Lifting Restrictions on Brakes in F-Class

[bruce moulds]

fclass is often seen as a fail because it is not "dynamic".
however, here is another selling point.
there are those who just want to shoot and not be dynamic when doing it.
and those who cannot be dynamic.
it has no agenda, other than the discipline it is, another selling point.
bruce.

[bruce moulds]

if as some suspect there is a push to change fclass and tr, those who are trying to do so could be forgiven for thinking there is a problem with nraa disciplines if they visit my home range.
the range is so unmaintained and obviously uncared for and unrespected that a casual observer would think that it is dead but just doesn't know it yet.
the gravel caravan park and many other places are covered in weeds.
rabbits have destroyed the camping area and 1/2 destroyed the lawn, and live under the club houses.
the firing mounds are rapidly being destroyed by weeds.
and in general no one cares including management, but this is because management is not pushed by members.
one person cannot deal with the problem, particularly unsupported.
to bring potential new members, the media, or anyone else there, would better not done due to the bad image.
bruce.

[Lee]

fclass is an internationl 2 disciplines.

PandaShooter
"Australian F Class shooters are in a very fortunate position in having a uniquely Australian F Class discipline to choose, which is F Standard. Fortunate because we have a discipline which we can tailor to our wishes unencumbered by International negotiation. This is why I am writing to you to encourage you to think about and discuss possibilities for the future of F Standard."Quoted by PandaShooter » Sat Dec 09, 2017 7:23 am


Agreed Bruce, However, can we not as members of International F-Class set a precedent at a local level, for other nations to maybe follow if they look at the Australian way of doing things and like what they see and by doing so become pioneers of the sport, leading the way for changes and growth on a much larger scale? Why is it some feel we cannot lead the way for changes as an equally competitive nation in an international sport? Can we not be innovative and creative in our approach to the sport, to enhance it and engage more shooters. Rim fire F-Class is a fantastic idea and one of many. It can be the same format just for smaller calibers at shorter ranges. I was of the understanding that F-Class pertained to the format of the shooting rather than the rifles chosen to shoot with. If everyone were to conform then we would still be shooting as F-Std across the board would we not? By all means keep the current format, but does that also restrict the choice of rifles and attachments for said rifles, be it suppressors, brakes or complete new disciplines shot under the same format to allow for smaller calibers as varying changes have been put in place to incorporate rifles other than .308 to encompass F-Open and F/TR.
As a "share holder" I personally would want the board to explore all avenues to try and grow the business and increase the dividend paid out to the share holders rather than have a fixed dividend while shares of other similar businesses rise. Promotion is a factor for sure but one of many, along with public perception and making the sport more available to more shooters through changes to the tools we use to shoot under the F-Class format.

[Gyro]

if as some suspect there is a push to change fclass and tr, those who are trying to do so could be forgiven for thinking there is a problem with nraa disciplines if they visit my home range.
the range is so unmaintained and obviously uncared for and unrespected that a casual observer would think that it is dead but just doesn't know it yet.
the gravel caravan park and many other places are covered in weeds.
rabbits have destroyed the camping area and 1/2 destroyed the lawn, and live under the club houses.
the firing mounds are rapidly being destroyed by weeds.
and in general no one cares including management, but this is because management is not pushed by members.
one person cannot deal with the problem, particularly unsupported.
to bring potential new members, the media, or anyone else there, would better not done due to the bad image.
bruce.

Unfortunately Bruce there’s a whole lot of that over here in parts too mate.

[bruce moulds]

gyro,
the same peole who think we need brakes and new disciplines are quite happy to exist in a rubbish dump.
getting rid of the dump look is the first part of promoting and growing what we have now.
but you have to think enough to at least see the ugliness due to lack of care and management.
when your range looks like a druggy suburb, the image is not positive.
why do members fail to see these things, and the fact that our product is as good as any, and can be sold effectively against any other product.?
probably because you have to think.
add pressure from outside groups and the easy way out becomes the answer.
ask this question.
do you need a brake to shoot fclass?
bruce.

[williada]

I am encouraged if muzzle brakes can be designed to stop the noise factor. It is the one thing that destroys the harmony on a range amongst competitors and for neighbours who we are dependent upon for a range's future who own the firing rights on many a country range. A positive public view of our sport is integral to our funding and political survival. On our range we have just one day in the week in which we can shoot organize and accommodate a variety of disciplines which we try our best to achieve.

But at the organizational level, we have found previously active shooters are not getting sufficient shooting time while their time is taken up setting up and closing the range, organizing and conducting a safe competitive shoot in the current environment with an increasing number of disciplines and new shooters. Qualified range officers are thin on the ground. We simply can't please everybody and we are in danger of losing active shooters and organizers because their satisfaction factor has been diminished.

