F T/R Competition Do Electronic Target Scoring Systems Work?

[Racer88]

So, late last night, I was inspired to do an experiment.

After having competed several times at a range with an electronic target scoring system (Silver Mountain Targets), I wondered how accurate they are.

A paper target is mounted on the frame for aiming purposes. Scoring is done through four sensors at the corners. The shooter gets feedback via WiFi and a tablet (such as iPad). It's a very cool thing to not have to have people in the "target pit" marking the target. It makes the match run more efficiently. And, it's also cool to be able to glance up at the iPad and get immediate feedback on your last shot.

I recalled that I had taken a photo of the paper target (that only I had used) at a match a year ago. I also had screenshots of 2 out of 3 "e-target" results. What if I superimposed the e-targets (with electronic "impacts" over the paper target (with actual bullet holes)? Would they line up?? Would they correlate?

My old school buddy (and NRA "Distinguished Rifleman"), who tempted me down the precision rifle rabbit hole told me that the system is known to cause "zero shifts." He doesn't like the e-target systems, but the sponsoring organizations claim is that the system is "fair" because it affects everyone the same.

Alrighty... the results of my nerd experiment!

OK... here's the original paper target. There are 65 holes there from three stages (20 shots each + 5 sighters):

Then I ran that through my OnTarget group calculator to mark the shots in red:

I managed to snag e-target screenshots for two out of the three stages.

Using photoshop, I superimposed the two e-targets over the paper target. I scaled them so the target rings matched up. I made the e-targets semi-transparent so we can see the paper target and bullet holes underneath. I don't think I got the camera squared up exactly when I shot the photo of the paper target. So, there's a tiny bit of skewing. But, pretty close. So, the target rings are lined up, but the e-target "impacts" and the bullet holes... not so much. Like, NONE of them line up / match. Hmmmm....

Then I shifted the superimposed e-targets a bit, and VOILA! The bullet holes and e-target impacts line up pretty nicely! But, the rings are off! Remember that I only had screenshots for two out of the three stages. So, 20 of the bullet holes are not "accounted" for. But, there are enough here for the demonstration.

When you mount the paper target on the frame (which has the four electronic sensors mounted on the corners), they stress that you must get it centered properly. We did. I'm quite certain of that. So, this would seem to confirm my friend's comment about "zero shift."

Here are the two images side-by-side:

Now.... IF the shooter makes an ACCURATE correction with the two "sighter" shots before shooting for score, the system's "zero shift" shouldn't matter, right? Of course, that's assuming the shooter's fundamentals are spot on (he doesn't make any errors with either of the two sighters).

Anyway... some interesting stuff, courtesy of this nerd! Whattaya think??

 

[Dstoenner]

That was a GREAT analysis. My hat is off to you. the trick here is the "zero shift" I have to think about it some but it seems to me that for those of us that hold off for the wind that a zero shift vertically would be easier to adjust to than a zero shift horizontally. Did your friend say that the zero shift is always elevation?

David

 

[Racer88]

That was a GREAT analysis. My hat is off to you. the trick here is the "zero shift" I have to think about it some but it seems to me that for those of us that hold off for the wind that a zero shift vertically would be easier to adjust to than a zero shift horizontally. Did your friend say that the zero shift is always elevation?

David

No. He made no such distinction. But, I was thinking... in theory.... if you make the RIGHT corrections off your sighters... aiming for the "virtual X-ring" and accounting for elevation and windage, the shift shouldn't matter. Right? It's still a bit concerning. I'm guessing there is a calibration process as part of "maintenance" that perhaps gets neglected at these clubs.

 

[FatBoy]

Zero shift is intentional. We offset the "virtual" Center of our 600y F class targets by 6". Otherwise, competitors have no aiming point after 60 shots, just a 3" hole.

If you are shooting EIC, or something with very limited sighters this is an issue. If you have unlimited sighters, it doesn't mean shit.

You spent sometime on this. Good write up. And yes, there is a calibration process. You have someone in the pits and you shoot a round AT DISTANCE. They pull it and measure the offset and you (the administrator) plugs in the off set in the software. Then you run in up and confirm. Usually takes two shots.

"Biggest" issue open face e targets have is high 100% wind and target shaking. These will affect the sound speed to each of the mics and can cause legit shift, but not much.

 

[Racer88]

Zero shift is intentional. We offset the "virtual" Center of our 600y F class targets by 6". Otherwise, competitors have no aiming point after 60 shots, just a 3" hole.

