QRA Queen’s

Results, photos of recent events, plan future events, let people know where you'll be competing.

Moderator: Mod

Message
Author
AlanF
Posts: 7494
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 8:22 pm
Location: Maffra, Vic

Re: QRA Queen’s

#61 Postby AlanF » Wed Aug 19, 2020 8:42 pm

Peter,

The Belmont 1000yard mound has a reputation for inflicting vertical errors in certain conditions at particular locations on the mound. So maybe scores, which reflect both horizontal and vertical accuracy, are a better parameter than windage only to base the analysis on?

Tim L
Posts: 873
Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 7:11 pm
Location: Townsville

Re: QRA Queen’s

#62 Postby Tim L » Wed Aug 19, 2020 9:39 pm

I can't say much for the overall analysys but can offer my targes from 25 on the day 2 1000 and 24 on the final.
I can say that those positions didn't give much if any elevation.
I shot a pretty consistant 3/4 moa elevation through out the comp (with the odd notable exception) and the 1000s were no different.
Shot 5 on day 2? I don't know the cause but I do know i made a full correction on it to pop a skinny 5 out the bottom from where I came up 3/8 and didn't touch elevation again.
In the final I came up 4/8 from the 2nd sighter and made no changes from there.
The day 2 was a deliberate shoot (trying to read the wind) The final, well having bracketed the 6 ring I thought i had it but shot one put me straight real quick. I don't mind admitting I chased the spotter with the odd pause for what I thought was and obvious change.

I've attached the queens squadding if that helps you guys confirm lanes

Screenshot_20200818-122919_Samsung Internet.jpg
Screenshot_20200818-123036_Samsung Internet.jpg


queens squad.pdf
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

lonerider43
Posts: 427
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2016 6:55 pm

Re: QRA Queen’s

#63 Postby lonerider43 » Wed Aug 19, 2020 9:46 pm

well done to Nick Williams from the Gemfields.[f-std]
even a 4th is a mighty achievement from what i hear.
3rd and 5th in the rankings is a pretty good show for our little club.
Australian's Against "Gun-A-Phobia"

pjifl
Posts: 883
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:15 pm
Location: Innisfail, Far North QLD.

Re: QRA Queen’s

#64 Postby pjifl » Wed Aug 19, 2020 10:21 pm

I am very familiar with a range that often destroys elevation consistency. My home range, Herberton, is renowned for this at times. Gulleys and hills and treelines abound.

Yes - I suspect that elevation analysis is almost as valid when trying to pin down windreading problems at the 1000yd top 50.

The two standouts for FO elevation here were Dave Boreham (target 13) and Peter Carter (target 14). Unfortunately Peter Carter had some very wide shots but with good elevation. The FO targets for this shoot were T10 - T18 (according to Hexta)

I left Brisbane way back in 1965 not long after the Enoggera range was closed but did shoot on the Belmost range a few times back then. It is totally unrecognizable now and not surprising that the 1000y mound has some disturbed air but I have almost no experience of it.

Why are Dave's and Peter's elevations better ? And why are the top TR shooter's elevations not much worse. Wind is distinctly different between FO and TR as one would expect but elevation - not much.

I might expand my data to include ALL of FO, FS-A and FTR. Could be some interesting comparisons.

Peter Smith.

Gyro
Posts: 764
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 2:44 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: QRA Queen’s

#65 Postby Gyro » Thu Aug 20, 2020 5:16 am

...." Wind is distinctly different between FO and TR as one would expect but elevation - not much "....... writes Peter.

That interests me, maybe others too ? Is it because shooting a rifle "off the shoulders" provides a lot more consistent start to the bullets journey re the barrels compensation dynamics, compared to a gun shot off fixed rests ? I know I have for a long time suspected that, just because it fits with how often the TR shooters are seen to hold such good vertical in thier groups.

GSells
Posts: 798
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 11:04 pm
Location: Qld

Re: QRA Queen’s

#66 Postby GSells » Thu Aug 20, 2020 6:52 am

You have to watch out for the angles at Belmont now . I remember when I first shot there some 9 years ago it was a very benign range . Has change now and is very challenging!
But angular change will hurt you . Also didn’t anyone notice the tree line screaming “ Don’t Shoot ?”.
That was the first time I turned up my earphones to flat out to hear when a condition was coming through . [-X

Tim L
Posts: 873
Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 7:11 pm
Location: Townsville

Re: QRA Queen’s

#67 Postby Tim L » Thu Aug 20, 2020 9:20 am

Gyro wrote:...." Wind is distinctly different between FO and TR as one would expect but elevation - not much "....... writes Peter.

That interests me, maybe others too ? Is it because shooting a rifle "off the shoulders" provides a lot more consistent start to the bullets journey re the barrels compensation dynamics, compared to a gun shot off fixed rests ? I know I have for a long time suspected that, just because it fits with how often the TR shooters are seen to hold such good vertical in thier groups.