Popularity goes in cycles. The British have gone down this path and a few shooters were able to maintain the small number of ranges until the popularity rose once more. In international competition the English and the Scots were always formidable competitors even though they did not have many ranges to shoot on. Unfortunately we have caught the energy limit issue from them to satisfy a safe view for the general public. Yet in the bush greater freedom can be exercised, but not on a rifle range.

Some people may say they just want to shoot, but they fail to recognize some have to organize and take on official duties in order to be able to shoot. Someone's got to wash the dishes to facilitate a smooth running activity. The economic argument we now face at our club is a choice between capital widening and capital deepening i.e. do we service a few disciplines with quality time or more disciplines with less quality time. Noise mitigation at the firing point does not work with flimsy barriers although the dust hazard can be reduced. We have tried. There is also a logistical problem of setting up and taking down barriers for each competition and for ground maintenance such as mowing. There is too much clutter to set up and pack up on the mound on the day falling upon too few able people; and on a multiple range program its more difficult and takes away from limited shooting time. Throw in multiple portable benches we use for less able shooters and there is not much time left for additional tasks despite the goodwill intended, its not practical.

An important part of our long range shooting is for the competitor to be able to read the wind. For all shooters to do that effectively without unfair advantage they require an unimpeded view of the flags, not be blocked from viewing by an obstruction such as a dust mitigation wall. Consider that the first third of a range amounts to approximately 60% of the wind allowance on an open range. To be able to see the flag closest to the mound is a major factor in determining the wind allowance. When we tried barriers to mitigate noise and dust, as the majority of shooters were lying on their bellies some have had their views obstructed and complained about the advantage received by those with an unimpeded view. Was this luck of the draw when limited space is available?

Shooting through a tyre tunnel at the longest range may work to mitigate against sound dispersion. But the downside is a problem would exist for the competitor who requires a full view of the weather for best decision making not just the forward flag which after all is the basis of marksmanship and what our sport is about. An F class and TR shooter also considers the flags to windward of their position and the direction of wind either from the left or right on different days, not just the flags in front of them.

We have also considered putting a tyre wall along the boundary to assist our neighbours, to reduce noise to shoot the longer ranges but this too would create a wind pattern disturbance that we as competitive shooters on open ranges dislike. The range could fast resemble an indoor facility. But it is a concession we would make in order to use our 900 mound so that our neighbours are protected without having to make special arrangements when they are out.

The member vote determines what happens at our club. The club is a corporate entity in its own right and can make decisions for itself and is granted authority to use the range by the police and not by the associated organisations. In Gippsland, we cater for an increasing number of deer shooters just wanting to sight in rifles coming from wider areas, not so much those seeking to use muzzle brakes. Its horses for courses. The range demand may be different in other areas.

If the noise issue could be solved, then anything is possible.

[bruce moulds]

another good post williada.
you are asking questions that face reality, rather than presenting a pie in the sky solution to all problems that will be left dead in the water by the nraa as it has done with current disciplines.
bruce.

[PeteFox]

After having spoken to number of people in various shooting comps one of the main things that come up for reasons why people don't wish to shoot F-Class is the fact they cant use a brake. Given the advances In technology and designs on brakes and the fact that they are making brakes that are specifically for range style competitions,would it be worth easing restrictions to include brakes specifically designed to be "Competition Shooter Friendly" thus encouraging more people to move into the sport and essentially helping it to grow. Just a thought....

I thought I'd go back to the source of this discussion, because its worth exploring. If the aim is to increase participation then we have to look beyond the muzzle brake conundrum.


I personally believe that people who claim that they won't shoot F class because they can't use a muzzle brake, actually don't want to shoot F class. They want to shoot something other than F class that involves shooting at long range. It's just that the something else doesn't exist, at least in Australia and we are the holder of the bulk of long range venues. These shooters I believe aren't interested in F class, it's the range

A muzzle brake serves three purposes:
1. to reduce recoil
2. to come back on target quickly and easily.
3. It looks cool
None of these things are necessary to shoot F class successfully.
Recoil control isn't necessary (it's nice) because most F class shooters shoot free recoil
Coming back on target quickly is normally done to see the fall of shot. This is not necessary because we either have markers or ET's.
I personally think we have these nay sayers just because it spoils the look of the rifle with a brake screwed off. It's an ego thing. Easily fixed, just buy a sleeve.

I don't see the future in F class to be in anyway tied up with muzzle brakes. People who must have one have already mentally moved on.

The first time you put a brand new shooter behind say a .308, he/she is confronted with an uncontrollable, harsh and noisy beast that actually gives them a big fright. Watch their face closely. You don't find them looking for the next round, they look around quickly to see if that's the way it's supposed to be. A bit like looking at the flight crew for reassurance on a bumpy flight. It's a poor introduction if you expect them too come back.
If you want someone to do surf rescue for instance, you don't just make sure they can swim and then put them on patrol. No you bring them up through the nippers etc to train them about all things surf.
This can be said about most sports. Training is the key. Learn to dog paddle first.

