false non-existent categories (and thus generating confusion) while claiming to be trying to clarify things.

[Southcape]

WARA is looking for a way of keeping collecting data on the number of bipods used in competition in WA.

[AlanF]

So how many of those were genuinely shooting F/TR and how many were reclassified to falsely generate F/TR numbers?

It's the underhanded way that people are promoting F/TR that really rankles.

Like confusingly adding false non-existent categories (and thus generating confusion) while claiming to be trying to clarify things.

At Rosedale there were 6 F/TR shooters all of whom were included in that class because it was the most appropriate class for them, and importantly because they wanted to shoot in that class. I could add that several other F-Std shooters had gear that would have been legal in F/TR, but they were not invited to join it. The F/TR shooters included 5 relatively new members with Remington/Savage rifles and one long-standing multi-disciplinary member who happened to have his match rifle. There is no falsification of figures here, and I can't understand the lengths some will go to drag down this promising new category of F-Class shooting. Let's give it a fair go!

Alan

[Southcape]

Great Southern DRA had 4 F/TR shooters, and 1 F Open shooter competing at our OPM.

Fofter as it became known by the end of the meeting, was very successful in showing that F Open and F/TR can be run within the same discipline.

[Barry Davies]

Hey Linda.
You'r kidding me - collecting data on the number of bipods in use? What for?
Is this a " back door " way of increasing numbers in F/TR
Maybe we could have two disciplines in FO ( Alan F take note ) those who use bipods and those who use a rest.
We could call it" FO bipod" and" FO rest." - now we have 5 divisions.
Bloody hell!!

Barry

[AlanF]

Barry,

I think Linda is referring to the fact that F/TR was run under F-Open because the SSRs don't cater for F/TR. In fact technically that is how Rosedale will do it. However I'm currently updating our scoreboard software, and F/TR will appear as a completely separate class from either F-Open or F-Std. And accordingly the results and trophies for F/TR will stand on their own. I expect SARA will have the same approach at their Queens.

Like SARA, we're running F/TR as a trial. Let's just wait until after several of these events and see if the shooters like it. If it becomes apparent that it is filling a need not supplied by the current F-Classes, then I hope it grows to become available everywhere.

Alan

[Barry Davies]

Alan,
You know as well as I do what Linda is doing -or trying to.
I don't have a problem with F/TR, I DO have a problem with F/TR Standard.
Lets keep it simple-- FO, FS and F/TR and no BS about keeping records as to who is using a bipod in FS and who is not.
Barry

[Southcape]

OK, wrong choice of words maybe. Better now?

I wrote it only because we had shooters showing up at our PM asking what is F/TR. When the word bipod was used, the reply was they had a bipod, so they must be shooting F/TR.

No it's not that simple.