Camp Perry or Cardinal Center

First topic message reminder :

Good morning all.  I was on this site this morning and read through the questions being asked about the Cardinal Center.  I thought that I would share some things with you and generate some discussion.

Mark Johnson, the COO of CMP, has advised that he will go to his Board of Directors and ask for funding to install electronic targets at Camp Perry that will be suitable to fire High Power, Smallbore, and Pistol.  If approved, the target date for being up and running is for the start of the National Matches in 2017.  The NRA will pay a lease fee to CMP for use of these targets.

I was recently contacted by a representative of the Cardinal Center and asked to commit to going there in 2017.  Cardinal Center will probably use turning targets and paper, just like what we use at Camp Perry now.  I did not commit but left the door open.  I cannot commit to going to a range that currently does not exist.  The target date for the start of the Cardinal Center is the start of the National Matches in 2017.

So now we might be faced with a choice; 1) stay at Camp Perry and shoot on electronic targets; 2) move to Cardinal Center and shoot on turning targets.

Everyone who has shot the National Matches knows what Camp Perry is like so I won't dwell on that.  At Cardinal Center there would be some major changes.  Not in the way the events are fired but in the way you live.  The cabins onsite would likely be taken up by the NRA to house staff, leaving RVs and hotels as the other housing options.  If you elect NOT to rent/bring an RV, hotels become important.  The nearest exit with hotels is 9 miles away and the next exit with hotels is 19 miles away.  I don't consider these distances to be objectionable but you might based on what you are used to.  At Bianchi Cup competitors drive 15 miles one way to the range each day and don't complain about it but this is a major change from the way things work at Camp Perry.  It won't be quite so easy to run back to your room after shooting a morning 900 and then return for the team matches that afternoon.  There is one, and only one, restaurant on site but plenty near the hotels.

The Cardinal Center is a terrific place but will entail some changes by everyone, NRA and competitors, alike.

Kick around the pros and cons and let me know what you think.

Dennis Willing

OldMaster65 wrote:I initially thought when they were talking about verifiers when shooting with e-targets that someone was just getting rifle and pistol rules confused. After reading the report from Talledaga and reading subsequent posts I am amazed that they are considering this for pistol at all. I can not even imagine standing there on the line and verifying for someone then having to shoot my own 900. Talk about an advantage for the first round shooters. They would need to have chairs and a covered area for us old folks to even think about it. This is just totally un-realistic and poorly thought out. That's my .02.

Len

Right on.  I'll add 2 more cents

A question come to mind about these e targets.  Probably been asked before, but...

What is really driving the effort towards e targets?

The practicality of Bullseye electrics escapes me.  As does the practicality in general range use. 

Shot up targets, maintenance, rules, verifiers, initial costs, tradition, all seem to me as making it a non-starter.

When the bigger money shoots like Bianchi start to use them, I might listen.

Jack H wrote:A question come to mind about these e targets.

What is really driving the effort towards them?

The practicality of Bullseye electrics escapes me.  As does the practicality in general range use. 

Shot up targets, maintenance, rules, verifiers, initial costs, tradition, all seem to me as making it a non-starter.

When thew bigger money shoots like Bianchi start to use them, I might listen.

Maybe the cmp is testing these etargets on us to then planing to sell them to the run and gun group?

The CMP is the only authorized seller of KBG targets in the U.S. .......

I've been thinking. Yea, bad idea I know. What does the verifier bring to the line with him/her? Do you bring your pistol box so you can shoot the next relay? Where do you put it? Do you drag it with you to the 25 yd line half a mile away so you can verify the shooters score there? Then back? Do they plan on the shooter going back and forth to verify? Do both the shooter and the verifier shoot the long line before moving to the short line? Have they thought about any of this? I see big problems with the whole scenario at Perry. Pistols boxes with no place to put them except in the mud, breaking up the entire match with big voids of no shooting and the possibility of trekking back and forth across Perry putting in grunt time. I don't shoot rifle anymore for a reason. Basically the same reason I don't shoot IDPA anymore. Last question. Who wants to spend half their time on the range watching someone else shoot?

Len

Personally, Len, I don't think they have thought that far ahead. At Talledega the line is covered and concrete and the installation is permanent. At Perry, who knows. They could do it like now with one target line and two firing lnes or they could put up tilting targets and two target lines and one firing line. If one target line they would need the coroplast covers for both the 50 and 25 targets. 

