Electronic Targets at Perry

First topic message reminder :

I saw today(7-27) that electronic targets were set up on the Petreca Range for pistol shooters to try and pass along comments. Was there any mention of this before or at  Perry?
Somehow I missed it or it was a well kept secret.

"Revolvers for Center Fire"

Time moves on!

What is the target system for the PPC nationals?

Jack H wrote:What material is
the framwork?
The "white scoring area"?
The black?

I've shot at Talladega several times now. The frame is approximately 1/2" thick white nylon, the white area of the target is a corrugated white plastic and the black is the black rubber screen roll. Service pistol rounds will go through the nylon frame but some wadgun rounds will just park themselves in the nylon. (Damn crossfires)

The red and green lights work well for 22 EIC where you have to do an International style lift. I like turning targets for NRA Precision Pistol but if you are using lights I like International Pistol. I have a problem seeing the lights when shooting my red dot guns, as the dot blanks the lights out. It is not too bad if you have adjacent targets to see their lights change, but our last match had shooters at every other station and I could not see the lights in my peripheral vision. I ended up shooting iron sights in 45 and got a higher score in 45 than CF.

I am sure a lot of matches did not have turning targets. There is a rule that regional ,national and state championships must have turning targets. I do not know when that went into effect
 At Summersville,WV sometime prior to 1978 the targets were turned by hand. The targets were held on edge by a spring. the targets were turned by hand via a cable and pulleys. When time elapsed, the handle was released and the spring pulled the targets on edge.
 Sometime prior to 1978 they went with a mechanical turner and in the mid-nineties an air cylinder was used.

One thing about the E-targets at Talladega, after your first string of rapid fire, you can see exactly how you scored which you can't with turning targets.

(Where can I find a description of how these electronic targets work?)

mikemyers wrote:(Where can I find a description of how these electronic targets work?)

http://www.kongsberg-ts.no/en/

With the paper target there is a definite proof of score, yes there are situations where there is a large knot hole but usually there is 10 holes to indicate where the bullets struck the target. With electronic you have to accept what the computer decided. With paper targets there is no calibration necessary, I guess there may be a batch of targets that might have slightly larger or smaller scoring rings but that is very unlikely even if that happens everyone on the line has the same. Electronic targets will have to be calibrated and or repaired from time to time, By Who?? During a match anyone with stop watch or anything with a device indicating seconds can check the timing. Just because a light is on or off doesn't mean the computer is at the same time.

Electronic targets have been used in international competition and the Olympics for many years.  This includes 1,000 yard rifle competitions. 

They work great but are controversial for bullseye because it changes the sport. They do not turn. 

- Dave

I looked over the website, but it didn't say "how" the target works.  I wrote them for more information.   Quick question - where do the bullets end up?

The fact that the targets don't turn is going back to the whistle, thought the computer now determines if the shot was early or late. Only problem is there is a light rather than a whistle and most that shoot on the electronic targets say it's difficult to shoot with optical sights. The Olympic system of iron sights and the ready position don't interfere with the light system. When the AMU was invited to test the system at Talladega all the shooters were scored misses due to late shots and they are a few of the best there is.
 Furthermore when Benning runs an International Shooting event they have to bring in the manufactures engineers to calibrate the system before shooting can take place. They come as a team (more than one) costing thousands per day not including travel. Plus they must remain during the match to insure everything works properly or make repairs if it don't. Given that it will be cost prohibitive for local matches because how many can afford that calibration and repair that will probably be required at large matches like State Championship or Regional. In my opinion is seems to be a way for sanctioning authorities to get their fingers into the shooters pockets! Every year we hear of Olympic officials getting money probably it was not put in a pool so they all get a cut! As of now given the cost of ammo combined with entry fee as well as travel expense make competing a loosing cause! The winners get some to offset the cost of the match and not enough to cover the entire cost yet those like new shooters that are supposedly being attracted will get nothing. Now add the cost of electronic targets to the cost at attendance will get lower!

mikemyers wrote:I looked over the website, but it didn't say "how" the target works.  I wrote them for more information.   Quick question - where do the bullets end up?

