Electronic target cams

[Mick]

First off, I don't care either way about cameras. You get to see how bad you screwed up sooner. That's hardly an advantage of any kind. You get to overthink things and overcompensate because you got caught by a gust or something. I'm happy to shoot against people using cameras even if I don't have one for that exact reason.

Innovation in this sport is all about pushing the limit of the rules. Unless something is specifically excluded, it is legal. If not for people reading between the lines, most of our equipment would never have come about.

Changing the rules only ever happens when people cry "unfair advantage" and have something excluded. Don't turn LRBR into F Class....

[Tony Z]

Mick, i think you have put that pretty well right on the money. You will see your screw up sooner. My use for the cam if it was allowed, would never be to watch fuckups appear on the the record target, but a very up close and personal view of the wind flag that i think may have the most influence on where a bullet may land. In Canberra, that would be at about the 300 m point, where you might want to see some of the subtle changes in wind strength and direction.

Let's examine this a little closer. The agruement is for cams to see shots when the mirage is crappy. My arguement to that is that when a shot is out in the 1 ring at whatever o"clock, did the wind put it there or did the mirage distort your sight picture and you aimed it there? How will a cam tell you how to aim through mirage when everything is swimming and a perfect aim off opposite to the one ring fuckup is next to impossible to achieve? The biggest problem with mirage is sighting, but the best thing about mirage is that it can tell you a lot about wind strength and direction and often to a finer level than what some wind flags can. It can be your friend and it has helped me to some very good scores over the 230 mark in Fly and some great scores and groups at 1K. A target camera will never help you in mirage, that i can guarantee. When there is no mirage and shots can be seen, the cam is the same as a scope and most still can't produce good scores or groups. My personal advice about all this sort of stuff is that you must prove the rifle first and by that i mean a bad group should be less than 3 inches and a great group should be 1.xxx" or better if possible and the agg through testing under controlled and good conditions should not be greater than 2.5". This has to be proven at 500m and not assumed from a couple of groups at 200 yards. When you have this, suddenly the wind reading makes sense as does the mirage and the wind flags or their feedback are the only real issue or obstacle to a good score.
Unlike short range BR where 90% of the guns can win, but only 10% of the shooters can, LR BR has about 10% or less great guns and about 90% of the shooters could win with them. The great combinations have great guns and are complete shooters and this is rarer than what you all may think. One good group does not make a great rifle, or shooter.
Before we all get too far into this great cam debate i will give you a little tip on how to shoot the real horrid mirage as you will only ever see in places like my home range. Wind off that power ring to about 20 or even a little less. Set the parallax to no where near what it should be like or clear at the target face. Set it for about two thirds of the way down range where the mirage you can see has an affect on your bullet path. Don't worry about the parallax as it is the least of your worries in this sort of crap. Shoot the sighters to a mental picture of that mirage and then shoot your record to that same mental picture. If this is no good, then go shoot point blank BR where you can see every hole you will ever need to.

Tony Z.

[Curtley78]

I think it’s pretty simple, it’s called technology and of course the factor associated with cost.

A range set with target cameras or electronic monitors would reduce the man power required to ‘score cards’ and would wipe out the need of having a target crew changing shot cards and the instances where people are required to pull frames. The use of cameras is nothing more then the early stages of evolution for most shooting disciplines.

Dave, please do tell…..My understanding was that most blokes were becoming ‘punch drunk and concussed’ and couldn’t endure 10 rounds, then of course their was the time factor required to run a 10 card match.

Dave, the next shoot in Canberra you will no doubt see that Ol Lyman of yours clamped to the Stolle but to be honest given the super fine cross hair, I am thinking that it will be best used in Rimfire and will take it along to see if it has focus and clarity at 50 meters.

As for your question as to why I purchased a Stolle, I never. I inherited it and for the record at the next shoot in Canberra I will run the old Mauser and Leanne will use the Stolle.

Now your dictating what people do…..The issue of target cameras was raised for discussion, speaking of Democracy, what better way of reaching a consensus on the issue then on a forum in the public domain as opposed to in secrecy?

Your claim that only 6 want cameras is somewhat misleading. It is more like 6 don’t want cameras and have an issue with them being used. With respect and out of interest, did you remove your left shoe when counting these people?

[/quote] I personally think that the use of target cameras should be allowed or limit the magnification of optics. [/quote]


I don’t think I could have been any more clearer then that but yes, I do think there is a problem in regard to the rules and that it need be clarified and amended.

Perhaps what is needed is an open day where the technology could be trialed and where the shooters could decide?

I enjoy shooting Fly, it’s generally a great weekend. The use of monitors, cameras whatever you would like to refer them to would provide people with the opportunity to improve their performance on the day. I think it is about moving forward, most people would refer to this as ‘progression’.

I think it is rather ‘self righteous’ to think that one could use a 50-60 X scope and in the same breathe claim it ‘illegal’ to use a camera-given that neither are stipulated in the rules, further to claim that one ‘should be able to shoot blind’ is laughable given that a walk down the line would reveal most shooters running Nightforce Optics and high magnification scopes.

I know that SASCOR will be in Sydney next year (the Company responsible for having manufactured the electronic monitors and equipment used at the Sydney International Shooting Center- where the Olympics were held).

I will make some inquiries in regard to costing and installation.


Regards

Sean

[Mick]

I could knock one up for maybe 300 bucks.

[Ackley Improved]

Well, build yourself a target camera....... DO IT!

Lets see if your scores improve from it?

How are you going to get around the Broadcasting License issue? If you do use one and get caught with it at a given range, will the range be punished at all for this?

What happens when two cameras on the line are using the same frequency, who turns theirs off?

Who is going to pay for the hard wiring for a system? These systems are expensive.

Again.. dont comment on a 60X scope until you have used one in a match.... They may not offer a advantage like you think.

[Curtley78]

Well, build yourself a target camera....... DO IT!

Lets see if your scores improve from it?

How are you going to get around the Broadcasting License issue? If you do use one and get caught with it at a given range, will the range be punished at all for this?

What happens when two cameras on the line are using the same frequency, who turns theirs off?

Who is going to pay for the hard wiring for a system? These systems are expensive.

Again.. don't comment on a 60X scope until you have used one in a match.... They may not offer a advantage like you think.

Trev,

Build one? You can purchase one for $90.

As for the broadcasting, there may be an issue there, however I have been informed that the wireless cameras available do not require a permit or license. There may also be an issue in regard to transmitting on the same frequencies, however, how will we ever know if we do not try? Shooters could nominate a set frequency or be allocated a frequency for the year.

I am certain that this can be overcome once we delve into the issue a little deeper.

As for hard wiring a range, I am bewildered that we do not already have more hard wired ranges in use, given such issues as ricochets and the ability to harvest and recycle spent metal.

Perhaps what is also needed is a letter to the State & Federal Governments in regard to funding?

Regards

Sean

[Ackley Improved]

I would like to see what these $90 units are like.

It would cost me around $500-$600 to make.

[Curtley78]

I would like to see what these $90 units are like.

It would cost me around $500-$600 to make.

Trev,

A bloke that frequents the gun shows sell them. Mal and I trialled one at his place and let me say that the image was crystal clear.

Of course one would need fabricate an armoured shroud to prevent it being fired upon by those having mental snaps and no doubt a cooling fan to prevent over-heating but believe me they are very impressive.

I initially thought that I could plug the wireless camera into the Sony PSP (I think I need the small USB-the kind used on the old Motorola phones to video cable) to enable the use of the Sony PSP.

Regards

Sean

[harold]

What is happening to Fly Shooting, what on earth happened at Bateman Bay on the weekend to start this hopeless debate on Cameras, do people know the difference between electronic targets and target cams, (Google them). Fly Shooting has only TEN rules (read the target) some people don't understand RULE 10, Fly shooting will only cost what you would like to spend, spend wisely on good equipment and not on @%$#@#@ cameras, learn how to shoot and use a good spotter, (4 eyes are better then 2). A 15 yr old won the Procal in September with a home made rifle using a Remington action with a boring old 30-06 caliber and he enjoyed himself as many other good friends did, some of us do enjoy Fly Shooting and keep on coming back for the Challenge, Fly shooting gives us a lot of challenges as Fly Shooter know. If you don't like the way Fly Shooting is done just @#&^%$#$# off back to where you came from so we can enjoy the sport, it is getting stronger 66 shooter at the Federal Cup and Procal this year. Leave Fly Shooting the way it was.

