Electronic Targets At Perry

First topic message reminder :

I shot them. Very poor sales pitch. target was not to scale for Bullseye
did not like you can not see your hits at the short line.
What do you all think of them  

I shoot Action Pistol and would have no issues with lights on the barricade. 

Tom

I had to give up trying to compete in IDPA because I can't hear the "beep". In our winter league here there is only one indoor range with turning targets so most of the matches were with normal commands and a whistle. I can't hear the whistle either. I always had to wait till someone fired before I started shooting. It turns out that there were a bunch of us old shooters in the same boat. I still have great hearing for voice commands as did most of the rest of us older shooters. The long and short of what I am trying to say is whatever happens in the future PLEASE, no horns,bells,whistles or beeps.

Len

I think you helped me make my point.  There are a few places and people who can simulate Perry.  It would be easy for all to simulate shooting on an electronic target by using an MP3 and the cost is nothing for most of us who all ready have a smart phone or some MP3 player.  It would be really easy at this point to even train for match pace.  Today it is not practical to train timed and rapid at the same pace you shoot in a match.  Shoot 2 strings then take a 10 min brake by walking and scoring then start over.

Toz,
I think OldMaster's point is nothing like yours.  He is saying his hearing is getting bad to the point that he isn't going to be practicing with MP3 commands either.

do 1 second drills with an MP3 player, then do 1 second drills on turning targets. THEN you will understand the difference in visual reaction time vs. seeing the bullseye, then hearing the horn, then reacting with the trigger finger.

Reacting to a horn when your eye is already on target leaves the shooter WAY more likely to shoot early.

Rob Kovach wrote:Toz,
..................Reacting to a horn when your eye is already on target leaves the shooter WAY more likely to shoot early.

So it is tougher - is that why everyone is complaining?

So it is tougher - is that why everyone is complaining? 




No, everyone is complaining for many different reasons.    Some of us, have watched what happened to international (USA shooting) when they went to electronic targets at their National matches.


Local and regional international matches have almost gone away.  


 We have no reason to think that when the traditional bullseye ranges become obsolete, the same thing won't happen to conventional pistol.

Just an observation.  Maybe the fans of electronic targets are not as vocal, but counting the con and pro comments on this forum and others such as Target Talk shows over 75% do not like or want to shoot on electronic targets.  That is a significant number.

Chip

dronning wrote:So it is tougher - is that why everyone is complaining?

No, without turning targets it's not bullseye.  
Taking away turning targets is bulls%&#. That's why I'm complaining.


I can shoot at fixed targets in my backyard.

dronning wrote:

Rob Kovach wrote:Toz,
..................Reacting to a horn when your eye is already on target leaves the shooter WAY more likely to shoot early.

So it is tougher - is that why everyone is complaining?

Ouch - see smiley face!!

As I have stated I am NOT in favor of eTargets at Perry - even if they can get them to turn. My reason isn't about turning or not turning, for me it's the fellowship during the scoring. Did the shooters believe the sport was dead when we first went to turning targets?

The challenge to everyone on both sides of the argument is if we collectively don't start getting more younger shooters this sport is dead in 10 years eTargets or not.

I commit to introducing one new shooter to the sport this year and another before Perry next year. And I will get at least 2 shooters that have never been to Perry to go with me next year.

You up!!!!

-Dave

"The challenge to everyone on both sides of the argument is if we collectively don't start getting more younger shooters this sport is dead in 10 years eTargets or not."


Yea,Yea, and people involved in conventional pistol have been saying that at least since 1980, along with the ten year time frame of doom. 


Most hobby sports don't follow the participation model of the big money professional sports.


Several million kids playing soccer obsessively in youth leagues in the US twenty years ago, have finally yielded a team that made the cut for the World Cup.  What is hasn't yielded is a bunch of thirty something's coming together for club team soccer tournaments on a monthly basis.  


I would like to see a survey of where bullseye shooters come from.   I believe a case can be made, that they come from other shooting disciplines, the military,the police, and recreational shooters as shooters mature and find they don't want to run around the barricades, or lie down in the mud with that rifle anymore.  


Bullseye is like Golf.    No one worries that if we don't have more youth golf programs that golf is going to die out.


You know why?  Because the guy who can afford the time and the money to play golf a couple of times a year, when he is 30, starts making it much more of a priority when he has both the time and the money to hit the links.  


Bullseye is like that.  So I wish all the hand wringing and panic about not enough junior shooter programs, would just die down a little.  


Face it.  The gun laws for pistol ownership, have made bullseye an adult sport.  
We need to work on attracting already interested adults to our specific discipline rather than throwing money at hundreds of juniors, hoping that a few of them will eventually join the sport after they get done raising their families.

