OzFclass

Interesting to see that there will be more fifteen shot ranges at Canberra this year. Three in the lead up and four in the Queens.
Congratulations to the organisers I reckon. They have provided for plenty of shooting with less moving around setting up for ranges.
Steve.

They have got rid of 300m & 700m, the entire program consists of 500,600 & 800m in 10 or 15 shot matches.

All disciplines to be shot on Kongsberg targets.

I like that it will sort the wheat from the chaff, hopefully I can get away for the whole 5 days. Don't miss the 300 range, it wasn't there last year either though the 700 was. As for using electronic targets I don't mind using them especially after the markers we had at Sydney last week.

BenW wrote:I like that it will sort the wheat from the chaff, hopefully I can get away for the whole 5 days. Don't miss the 300 range, it wasn't there last year either though the 700 was. As for using electronic targets I don't mind using them especially after the markers we had at Sydney last week.

I was not at Sydney,but knew three shooters that were there,one with over 50years shooting experience,another with over 10 years in F Class and one new shooter with about two years experience,none of them had a problem with the markers,to quote an old State Level R O,if you are not happy,there is my ute,go down and have a go yourself.
Just because the marking may be not up to your standard doesn't mean it is the markers fault.
Mike.

I wasn't at NSW either, but I think we need to be prepared to expect a general deterioration in the quality of manual marking as more ranges move to ETs and less manual marking is done. The typical marker over the next few years may be a raw recruit schooled by a teacher who doesn't insist on the high standards we've enjoyed previously. This situation may worsen until ETs become universal.

AlanF wrote:I wasn't at NSW either, but I think we need to be prepared to expect a general deterioration in the quality of manual marking as more ranges move to ETs and less manual marking is done. The typical marker over the next few years may be a raw recruit schooled by a teacher who doesn't insist on the high standards we've enjoyed previously. This situation may worsen until ETs become universal.

I agree with all of this,another thing to consider,is that the target frames have not been used for a long time,when they were being used every week,the chances were that they may have been a lot better maintained.As in any job,experience helps,to expect a raw beginner at marking to be as good as an experienced marker,with some years practice,is wishfull thinking.Probably we all have a level we expect,sometimes it doesn't happen,then it is up to ourselves to adapt.

the markers at anzac that we use mostly are ok but some can't be unglued from their iphones and miss shots all the dam time.but then again they are kids, give me an electronic target everytime

I applaud ACTRA for coming up with a programme of more 15 shot matches at mostly 600 and 800 meters. I would have liked to have seen 900m used in some way, whether it is for a champion of champions match or a seeded Bisley style match for the last range of the lead up and Queens, maybe one day????
I sort of shot the lead up at Sydney and, yes some markers were ridiculously slow, causing some shooters to go close to timing out, but I would still rather manuals over Kongsberg erratic targets, sorry, electronic targets for a Queens shoot. The sometimes slow pit service separates the wind readers from the machine gunners. (not knocking machine gunning, I sometimes do it as well when on ETs), but at least with manuals, if you get a wild shot, it is not because a dodgy erratic sensor say your shot went there. At least I have been assured the ACT ETs are very well maintained, so I am optimistic for now.

Hey Rod what about Geoff's problem ???

the markers at anzac that we use mostly are ok but some can't be unglued from their iphones and miss shots all the dam time.but then again they are kids, give me an electronic target everytime

Interesting observation, is that you seem to accept that behavior in a work situation? I'm assuming that the markers were in deed employed to do a job.

I would have thought a condition of that work, is that they only get to access their "electronic devices" once the competition was complete. I know you could read this in the SSR's if you had a quick look

BenW wrote:Hey Rod what about Geoff's problem ???

Yes, it's not the first time I have seen the old " I can't find holes for the sighters so I will give him random shots, then mark him zeros for his scoring shots".

RDavies wrote:

BenW wrote:Hey Rod what about Geoff's problem ???

Yes, it's not the first time I have seen the old " I can't find holes for the sighters so I will give him random shots, then mark him zeros for his scoring shots".

Hard to deal with considering the time and expense invested.

Steve

Simple solution is to have competitor marking, how does everyone feel about that ??
Matt P

i think the bottom line is that there is no perfect solution, only the best solution & I believe that will ultimately be electronic targets. So lets accept that & work together to work out the best ways to achieve the best results from them. To me it seems that there are 2 main points to consider with electronics 1) Proper set up so zero is correct (most important). 2) Correct maintenance followed by more correct maintenance.
Keith H.

I for one would be happy to remove electronic targets and go back to paper targets with competitor marking. I will even put my hand up to mark first.