I will say that they have worked hard to address the initial problems in Alabama. But I don't think that anyone has shot a 2700 on the Bullseye targets. I know that they haven't had 4 relays shoot a 2700 on them. And what does a target look like after a master has put 270 shots into it?

One of the posters on another forum said the Kong technician was saying that the have not started the programming for NRA matches.
More calibers, and more shots. Also, remember, the CMP only shoots 100 rounds max in one day.

The CMP only shoots 100 max "hardball" in a day. Wonder what wad cutters will do?  The pointy hardball just zip right thru making a very small hole. I see 3 options for a 200 gr SWC going about 600 fps at 50 yds. 1. they could zip right thru (doubtable) 2. They could do the same size hole that they make on a paper target possibly with extra tearing since they won't zip right thru (probably) 3. They bounce (possible)

Len

Old master,
I don't think they will bounce but depending on the rotating rubber ban... They might get stuck in it....
It is all conjecture Tell someone puts three hundred rounds of wad cutter at them. I would like to see that test.

OldMaster65 wrote:The CMP only shoots 100 max "hardball" in a day. Wonder what wad cutters will do?  The pointy hardball just zip right thru making a very small hole. I see 3 options for a 200 gr SWC going about 600 fps at 50 yds. 1. they could zip right thru (doubtable) 2. They could do the same size hole that they make on a paper target possibly with extra tearing since they won't zip right thru (probably) 3. They bounce (possible)

Len

As long as we are changing the fundamentals of the sport in order to promote unproven technology..... might as well ban the bullets that many shooters rely on 'for the greater good' of said tech!


Bruce

Danehogle wrote:One of the posters on another forum said the Kong technician was saying that the have not started the programming for NRA matches.
More calibers, and more shots.  Also, remember, the CMP only shoots 100 rounds max in one day.

It seems CMP is having KTS do all this work but the way the system is set up anyone that has ever filled out an electronic survey could actually do it.  It's all parameter driven.  Need a new bullet size (.40) enter it and save the mask.  Need a new match enter the number of shots and the time.  Getting all the match reporting to look nice on the summary screens would be the only tricky part.

I've watched the guys at Minneapolis Gun Club do it on the Megalink system (also built in Norway).  During the the winter leagues they run F-class on half the lanes and a XTC match on the other half.

Bullets
We can't shoot any plastic tipped bullets on the Minneapolis targets because they eat up the rubber membrane.  A 200gr SWC is going to raise hell with the membrane and I doubt a .38 SPL HBWC out of my Smith 52-2 with 2.5gr of Clays would make it through it.

- Dave

OldMaster65 wrote:The CMP only shoots 100 max "hardball" in a day. Wonder what wad cutters will do?  The pointy hardball just zip right thru making a very small hole. I see 3 options for a 200 gr SWC going about 600 fps at 50 yds. 1. they could zip right thru (doubtable) 2. They could do the same size hole that they make on a paper target possibly with extra tearing since they won't zip right thru (probably) 3. They bounce (possible)

Len

For electronics, the size of the hole is not the issue.  The sensors detect the center of the hole and then determine the edge based on the size of the caliber.  

However, if I am recalling a previous post correctly, there is only the one caliber for hardball (.45).  For people shooting center fire with a .32, the get a distinct advantage for scoring of close shots if the units are only programmed for a single caliber (.45).

bdutton wrote:
However, if I am recalling a previous post correctly, there is only the one caliber for hardball (.45).  For people shooting center fire with a .32, the get a distinct advantage for scoring of close shots if the units are only programmed for a single caliber (.45).

This was fixed, it was always a feature of the KTS system but CMP didn't implement it for their first match.  They now can input the caliber by shooter. 

- Dave

Bruce said

    "As long as we are changing the fundamentals of the sport in order to promote unproven technology..... might as well ban the bullets that many shooters rely on 'for the greater good' of said tech!"

I have been looking into my crystal ball again and this I what I saw.

"NRA Announces changes in bullet regulations for the 2017 National Matches held in Camp Perry Ohio. Due to global concern over the use of lead bullets and their effect on the environment all shooters competing at the National Championships must use a fully jacketed bullet for the CF and .45 matches...."