OldMaster64 wrote:I had to give up trying to compete in IDPA because I can't hear the "beep". In our winter league here there is only one indoor range with turning targets so most of the matches were with normal commands and a whistle. I can't hear the whistle either. I always had to wait till someone fired before I started shooting. It turns out that there were a bunch of us old shooters in the same boat. I still have great hearing for voice commands as did most of the rest of us older shooters. The long and short of what I am trying to say is whatever happens in the future PLEASE, no horns,bells,whistles or beeps.

Len

I have the same hearing problem.  I just wait for the first shot.  Then let the official sort it all out. 
Turning targets are an absolute must.  The NRA rules ought to consult the ADA.

"The NRA rules ought to consult the ADA"


Yep.  Right now, I believe the NRA competition department, is running lickety split towards an ADA lawsuit.  


Either that or they are going to have to change the rules of bullseye so much, that it wont actually be bullseye any more.

Just to stir the pot a little I would like to throw this thought into this discussion. Electronic targets,instant scoring,automatic posting of scores and internet access. Why would we have to make the trip to Perry? Just have every bullseye shooter in every state shoot the Nationals on the same day at the nearest venue with this capability. We could count on about 3000 shooters to participate. Now that's a National Championship.
  I did mention stirring the pot. I am not in favor of e-targets but am in favor of getting more shooters into the sport and greater participation at national levels. I can see these targets and the net-working capabilities of the system being a part of the solution.
  I shot Perry in 1974. I don't remember any hardships. I don't remember it taking 4 days. I do remember the strong winds, bright sun and that I had a blast. In 1974 I was still a kid. Now, 40 years later the hardships are what is stopping me from going back. Stir, stir, stir

Of course they would have to turn 

I guess I should have made myself a little more clear - I was talking about 30-50 year olds. As I look down the line I think the average age is closer to 60, maybe older.

There seems to be a ton of new action shooters that as they get older may want to try bullseye. I have had a couple guys talk to me about bullseye because they want to shoot more and there are so many showing up at their events the wait for their turn for a stage is getting ridiculously long.

I don't think I'd give up on kids either. Air pistol competitors may make the transition to bullseye shooter someday. The more people we can get into shooting sports of any kind, can do nothing but help our sport. We need all we can get.

Perry attendance - not a good trend
2002 - 750
2014 - 656 (up slightly from 2013)

OldMaster64 wrote:Just to stir the pot a little I would like to throw this thought into this discussion. Electronic targets,instant scoring,automatic posting of scores and internet access. Why would we have to make the trip to Perry? Just have every bullseye shooter in every state shoot the Nationals on the same day at the nearest venue with this capability. We could count on about 3000 shooters to participate. Now that's a National Championship.
  I did mention stirring the pot. I am not in favor of e-targets but am in favor of getting more shooters into the sport and greater participation at national levels. I can see these targets and the net-working capabilities of the system being a part of the solution.
  I shot Perry in 1974. I don't remember any hardships. I don't remember it taking 4 days. I do remember the strong winds, bright sun and that I had a blast. In 1974 I was still a kid. Now, 40 years later the hardships are what is stopping me from going back. Stir, stir, stir

Of course they would have to turn 

I love out of box thinking! Can you imagine the uproar this proposal would cause if ever actually looked into!!!! If you can dream it, it can happen!

-Dave

Perry attendance - not a good trend
2002 - 750
2014 - 656 (up slightly from 2013)






I think this is pretty good actually.   Considering that gas is 3.50 a gallon, and this country has a real unemployment rate close to 15 percent. In short, the economy is terrible. 


 I  wonder what participation at Perry was like  in 1936 (depression) compared to 1925 (boom)?


Also Perry demolished most of the competitor housing without replacing it three years ago.   That has to have affected turnout. 


I know a lot of small sports, such as four wall handball, that would be over the moon if they could get 650 handball players to show up for nationals.

Frankly, I was somewhat surprised that the 2014 turn out was that good, based on what Shaumannk mentions and the .22 ammo and other component crisis. The training, if you train, and expense of travel, lodging, entry, time away from work etc., is significant. Not something every one can commit too. I have been involved in bullseye since the mid 1960s, and there has always been an effort to increase participation in the sport.. To excel in bullseye is very difficult, and the average person is not interested in the sacrifice and committent it takes.
Jerry

I want to know what is going to happen when I try to tear the etarget down and try to staple it to my trophy wall? Hey,we all save our best targets. You know which targets I'm talking about. The targets we drag out and take pictures of and post on this forum. Guess I will need a bigger wall and stronger staples. 

HA!!!  I guess we will have to take a picture of the lame screen with our camera phones--that aren't allowed on the firing line unless they are in airplane mode....

They can be emailed to you or printed out, the raw shot location & timing data is kept. In fact if they are really headed to eTargets we should start requesting features like getting our whole match sent to us. You won't just have holes in paper you will have shot sequence and timing too. If they make replay software available (some systems have this) you can replay the match in real time. Not sure what Megalink has available.

-Dave
I'm not in favor of eTargets at Perry.