If you are shooting EIC, or something with very limited sighters this is an issue. If you have unlimited sighters, it doesn't mean shit.

You spent sometime on this. Good write up. And yes, there is a calibration process. You have someone in the pits and you shoot a round AT DISTANCE. They pull it and measure the offset and you (the administrator) plugs in the off set in the software. Then you run in up and confirm. Usually takes two shots.

So, then... what I said earlier is correct... if you properly correct your zero with the sighters, then you'll be aiming for the actual paper x-ring and impacting the VIRTUAL "x-ring," and the results are the same? Is that right?

So... if my rifle is zeroed "dead nuts" in reality... I'm going to HAVE to correct it with the sighters in the match? There's always a zero shift built into the system?

Thanks for chiming in. I thought my experiment was an interesting exercise. I will say the accuracy of the shot marking, relative to each other was remarkable.

 

[FatBoy]

Yes, absolutely correct. This isn't great for guys wanting to verify CBS, but it makes highpower matches run much faster. BUT the zero shift isn't built into the system unless you're referring to the targets and the match personnel. The shift is a result of 1) the match director not having time to calibrate all the targets the morning of the match or 2) an intentional offset to preserve an aiming point.

No matter which way, your score will be statistically the same but your greater point is on point. We have used them for three years now and are up to 13 targets this season. Scores haven't changed at all. Cadence of the match is alarmingly fast for F class guys, and it is not the greatest tool for getting shooters to watch wind and mirage but I personally love them.

 

[Racer88]

Yes, absolutely correct. This isn't great for guys wanting to verify CBS, but it makes highpower matches run much faster. BUT the zero shift isn't built into the system unless you're referring to the targets and the match personnel. The shift is a result of 1) the match director not having time to calibrate all the targets the morning of the match or 2) an intentional offset to preserve an aiming point.

No matter which way, your score will be statistically the same but your greater point is on point. We have used them for three years now and are up to 13 targets this season. Scores haven't changed at all. Cadence of the match is alarmingly fast for F class guys, and it is not the greatest tool for getting shootings to watch wind and mirage but I personally love them.

Makes sense. While I'm somewhat familiar with how pit duty works, I've never had to do it. I've done six matches, all at this same range - with the e-targets. I like'em! I like the instant feedback on the iPad.

Unfortunately, my rifle (Ruger Precision Rifle) puts me in the F-class Open category. While I have no real interest in being truly competitive, and I'm mostly there for fun (and the opportunity to shoot at 600 yards)... there's no way my low-end rig (RPR, Harris bipod, rear squeeze bag, Vortex Viper HST 6-24x50 scope) can compete with the real F-Class rigs with adjustable bipods that cost more than my rifle and their semi-solid rear "bags." But, that's OK. I'm having fun with it.

Thanks for explaining it. At least I know I'm not crazy! LOL! And, I even had fun playing with this on photoshop to analyze the accuracy (and confirm my hunch) last night.

 

[FatBoy]

You picked it up faster than most. Don't sweat the equipment. If you take your first couple years and work on fundamentals and learning wind and mirage you'll be competitive with anyone in the country with a $150 rest. A front plate and bag rider. Maybe a good barrel

Or, shoot from a sling and coat like me ?

 

[Racer88]

You picked it up faster than most. Don't sweat the equipment. If you take your first couple years and work on fundamentals and learning wind and mirage you'll be competitive with anyone in the country with a $150 rest. A front plate and bag rider. Maybe a good barrel

Or, shoot from a sling and coat like me ?

Thanks. I don't foresee really getting into F-class... other than just for fun and the opportunity to shoot at 600 yards (ranges are few and far between around here. This one is 2 hours away. I'm more likely to get into service rifles if I ever pursue competition on a serious level. My buddy is a Distinguished Rifleman, who drew me into this precision rifle rabbit hole. He competes with a sling and iron sights (and sometimes scope) at a national level.

Yeah... my barrel needs replacement. I got my money's worth out of it. 3500 rounds, so far, and still shooting sub-MOA at up to 300 yards.

Here's my best performance at the F-class matches. This was my 2nd time with this rifle. 5th time ever (3 previous times were with an AR-15) Two of these targets are the ones I used for my analysis in this thread. I didn't use the first target, because I forgot to "zoom" it. First target was the best score!

 

[Racer88]

And, her is how my 15 year old daughter did! Her first time ever at 600 yards. 11th time ever shooting ANYthing ever in her life.

 

[FatBoy]

Your rifle is still holding pretty good elevation at 600, but I suspect you're close just on count.

Congratulations on shooting with your daughter. I started mine off at 8 years old, behind an old 6BR at 1k. There were no affordable mobile phones then, and certainly none with cameras. She's 25 now and does pretty well when she gets all her shit in one sock. You're a lucky man, savor these days.

We're blessed in middle Tennessee. We have six 600 yard ranges and three 1000 yard ranges all within 2.5 hours drive from Nashville.

 

[rimfireninja]

I shoot twice a week at range with 20 lanes (total) 50 yd and 100 yd, 100% Kongsberg e-targets only, no paper. (closed acoustic chamber type, not "open" acoustic) . Quite often the (four) 50 yard targets are "shot out" to the extent there is nothing but a ragged 2" dia hole in bullseye centers,, no aim point..shot clean thru and thru, front middle rear.. you will see the dirt berm backstop 60 yards beyond the target in your scope .. even if they paste a new bulleye on target front face, that hole is still there, and I have lost all confidence in e-monitor plotting/scoring.. waste of time and ammo... no matter what Kongsberg or others may hype about targets being good for 300-3000 round counts , that acoustic chamber is seriously compromised when there is a 2" or larger hole clean thru it,, and anybody with a decent rifle/scope can obliterate an entire 2" 9-ring area in less than 50 shots of course... I don't expect the RSOs to do extensive expensive work on these targets every day, either, it is very high cost maintenance .. but I have about given up doing 22LR rimfire at 50 yards.. with (16) 100 yard lanes, I can shoot rimfire magnum, and do; those targets do not get even 10% of the shot counts on them that the (4) 50 yd targets do, mostly centerfire guys throwing less than 10 shots downrange .. so I can always find at least few 100yd targets in pretty decent shape ... just looking for any comments or opinions or experiences with similar e-targets.. what round counts do YOU trust on these things, etc .. have you found any practical solutions ??? .. (some of the LONG range centerfire shooters have some experience with this, but I find extreme little so far amongst the rimfire brethren .. not much feedback on what reasonable centerfires shots counts ought be either.. and shot density obviously matters) .. no, they do not attempt F-class matches (or any matches at all since opening jast July).. which is maybe a "good" thing .. I have no idea how most e-target matches are run, but shot DENSITY gets high really fast when shooting at a a 0.39" X-ring at just 50 yards

 

[1moaoff]

To me thats a target shift not a zero shift. When hoping for x's is there a difference target to target? Maybe 1 target mounted 1/4" lower a.d the other higher.

 

[smoothy8500]

To me thats a target shift not a zero shift.

That is correct, and targets with Silver Mountain and Shotmarker generally need to be calibrated on occasion. As @FatBoy mentioned, the center can be moved to either "correct" the target or "move" the shot-out center that @rimfireninja complained about. Your concern is valid that switching to a different target mid-string can potentially throw off your "zero" since that other target may not have been calibrated. If a target goes offline and shooters move to another one, we will allow two sighters to adjust/confirm "zero".

We only calibrate our club targets when doing an EIC match since they do not have sighter shots to confirm zero-all rounds count for score.

 

[rimfireninja]

That is correct, and targets with Silver Mountain and Shotmarker generally need to be calibrated on occasion. As @FatBoy mentioned, the center can be moved to either "correct" the target or "move" the shot-out center that @rimfireninja complained about. Your concern is valid that switching to a different target mid-string can potentially throw off your "zero" since that other target may not have been calibrated. If a target goes offline and shooters move to another one, we will allow two sighters to adjust/confirm "zero".

We only calibrate our club targets when doing an EIC match since they do not have sighter shots to confirm zero-all rounds count for score.

re: my comments on our range setup, its not about target to target variances.. its about the centers being shot out (too many hits) and that can only be corrected by moving the internal"rubber bands" (and also replacing or patching the front and rear face covers, which are corrugated plastic sheet, (which help prevent wind interference within and help insulate the box from rapid temperature changes) so that there is no clear and obvious hole shot clean thru and thru.. ***both time consuming and costly if done well*** ... you cannot have a large OPEN HOLE in the "acoustic box" and actually expect to accurately plot shots resulting from INTERNAL shock waves within "the box"; there will be no true and consistent "acoustic center" .. the question is really more about just how much shot DENSITY, i.e, how many shots concentrated *within a small area*, can these type systems tolerate and still be considered truly adequate for intendsed purpose .. vendors will mislead you with carefully worded vague claims.. 300 shots.. 3000 shots... but theyt never seem to even mention shot density ..... PS Silver Mountain is NOT acoustic box, it is OPEN "single face surface", (or no surface, just mics on an open frame), no internal membranes.. cheaper, but but also less precise and generally not good for subsonic rounds, etc ... same I think for Shotmarker ?? ... I don't buy these things, I just shoot at 'em .. on the OPEN frame type there is no shot limit, there is no shot density, there is actually no physical target, its really just one BIG hole even if you cover it with a paper face, they just pick up the supersonic bullet shock wave as it passes thru frame, while also measuring the bullet velocity