The bullet passes through the target.  Electronic targets uses 2 methods to locate the shot.  Sound and/or IR.  The targets at CMP's Talladega Marksmanship Park use acoustic sensors accurate to a fraction of a milimeter by triangulating the shot. 

They locate they exact center where the bullet passed through the target. Then based on what caliber you are shooting the system calculates the score and displays it on the monitor next to you.
 
Sonic Sensors in Talladega’s Target Systems

I should have mentioned in MN we have one of the few private club electronic target ranges in the country.  18 Megalink targets on a 300 meter rifle range.  They allow us to shoot all winter.  We shoot inside a heated clubhouse, out windows.  We don't shoot if it gets down to -10F mostly because the covers for the targets get too stiff to remove.

The targets have been running trouble free for years.

- Dave

That's good for rifle. In most areas here in PA it is too cold to shoot Pistol Outdoors so we have indoor ranges with turning targets. Some have 50 foot range, most have 25 yard. I would think electronic targets will be OK for Rifle. To add to the problem new shooters have quite a bit of problem keeping shots all on the target. Every few years we have to replace the frames due to they are shot to pieces. Few dollars in angle iron and a little welding make it a simple inexpensive task to replace them.
 I think the target system is OK as it is, maybe if a better system is developed electronics will be a good change but not now.

I plan to try the Electronic Targets for the first time for both Bullseye and Rifle in Dec at the Talledega 600. 

I like turning targets. It is part of the game. I may wind up liking the electronic targets too, but they are changing the game.

Wobbled, if that's the case, why are you not wanting the move back to Sea Girt...
I'm with Jerry....

Was Sea Girt a pistol match?

That's exactly the problem, they are changing the game supposedly to get more competitors shooting. But what they are doing is having the opposite effect. Too many non competitive shooting people are making decisions for those that compete. Or like in Anderson's case an International shooter trying to impose international type shooting on those that do not shoot International! Yes over the years there have been changes in the game, at one time I'm told that only 5 shots were fired and the targets scored and changed. Another was that at Perry (possibly local matches too) that everyone fired each phase of the match (Slow, NMC, Timed and Rapid) before moving to the next phase, that made a Looong day at Perry. Turning targets was another change but these changes were welcomed by the shooters and made the game better.
 Don't get me wrong! I'd love to have the convenience of not having to score or change targets plus being able to see what I shot without looking thru my spotting scope, that will be a definite plus shooting under covered firing ports on a rainy day!!! Might be a good change if someone can invent wireless electronic targets that drop into the turning frames!!!
 I think Sea Girt was Rifle, as far as I know Pistol was started at Camp Perry. Supposedly it was just Service Pistol then expanded to what we shoot today.

I wrote to the manufacturer in Norway to find out more.  They sent me the following email, which helps explain things so I have a better idea now as to what is going on....

"The targets detect the hits with acoustic sensors/microphones, which are mounted in a “sound chamber”, in between a front rubber and a rear rubber, see attached “U-Target functionality”.
In addition to a solution with 3 sensors/microphones in the lower part of the target, we have an alternative solution with 4 sensors/microphones, one in each corner of the target.
 
The bullet goes through the target and into a bullet catcher, like the way you shoot at paper targets."


I sent them a link to this discussion; maybe they'll join the discussion.

I do understand how they work, my son worked for Echo (now owned by Phillips) ultra sound that uses sound to look inside the body. I made many test fixtures for them. First do you expect the manufacture to tell us all the details other than they work perfectly? What about a cross fire or more than one? My other son is in the AMU, they have the system used at the Olympics in Atlanta and tells me of issues they have with them.
 I think they are OK for Olympic level shooters that use Iron sights but as of now they are a game changer for our sport not to mention the cost!

Froneck wrote:First do you expect the manufacture to tell us all the details other than they work perfectly? What about a cross fire or more than one? My other son is in the AMU, they have the system used at the Olympics in Atlanta and tells me of issues they have with them.
 I think they are OK for Olympic level shooters that use Iron sights but as of now they are a game changer for our sport not to mention the cost!

If you're asking me, of course I expect them to answer all the questions about "how" they work, and discuss any issues.  I think they would want to do that.  Two weeks ago, I knew nothing about this - saw something on a YouTube video, but that didn't explain anything at all.  I'm learning, slowly.  