I'm with you on the amazing results but my theory is we scopies tend to follow mirage shift more closely while peeps prevent it.
I found I was constantly moving my point of aim in moderate to heavy mirage to stay in the middle. The target clearly isn't moving so where I was actually aiming on release is anyones guess.
I moved to bracketing with the graticule marks and immediately found better elevation. I just let the aiming mark bounce on the bottom reticule mark and centre left and right. It means I have to wind for every shot but it seems to be working.
It doesn't eliminate big shifts but does seem to cut out the minor bouncing we get up here.

pjifl
Posts: 883
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 12:15 pm
Location: Innisfail, Far North QLD.

Re: QRA Queen’s

#68 Postby pjifl » Thu Aug 20, 2020 10:00 am

FWIW, anyone with time on their hands may download what I have captured from the Hexta Site and transferred into my file format plus my program MultiGroupZ which will accept bulk loads and do various quick comparisons and analyses.

https://sites.google.com/site/pjstempqu ... e/2020-qld

It seems to me that, to do some of the analyses people want, we really need ALL the Hexta results to be accessible from a powerful DataBase program. That is for every shot position !

Personally, I doubt that one can draw any serious conclusions from the data I have captured but it can be interesting looking at shot positions.

You will have to figure out how to use MultiGroupZ.

Peter Smith.

DenisA
Posts: 1526
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2011 7:00 pm
Location: Sunshine Coast, QLD

Re: QRA Queen’s

#69 Postby DenisA » Thu Aug 20, 2020 10:15 am

I have done some stats myself.

I have attached my excel spread sheet.

I only wanted to include scoped classes as I believe there's a high possibility of optical error in turbulence being part of the equation.

I wanted to understand the % of points dropped at the final 1000 yards for each shooter, their lane position and then each row of lanes compared to the average % of points dropped across all ranges and all positions of the Aggregate of the Duncan and Queens excluding the final 1000y. I believe this is a fair comparison as it takes into account the shooters actual performance all round over a large sample size.

The theory is that the heavy R/H wind at the final 1000y was rolling off the treeline and burm and causing massive turbulence for the shooters in the side row. The theory also suggests that the shooter closest to the treeline may be inside the dropping turbulence and protected. Therefore the statistics in my spread sheet have excluded the firing point closest to the treeline on the R/H side.

My suggestion was that keeping a top % shoot off to the centre row would represent better the deliberate intent of the squadded shooters and eliminate the uncontrollable characteristics of the range. Therefore getting rid of the FINAL LOTTERY.

The data I have suggests clearly that at 1000y both side rows have a higher % of points dropped points than the centre row when compared to the average performance of all scoped shooters involved in the final 1000, throughout the Duncan and Queens series
It shows that in the heavy right wind we had at that 1000y shoot, the shooters in the R/H row had a much higher % of dropped shots than the centre row and L/H side.

I think it all looks fair but I am no mathematician or scientist. What do you guys think.

I believe this supports the idea that a final top % shoot off should be confined to squadding in the centre row.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Tim L
Posts: 873
Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 7:11 pm
Location: Townsville

Re: QRA Queen’s

#70 Postby Tim L » Thu Aug 20, 2020 10:39 am

The link has 2 downloads but I'm told it no longer exists.

I think the trees on the left will buffer and release the oncomming wind/pressure. Given it is rarely arriving in a steady speed or direction that effect is likely to be very erratic and occur many meters before the tree line.
That's what I figures was happening on the final day at Pinjar, although with slightly less effect because the arriving wind would be a lot more smooth than that at Belmont

DenisA
Posts: 1526
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2011 7:00 pm
Location: Sunshine Coast, QLD

Re: QRA Queen’s

#71 Postby DenisA » Thu Aug 20, 2020 10:53 am

Try again Tim. I had troubles with it and had to repost it. Maybe refresh your browser. It’s not a link it just a file to download.

Tim L
Posts: 873
Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 7:11 pm
Location: Townsville

Re: QRA Queen’s

#72 Postby Tim L » Thu Aug 20, 2020 11:06 am

https://youtu.be/-GIToNj-m4M

This is a useful video that shows some of what happens.

Tim L
Posts: 873
Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 7:11 pm
Location: Townsville

Re: QRA Queen’s

#73 Postby Tim L » Thu Aug 20, 2020 11:25 am

Here are your results graphed laid out as per position on the range.
20200820_112318.jpg


It suports Greg Warrians theory. You get cut up on the right because of turbulence from the trees, and on the left because the air is shot full of holes :lol:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

DenisA
Posts: 1526
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2011 7:00 pm
Location: Sunshine Coast, QLD

Re: QRA Queen’s

#74 Postby DenisA » Thu Aug 20, 2020 11:36 am

The input data is lacking some information that doesnt make it super accurate to lanes as it doesn't allow for crossfiring lanes near flag poles. I have included that for FSTD because I was there and could see where the shooters were but I'm unsure about the rest That said the data is accurate for rows of lanes.

DenisA
Posts: 1526
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2011 7:00 pm
Location: Sunshine Coast, QLD

Re: QRA Queen’s

#75 Postby DenisA » Thu Aug 20, 2020 11:49 am

I think this is a good way of looking at the question as it compares the average performance of shooters over the duration of an event to an specific outlier range / condition / situation.


Return to “Events”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests