Electronic target cams

[harold]

Bec Because you spent the most on equipment does not buy 1st place, as I have said before and I will say again, if you put every gun on the line in a vise and shot a group you probably find that there is only 1 inch difference at 500 meters, human error and the wrong placment of shots cause the problem with low score and groups, and also just a bad day, (we all have had those). There is a young bloke up in Brisbane shoots 1000yds with a out of the box Savage, little bit of work on the gun, standard barrel and stock and he puts 5-10 inch groups in and having a lot of fun, so Bec don't let the fancy guns and stand bother you to much, if you are going to buy something do your homework first and speak to people that know, not the people that thinks they know, go out and have some fun.


Regards Harold

[Curtley78]

G'day JR,

That is certainly some impressive shooting, no doubt you have spent many tiresome years developing the skill. What I am saying is that there is no way you would know where your fall of shots would print and that one would be placing faith with the fairies given that you can't see beyond the mirage.

I seriously think that the whole argument is just as Keith described and based on nothing more then 'technophobia'.

There are certainly some politics amongst the BR fraternity (I thought the Small Bore Association was bad). BR is somewhat like the bickering that one would expect to encounter in the Country Womens Association.

Why is BR so political? I am thinking of getting myself a Davy Crockett raccoon skin hat, smoke pole and leather chaps, if that doesn't work, I may just crawl back into the Ocean....

Regards

Sean

[malcolm]

I opened this topic -------------- can I close the fucking thing------- lets talk about Christmas trees or apples and oranges---
Malcolm

[Glenn]

Malcolm

What is the name of that box? "Pandora's"

So what is your next topic?

Glenn

[albow]

Actually Malcom the person with the orange would have an unfair advantage over my apple because the dimpled skin would enable them to get the reverse swing happening............

[bowhunter]

So many varied opinions and so much passion, I seem to recall that the original fly shoot was designed for hunting class rifles, now there is light gun , heavy gun - no limitation on weight in heavy gun, any calibre, any stock configuration, no limit on the number or variation of wind flags, no limitation on the expense or power of riflescope or spotting scope, the fact that a competitor may have another person spot his/her fall of shot -but above all observe rule 10. I wonder if in 10 years time, will people still be arguing against the use target cams or the merit of leupold brand cams versus zeiss brand cams, wired versus wireless. Can this entire thread be preserved and replayed in 10 years time, I wonder what the future comments will be.

[stinkitup]

Actually Malcom the person with the orange would have an unfair advantage over my apple because the dimpled skin would enable them to get the reverse swing happening............

Gold!

[john mc]

Hi Bowhunter what a great idea -- save this topic for later viewing -- I wonder in 5 or 10 years how many members of AV will even remember what they have written on this subject --- how times change back in the good old days i purchased a .222 heavy barreled sako with a 10 power target scope and it was deemed to be an unfair advantage -- untill 3 other shooters turned up at a shoot with the same rifle and much larger scopes -- NOTHING HAS CHANGED IN THE COMPETITION CAMP -- there will always be the have and the have nots who whine and bitch about unfair advantages -- I built my target cam so i dont have to disrupt any other person at the range while i'm testing loads and sighting in my long range rifles and i have used it on a game trail to see what went to a dam after dark -- it works great -- john mc

[Rinso]

I'm a complete outsider to this, but have an interest in trying out 500m fly one day.

That was until I saw a picture of the firing line from the event down at Batemans Bay, and noticed:

* _lots_ of custom benchrest rifles;
* massive scopes; and
* exotic benchrests.

Do I need all that in order to _compete_ let alone have a remote chance of winning? Sure there are some freaks in this sport, like every sport, who have that natural ability to shoot the eye off a needle at 1000yds w/ iron sights, but I'm not one of them, so I would have to rely on my equipment as much as my limited skills in order to not come last (<-- always my goal).

Now you wanna add cameras and electronic flags!

Where does the barrier to competing (aka the money pit) stop? Why get into a technology race? If I need those in order to simply compete, scratch that idea, I'll do another rifle sport which doesn't require such electronic wizardry. The tenet of Fly Shooting dies at that point, doesn't it? Fly isn't going to attract shooters, simply due to high barriers of entry.

I agree that electronic _targets_ are the way of the future. Get them, and you won't need target cameras - the video output shows the fall of shot on the screen for you.

I thought Fly was about fun? Keep it simple.

- bec

I opted out of this discussion because I became side tracked and was unable to maintain the direction I was actually after.
You have summed a few things up very well in particular the cost factor ... The argument for target cams is to reduce the cost of having expensive spotting scopes, it does not however alter a few simple facts ie not that many shooters have high quality spotting scopes for example.
The fact that whilst a $90 target cam is available does not mean that you cant get a $1000 set up that is much better and so the race continues .. the fact is that we will always have those who can spend any amount of money to gain a so called advantage .. funny I dont see to many people winning with flash equipment alone ... there seems to be some skill sets required as well.
The shooter with the $1500 rifle and reasonable scope who knows how to make and tailor ammunition, read wind, has very good bench technique and the bottle to back their ability will still come out on top of the bloke with flash gear and little skill.
I am afraid I have seen too many people win matches with less than the latest perfect gear, who couldnt see bullet holes all day but had talent and ability to believe that any equipement advantage is that major beyond the obvious equipment needs.
The Fly shoot was intended for competitive fun at the extemes of performance to test your ability and allow for something that pure BR didnt allow big guns and miminal rules ... It was not meant to be an equipment race and adding another pile of gear ie target cams is just adding to the equipment race. Has anyone considered what will happen when 66 shooters at Canberra in March all want to use their cams and screens and the rest of it ... might have to shoot off the ground as the bench will be full ....
The Fly shoot is fine as it stands and thats with miminal rules .. F Class at the NRAA has a lot of rules for those that want them and is available Australia wide.

[Tony Z]

Dave you put that very well, as you usually do. It has sort of become an equipment race for some.
The only thing that may need to be added is that for some very obscure reason the Fly has hit a wall in Queensland. Because of that and the fact that we live in another period of time where now there is a requirement to be seen to cross the t's and dot the i's, the Fly will have a more extensive set of rules sometime soon. Rule ten will be obliterated from the target face and we will have to be seen to do the right thing in order to stave off possible litigation or draw the ire of WLB. Having seen what a giant fuck it can be to have anything to do with any sort of rules, i am extremely glad that i will not be in any position to, or be in any way inclined to have any sort of input. I know it will not be what it once was and depending on how much or how little input the masses may have into this new set of rules, there will always be those that will not be happy. The only thing we can hope for is that those that do eventually have the task of drafting the new set of rules do take a moment to recall the past, as like it has been said before, those that do not heed history are doomed to repeat it. And yes i am referring directly to the 1K farce.
Those that have a financial gain or any conflicts of interest with regards to BR, long, short or otherwise, should be disqualified from holding any position directing the destiny of what the Fly may become. We expect no less from our politicians to exclude themselves from such activities, so why should we expect any less of those individuals within our sport? The other point from my perspective is that a representative committee of some persons that have no idea about the sport in question or persons that can be manipulated by the same transgressors with vested interests, is in no way a plus for a legitimate outcome.
If and when a time may come to have your say about the Fly, you should be wary of the Greeks bearing gifts and even more wary of the "Aussies" with the pork chop tied around their neck wishing for some dog to come and play with them. Beware of the diatribe like the "listen here, i have shot all over the world so yada yada yada, horseshit horseshit horseshit etc". Many of us have either read or heard this hype, and those of us that have witnessed it personally can recall how confrontational it can be. So to those that have yet to hear it or yet to see it should remember this: i have been all over the world and crapped in many toilets, but that don't make me no fucken plumber

Jethro Bodine, Loose Cannon.

[AlanF]

As with Snipewrench, I've never shot fly. It does strike me that super high definition scopes, big bullet holes, and especially target cameras would improve the shooter's ability to see where the shots are falling on the target. And in tricky conditions that must be an advantage. Can I suggest that if you have a target where you can't see the bullet holes with any scope, then it would make the whole thing fairer for those who can't afford top scopes and who don't shoot big calibres. This could be done by having a random dotted pattern on and around the fly, such that the appearance of new holes would be virtually impossible to notice. This may cause the fly to become less distinct as an aiming mark, so the "dot zone" could be enclosed in a square to be used as the aiming mark, with the fly at dead centre. Is that called "thinking inside the square"?

[Ackley Improved]

The Fly is just right the way it is.

I do not have an issue when not seeing holes. I understand that this happens. When the first target cam is on the line, the next shoot I will have one however. I see it is a advantage when shooting for score, because when I am running a fast string, if I see the hole go "awol", I will stop the shooting. I see this very beneficial, and it could be the difference between having one shot off target to 3 off. If shooting for just group, the target camera would not mean much, because the damage would be done!

I believe that expensive and fancy gear does not make you a good shooter also.

If the Fly becomes full of to much politics, I will chuck it in! I just cant be bothered with crap!

Cheers

[a.JR]

Guys the FLY is obviously going great ,just like it is ,as evidenced by the no's that turn up .. We in fact need no help from the score only shooting groups that seem only intent on making their efforts look not so dumb ,after ya get to sit down and look at the targets ,that is ..If you don't like the way it's shot or need to change the gun rules to suit the way your gear is configured then go make a fuckin new event of your OWN ,,Jesus H christ ,if the boot was on the other foot we would never hear the end of it.. If your stuck with a best result in FLY of 120 and the others are shootin 240 don't try to change the rules because you just plain SUCK at it .change your ways ,not the event..Benchrest is and always will be Benchrest ,the prone matchs are what they are and for my money thats the way it should stay ..JR..Jeff Rogers


[quote="AlanF"]As with Snipewrench, I've never shot fly.

[Tony Z]

A lot of the thought process being presented here is very misguided and does show how much or how good some people think their style of shooting or equipment is and that the only difference between the top end and themselves is an ability to see where shots are going. If we take the logic of big calibers being used simply for a visual advantage and those that do not see holes at any point due to their choice of smaller calibers, then one would deduce that only the bigger calibers should win and the 338 which has never won the Fly outright should be the caliber of choice. That is just plain statistiically wrong. The 338 loses because it is inferior accuracy wise, the 30 cal wins because it bucks the wind and produces brilliant accuracy and the 7 and 6 mils are extremely accurate but fail to cut through the wind as well. Now remember here that i have used every caliber and have won with them all so i do know what advantages each has or has not.
Where in the world do we come to a conclusion that if the cellar dwellers could see bullet holes all the time that the gap between the winners and also rans will close? I say if there is an advantage as some seem to be telling this forum, the already existing winners will produce higher scores and the losers will still lose by the same percentage. The gap will remain a constant and nothing will be gained.
Has anybody for one moment even bothered to consider that PVM with his little ol' Dasher has cleaned the clocks of a lot of 30 cals and is statisically the man to beat in Canberra? Ask him how many bullet holes he sees during a match and by how much more he beats you by when he gains that perceived advantage through seeing holes. My money is on a superbly accurate rifle that is predictable at all times and a great sense of what mirage or wind flag combinations to shoot on. IMO a target cam won't help him in any way as it will be a distraction. I still maintain now and always will maintain that the only difference between the cellar dwellar and the top end is their rifles accuracy. Get that and the rest falls into place.

Jethro Bodine, Loose Cannon.

[Rinso]

As with Snipewrench, I've never shot fly. It does strike me that super high definition scopes, big bullet holes, and especially target cameras would improve the shooter's ability to see where the shots are falling on the target. And in tricky conditions that must be an advantage. Can I suggest that if you have a target where you can't see the bullet holes with any scope, then it would make the whole thing fairer for those who can't afford top scopes and who don't shoot big calibres. This could be done by having a random dotted pattern on and around the fly, such that the appearance of new holes would be virtually impossible to notice. This may cause the fly to become less distinct as an aiming mark, so the "dot zone" could be enclosed in a square to be used as the aiming mark, with the fly at dead centre. Is that called "thinking inside the square"?

Alan,
An interesting point of view, but I would contend that the Fly shoot is a score shoot (albiet with a bonus for group) and what you suggest has some merit. In fact it has so much merit that a whole competion is shot around it, that would be F Standard wouldn't it. Everyone has to use similar gear and ammo, seeing bullet holes is irrelevant as the target is marked ... Maybe there are a few new F Class shooters here for you mate .. get them to an NRAA club and increase the membership.