Anyway, why not bring ALL the issues out in the open.  Maybe some of them can be resolved, even if not all of them.

The person I wrote to in Norway is going to ask one of the local people to come to this forum.  I hope that happens.  In the meantime, this discussion has been very educational to me.

mikemyers:
I sent them a link to this discussion; maybe they'll join the discussion.

I doubt it.

Do a search on this forum there have been numerous threads on eTargets over the last couple of years.  It's well know that CMP is the US distributor for KTS and in fact built the $20mm Talladega Marksmanship Park showcasing the KTS system.  They had numerous start up issues both on the rifle and pistol side.  Many of those issues were due to not explaining to KTS exactly how some of our matches are run, like multiple calibers used during a match.  Most issues have been worked out, even crossfires.

 eTargets changes Bullseye - they don't turn and most people oppose them for pistol because of this.  I love eTargets (I have a SIUS) but I would be sad to see them come to pistol because for me it's not the turning issue it's that fact we would lose the camaraderie that occurs as part of our current scoring process.

One thing about eTargets I really like is the fact matches can be broadcast.  My family could bring up my target and watch the shots as they appear.  Now that would be cool, but it still doesn't sway me, I prefer paper for pistol (PFP).

- Dave

From what I understand about the system of detecting the shot location is based on the measurement in the difference in time detected by the microphones. The speed of sound is not very fast when compared to light but the amount of time needed to travel inches is very small. Plus the difference in time using the speed of sound to detect a scratch 10 or a 9 is extreamly small. I can't see that over time something will not need calibration.
 As it is now there is definite proof of where the shot hit the target, yes the scorer and the shooter may not agree but it's easy for a Ref or a Jury to determine. Add to that anyone can check the time of a turning target with a simple stop watch but can it be determined if the lights and computer are in sync. ??
 Then there is the cost of the system, it was mentioned earlier the target will cost $4500 each, I don't know nor think  the computer and any other equipment requited such as a monitor for every shooter was included. Most of the ranges I shoot at have 20ish targets, that's $90,000 just for the targets.  How many matches have to be run just to pay for the system ??
 As I said there may be a time when the electronic targets are a welcomed up-grade but for now I think the turning target is the best way to go!

Froneck wrote:From what I understand about the system of detecting the shot location is based on the measurement in the difference in time detected by the microphones. The speed of sound is not very fast when compared to light but the amount of time needed to travel inches is very small. Plus the difference in time using the speed of sound to detect a scratch 10 or a 9 is extreamly small. I can't see that over time something will not need calibration.
 As it is now there is definite proof of where the shot hit the target, yes the scorer and the shooter may not agree but it's easy for a Ref or a Jury to determine. Add to that anyone can check the time of a turning target with a simple stop watch but can it be determined if the lights and computer are in sync. ??
 Then there is the cost of the system, it was mentioned earlier the target will cost $4500 each, I don't know nor think  the computer and any other equipment requited such as a monitor for every shooter was included. Most of the ranges I shoot at have 20ish targets, that's $90,000 just for the targets.  How many matches have to be run just to pay for the system ??
 As I said there may be a time when the electronic targets are a welcomed up-grade but for now I think the turning target is the best way to go!

The system is more accurate than a plug by a HUGE margin.  Verification, the CMP has been using plastic corrugated backers behind the eTargets just to prove any disputes and from what I have read the system and the backers have agreed.  This I assume is temporary.  The calibration process is pretty simple and I believe runs on every start up, the mic's check against a fixed beep generated and if their distance doesn't match a diagnostic error is generated.  The calibration does require that the frame hasn't been knocked out of alignment and a "hit" from a 45 would NOT do that, it would have to be hit by a vehicle or dropped some distance.  Of course if that were to happen all mic's would error out.

Determining if the lights are in sync, no need for a stopwatch, the data shows how many milliseconds it took to turn on/off the lights.  Question is: Should eTargets be the exact same timing, or should you get 1, or 2 seconds more??  That's just a question from me.

Cost, yes it's a lot of money, you just can't justify it, BUT not having anyone down range may get the attention of insurance companies at some point, then we may not have a choice.

- Dave