OldMaster64 wrote:Just to stir the pot a little I would like to throw this thought into this discussion. Electronic targets,instant scoring,automatic posting of scores and internet access. Why would we have to make the trip to Perry? Just have every bullseye shooter in every state shoot the Nationals on the same day at the nearest venue with this capability. We could count on about 3000 shooters to participate. Now that's a National Championship.

Proposing changes to Camp Perry never seems to be very popular. The place is legendary.

For many, Perry is like a family reunion. Then, you have the people that are paid to be there. There are the people looking to see how they stack up versus the best of today and the legends of the past. Then, there are the new folks that just want to see what the place is all about.

Any changes should be carefully considered.

I've heard it was said that replacing the existing turning target system would be like condemning future shooters to 100 year old technology. Almost everyone uses a 1911, and that seems to be working out just fine.

On the other hand, I love electronic targets. From my phone, I can track college rifle events all across the country in real time.

In International style events, you get sighters. These calibrate the machines and the guns.

Electronic targets would open up a whole new series of competitive opportunities if the targets could be placed in various parts of the country when not at Perry. Imagine 15 targets in 10 areas of the country for regionals with an overall champion. That should lead to a really good crowd in total.

If we change the turn to a light/buzzer, allow sighters, and compress a week into a few days, is it still the same sport?  It might be a great new game, but it hardly seems like Bullseye. The records and legends would start anew because there would clearly be no comparison to the current traditions.

Hmmm, much of this whining about hearing loss (THANK YOU DAD for cramming plugs in my ears early and hammering home the lessons of his merely mild hearing loss!) goes away with the dreaded/evil/newfangled/nasty Euro-Trash style red and green light system.

Current NRA and DCM rules require either the troublesome audible signals or turning targets.

Three lines in the revised rules and those evil electronic target systems would be required to have the red/green light within view of your optic, just like a turning target.

ADA problems solved, I think, for the hearing impaired. I believe we already have the wheelchair rules in place for the traditionally-thought-of but small minority of "disabled" who have mobility challenges. NO WAY to "reasonably accommodate" the majority of "disabled" who are that way because of cognitive and/or mental health deficits.

Just throwing some real world at ya.

We need the per-firing-point maintenance and replacement schedule and budgets from Benning and those other outdoor joints that use electronic. My friend who shot them at the All Guard championships in the 1980s thought they were pretty good for rifle use.

I can imagine at least one way that a "turning" target type arrangement might be possible with an e-target, at least from the optical appearances perspective.

Losing the souvenir holey paper target from a lifetime high score may be the only validly objectionable and impossible to avoid "change to the sport" from a switch to electronic targets.

I will be totally convinced when someone shows me the reasonable figures from actual range use of X dollars spent up front, lasts Y years before average replacement, minus salvage value of junk being changed out, is at least 10% less money over the life through replacement of buying all that paper, rubber bands, pasters, and repair supplies of a physical turning target system--which my local range can't afford either.

Turning targets are currently required for Registered matches under the NRA rules.

Changing the rules to accommodate a single match and creating more division among the shooters is not a good reason to change. The money difference, if any will not substantially change participation at the nationals. The entry fee is only a small portion of the expense for most shooters. The real shooters might even be less inclined to attend since it would be a different match and conditions than they normally shoot. That is my major point.

Turning targets and timers are available or can be built by almost anyone that wants to, electronics would have to be purchased from manufacturer at whatever cost.

Rob Kovach wrote:Toz,
I think OldMaster's point is nothing like yours.  He is saying his hearing is getting bad to the point that he isn't going to be practicing with MP3 commands either.

do 1 second drills with an MP3 player, then do 1 second drills on turning targets. THEN you will understand the difference in visual reaction time vs. seeing the bullseye, then hearing the horn, then reacting with the trigger finger.

Reacting to a horn when your eye is already on target leaves the shooter WAY more likely to shoot early.

I did not mean to refer to OldMaster's post sorry for the confusion.  If there were a buzzer or some audible noise they would have to put it in a frequency range that does not fall into a common one where people have hearing loss.  OR come up with another solution.  I think this point is a very valid argument compared to others people have come up with.

Rules can and will be adopted to account for technology changes.  Dots are an example.  I get that people do not like change but change will happen and you have the choice to fight it and get stuck with the implementation without your input or get on board and provide inputs to help make the change better for you and all of us.

So maybe we can turn the discussion around and come up with ways to make the new targets at Perry and any were else they end up better for the sport.

Sounds to me like people are just fascinated with the technology they haven't even used yet. Using electronic targets at perry is like using a cell phone to text someone standing beside you. Yes, you can do it and save some talking, but is it really worth the effort or increase the benefit of the experience?

You want more people participating and shooting bullseye? Then why don't you put on some matches?

You want an electronic target, then put it at your range first and let us know how it works, what the cost/benefit is and how many more shooters you get. After we get a couple of hundred ranges update then we can discuss what needs to be done at the National Matches.