Similarly in shooting, if we are going to get young people involved, shooting will need to be introduced in a way that doesn't confront them, it needs to challenge them, its needs to train them to shoot F-class. They have to develop a mindset that craves the next centre and motivates them to do it time after time.
The way I see to do this is F-class rimfire. On the open range, with wind flags, just a short version of the real thing, but with civilised rifles, no hand loading complications, just purely shooting for score but nonetheless very challenging.
It has to be organised with dedicated people who have the time, skills and energy to be mentors of young people. This Youtube video shows how simple and inexpensive the range setup could be, and it hardly looks any different from what we do on the range every week, it just happens to be in the Canary Islands. I'd guess at $500 max for flags and targets.

https://youtu.be/CGEJrkqXvzk

The future of F class is lies to our ability to attract young people and bring them up through the ranks. We've been doing it wrong since the Army stopped handing out free .303 ammo and a Mark 3 for a couple of bob.
Stop being fixated on attracting adult shooters, it's not the answer.

Pete

[Gyro]

Rimfire BR I hear is growing RAPIDLY overseas ?

[bruce moulds]

pete,
between you and williada we are hearing some realistic things.
logistics must be the major consideration.
just saying brakes are going to be the second coming has no substance.
the real issues must be addressed.
bruce.

[argh]

After having spoken to number of people in various shooting comps one of the main things that come up for reasons why people don't wish to shoot F-Class is the fact they cant use a brake. Given the advances In technology and designs on brakes and the fact that they are making brakes that are specifically for range style competitions,would it be worth easing restrictions to include brakes specifically designed to be "Competition Shooter Friendly" thus encouraging more people to move into the sport and essentially helping it to grow. Just a thought....

I thought I'd go back to the source of this discussion, because its worth exploring. If the aim is to increase participation then we have to look beyond the muzzle brake conundrum.


I personally believe that people who claim that they won't shoot F class because they can't use a muzzle brake, actually don't want to shoot F class. They want to shoot something other than F class that involves shooting at long range. It's just that the something else doesn't exist, at least in Australia and we are the holder of the bulk of long range venues. These shooters I believe aren't interested in F class, it's the range

.......


Pete

I normally dont get involved in these discussions, but i put my 2c in early so may as follow up.

I think the above sums it up. Its the range you are after.

Lee, you have started this discussion re breaks, but the passion you have about declining membership seems to be only slightly related to breaks, and more about organisational issues with your local range, and state association. Calling it an issue about breaks in fclass is a unfair. Trying to change established competitions aus wide to suit YOUR LOCAL grievance is not the way to go about it. BTW, in many places around aus, clubs and association's are doing well, and some are doing poorly. QRA seem to be the shining light with well thought out programs AND. A BIG AND. They have a range that doesnt just cater for full bore and fclass shooting at belmont. MANY other disciplines shoot on that range, and its well utilised. The clubs that seem to be declining may be more about local demographic changes and potentially less than ideal club management.

My home range is the same as belmont in many respects. Our club set up the range 70+ years ago for full bore shooting. Over the years others have wanted to shoot on this range.
BUT
They didnt come in and tell the full bore club to change their ways. They came in with proposals to use the range when it is not being used by the head club, and set up their own club. And they did.
Our range has the main target rifle club, along with two pistol clubs, a small bore club, and a sporting shooters style club that caters for 100m rifle, pistol, sporting clays, and they use our range out to 600m frequently. This is called co existance.

Lee, if you have all these people that want to shoot long range, but dont want to shoot to the rules of fclass. Setup your own club. Set up your own competition or take the form of others that already exist, and go to the range owners with a proposal to use the range at alternate times. Put in the hard work, find out how much work it is to run and maintain a long range, club house, etc. Comply with regulations, comply with public opinions and police feedback, comply with state licensing compliance.

For the record, and so you (lee) dont come back at me as 'anti change' I am on my clubs committee (vice captain). When Sporting hunter class was introduced i was right behind it. I put forward the list of members that turned up with tactcal rifles on their start at the club (myself included) to show its a feeder class. I argued for approval of muzzle beaks on my range in that discipline (F SH), and put up the concept of baffles like other ranges. At the vote for it i lost. The club is run by Democratic principals like our society, so i accept that decision by the club. And, our club is one of the biggest in NSW, with membership always climbing, and despite the fact that we steer many prospective members to the other clubs on our range if we believe thats the style of shooting that suits them (eg.. just want to sight in my hunting rifle)

If you dont like the way the local club shoots their established competition try setting up your own comp, not changing others, and blaming it on muzzle breaks.
My Opinion
Adrian

[AlanF]

Hello all. I have just deleted a very abusive (towards several other posters) post by Lee, the originator of this topic. I apologise for not removing it sooner. Lee has been banned from the website.

[Quick]

Thanks Alan. I read and thought about messaging you but I thought you would be asleep.

[AlanF]

Thanks Alan. I read and thought about messaging you but I thought you would be asleep.

Just half asleep

[Quick]

Haha. Fair enough.