[chris.tyne]

Substitute the work Fly for just the first letter which is "F" and then shoot for class and what have ya got,sounds like a familiar argument hey.
To those who deem it no advantage would you be happy to compete against someone who was using one in registered comp...................just asking.



Regards Chris.

[malcolm]

Girls --- put your pants back on, calm down and have a chill pill. Firstly-- I've never said I want to change rules--- I've never said anything about an unfair advantage, all I said in my initial post was "any discussion is healthy discussion". Some of these posts are bordering on verbal abuse. Everyone is entilted to their own view-- even if it is pro cams. That said, all the posts I've had via PM's, I'll find out info for you guys and send a few photos.
Thank Christ I never called anyone a f@#%ing c#%t--------- could you imagine the serving I would of copped over that.
Cheers Malcolm

[Rinso]

Lost Interest

[Tony Z]

Sean, maybe i have been around just a little too long and it is a great thing that i don't shoot comp any more. But if you can, explain to this broken down old shooter how a target cam can improve some ones performance? This argument was done to death for the great 1K debate were it was anticipated that marking of each shot during the record period would enhance performance. After some years now, the statistics greatly favor the old blind method. That is not to say that there has not been some very good results with the marked method because there has. But the score side of the marked method, or the seen shots on record target, have not made any inroads into what the blind shooters have continuously done since the inception. Since the Fly is a predominant score shoot, but where the group does count, i see a lot of parallels here.
The marked method in 1K has sort of become the Alpha Romeo syndrome of the shooting sports and it warms my heart to see one of the loudest supporters of this style owning the largest 10 shot HG group at 1K of something just over 38 inches. That is quite an achievement of getting all ten on considering the target measures 42 inches neat!! The only way i could have seen myself bettering this was to shoot blind, and i mean seeing eye dog blind I personally don't think that target cams used in the record period of the Fly will be any different as the focus is more about bullet impact seen on screen and less about what conditional change has happened.
The best way you can find out for sure and prove some of us (me) wrong, is to not go and build a cam and use it, just go to a 500m range that has a butts set up, place the Fly target on a frame and get a very quick mate, or three, to turn and spot the target for you. But to be fair, do it on a crappy mirage hampered day. Then come back and tell us your results. It will be the same thing as an instant cam image if the target pops up as quick as you can reload. This has already been done up our way and as a score transposed onto an FClass target, it was competitive to a point, but as a Fly score it was rather ordinary. If you do get the cam going, go to a match, exclude yourself from the results and run it as an R&D shoot, then tell us all about it. Prove me wrong on this and hey, the best decision i ever made was to dump this LR BR thing and go over to the dark side with FITA target archery, beach volleyball and golf, as it will be obvious i was behind the eight ball.

On another note, if the ability for shots to be seen at all times appeals to those FClass shooters and this adds bums on seats, then bring on the cams!!!

Tony Z.

[albow]

Thank Christ I never called anyone a f@#%ing c#%t

or suggested to allow muzzle brakes

[Mick]

Substitute the work Fly for just the first letter which is "F" and then shoot for class and what have ya got,sounds like a familiar argument hey.
To those who deem it no advantage would you be happy to compete against someone who was using one in registered comp...................just asking.



Regards Chris.

I would.
But as previously stated several times, I want to run the "No sandy vagina class" where you bring whatever the fuck you want and shoot against other people who brought whatever the fuck they want. At the end of the day, as I'm sure you know, the best shooter will prevail rather than the most expensive, technologically advanced equipment. And as I said earlier, I don't believe a target cam gives you any advantage whatsoever. I'd like to see anybodys reasoning as to why they are an advantage.

At the end of the day, all equipment "advantages" are bullshit. I've seen plenty of no name "match grade" barrelled rem700s on a no name stock with a tasco scope, shooting cheap bullets from Winchester brass spank the shit out of bat actioned, 3 groove hand lapped Lilja barrelled, march scoped, RWS brassed, and flavour of the month custom projectiled rifles. Tell me it doesn't happen every fucking weekend....

As for changing the rules, I don't think anybody wants that for Fly. There are 10 rules printed on the target, and that's how it should stay. If it is not excluded, it is legal, end of story. If there's one thing I hate it's the "Spirit of the rules" argument. That shit belongs in F standard apparently and doesn't need to infect other disciplines and hinder progress and innovation.