What they mean is. Lead bullets won't work with the CMP's new targets so everyone has to change their ammo to shoot here.

Len   The cynic

I did not realize there was an "X" on the target to aim at.  I just looked a new target and sure enough there is one.  I guess the reason I never noticed it was because my dot was covering it up this whole time.

Then your looking at the dot and not what you should be....
I am not saying your doing it wrong, but as Mr. Zins says.. Your doing it wrong....

Regardless if a person is looking at the dot or the target the dot will/should cover the "X".

I am sure Mr. Zins does not see the actual "X" on the target but sees it in his mind because he knows it is printed on the target in the center and that gives him something to "aim" at.

I do not think if the "X" exists or not is major factor that creates a fundamental difference in the 2 systems.  My eye and mind center the round objects in my sight picture and the trigger goes off.

It seems to me a larger fundamental part of the short line is getting shot 2-5 off and accurate and less so the turn of the target. The turn of the target could only have an impact on 1 in 5 shots.  We all have to learn to deal with it and figure out how to get off the first shot.  It was easier for me to learn the first shot but struggle with shots 2-5.

Looking at the dot or target face is a moot point, do what works for you.
I have the dot turned down low enough that I see the target X through the red dot covering it.
Plus I obviously see the circle within the circle within the circle.
A two fold positive.

Getting the first shot off on the turn gains you more time to get off the next four shots, that is all, which gives you more overall time.

Sometimes I do not get the shot off at the turn, no big deal, just stick to the process.
If I do get the shot off on the turn, I have more time to spare.

Do not over think it.

I want to be able to see the X and all the numbers on the target, not a black hole like free and air pistol, EIC and DR.

If all I shot was irons, then would have no problem with just a black hole.

So thinking out loud...
If we go to E-targets with only black holes then I need to get rid of all my dot sights for the 2700.
No, not going to happen.

Clarence

In my opinion I would like to see turning targets rather than the electronic version. First the is a definite record of what was shot rather than a computer telling you what it is. I would hate to win or loose a match due to computer malfunction! Second it puts many shooters at a disadvantage, shoot and practice all year on turning targets then try to compete with those fortunate enough to belong or be near ranges with the deep pockets that can install the electronic system. Furthermore the clubs are now struggling to make ends meet and provide for a good match with somewhat of a "reasonable" award. How will they ever be able to afford an electronic system without raising the entry fees? Furthermore who will maintain the system? Speaking to my son the coach of the AMU Pistol team he tells me of the cost required to conduct a Olympic match. Company engineers are required to test and certify the accuracy of the target system plus remain while the match is being shot to fix any problems that may occur.
 It simply seems to me that there are a few in the pocket of these computer target companies and are more interested in personal gain that what is best for the shooters.
 I enjoy the Camp Perry experience and have gone there consecutively for 35 years, the early years are great but it seem that now they are more interested in how much money they can extract from the shooters pocket. The CMP should listen to the competitors because what will they do if all the shooter decide they will not shot the CMP matches at Perry and go over to the Crardinal Center.

Froneck wrote: Second it puts many shooters at a disadvantage, shoot and practice all year on turning targets then try to compete with those fortunate enough to belong or be near ranges with the deep pockets that can install the electronic system. 

I do not agree with this point.  This makes it easier to train.  When training I have no access to turning targets. The only time I shoot on them is a match. To train for etargets all one needs to do is use a recording of the commands and play it on what ever you play mp3s on.  Now everyone including the people that do not have access to even turning targets can more closely match those conditions.

Most of us follow toz's example. Voice commands and stationary targets. Matches, we just deal with the turn. 10 seconds is a lot of time...

Unfortunately every fixed target match I've ever shot (electronic targets not in this example) there are early and late shots that still count as hits. Not enforced! I've shot e targets internationally with minimal time training on them and felt totally screwed. Not an easy transition. I'm against using for BE because it will put 99 percent of shooters at a disadvantage.
Jon

I largely credit the constant training with a portable turning system to the rapid ascent of my trainee.. 4 years from zero to Master and breaking 2600..

And don't forget Jerry, that turning target system is a lot cheeper than one ETarget....

Danehogle wrote:And don't forget Jerry, that turning target system is a lot cheeper than one ETarget....

Yes, I agree.. I always say, "There are participants and there are competitors. How bad do you want to win?"
Competitors will fight, the participants will surrender.