 

[Tempest 455]

That is correct, and targets with Silver Mountain and Shotmarker generally need to be calibrated on occasion. As @FatBoy mentioned, the center can be moved to either "correct" the target or "move" the shot-out center that @rimfireninja complained about. Your concern is valid that switching to a different target mid-string can potentially throw off your "zero" since that other target may not have been calibrated. If a target goes offline and shooters move to another one, we will allow two sighters to adjust/confirm "zero".

We only calibrate our club targets when doing an EIC match since they do not have sighter shots to confirm zero-all rounds count for score.

We had that problem one time at a 600 yard FTR match. We had a target malfunction and had to move to spare unused target. 1st thing I noticed was, sighter shots were high and right compared to previous match. When match was over, I had done a screen shot of every match. When we went to pull the targets down, you could see where the holes in the new target were off quite a bit from center compared to the other target we were shooting.

 

[smoothy8500]

re: my comments on our range setup, its not about target to target variance

some of the LONG range centerfire shooters have some experience with this, but I find extreme little so far amongst the rimfire brethren .. not much feedback on what reasonable centerfires shots counts ought be either.. and shot density obviously matters)

One of the limitations in respect to smallbore with Silver Mountain, and it may be the same with Shotmarker, is that the projectile must be traveling at least 1,300fps to be recorded. I'm not familiar with how shot density affects scoring, at least with centerfire in respect to e-targets on F-class or NRA/CMP Highpower. In theory, you could place all shots in one hole and continually record scores, since the sensor detects the shockwave and not "impact" that's measured.

 

[rimfireninja]

yes, we know Silver Mountain and all similar OPEN frame acoustic targets have to be supersonic... the external shock wave is measured as it passes thru the OPEN frame type.. that is also why that OPEN type has to also measure bullet velocity at target, in order to calculate the mach angle ,,, there is no box, there is no necessary front plate, and, it's really still essentially just an open frame even with a paper target attached to frame front ... one shot or 10,000 shots, same spot or 1000 different spots, there is no such thing as "shot hole" (small or large) in the open frame itself, no such thing as shot density relative to open frame.. that paper target on front might as well be a hologram... but the enclosed acoustic box chamber type does just as well subsonic or supersonic, because the INTERNAL acoustic/shock wave within the box is what is measured, not the incoming external wave and the bullet velocity doesn't much matter.. the acoustic "box" is really not perfectly sealed, but it is "close enuff" for the purpose .. which is why the closed type can take just so many hits before degrading.. when you blow too many holes in it, or even just one large enough hole clean thru the enclosure front-internal membran(s)-rear plate assembly, it is then a *compromised* acoustic chamber .. so number of shots do matter, and how densely packed those shots are in a small area matters quite a lot, i.e., "shot density" .. if you are thinking too much about the "open frame" types like Silver Mountain, you will simply get confused about the "enclosed chamber" type.. they both measure acoustic waves but they do it quite differently, they are not same, same .. neither system really is measuring "impact"sound.. its not the sound of a bullet hitting a surface.. (there are other systems that may try to do that with varying success) ... it is just the pressure waves generated by the bullet passing thru.. what varies in exactly where and how the pressure wave is measured in the different systems .. OPEN is cheaper and more forgiving, but less precise and must be supersonic.. ENCLOSED is more expensive, more precise (when it's in good condition) and can do both subsonic and supersonic

 

[rimfireninja]

some part of this probl;em is that in spite of e-target proliferation there are only two or three in the USA that use the pricier enclosed type Kongsbergs I describe.. (last time I looked anyway) .. CMP in Talladega was the 1st, back in 2015, our local range is one of the very few others.. our guys "went for the gold".. and I think we are still learning.. CMP gets megabucks from Uncle Sam, we do not .. our range looks very like a smaller size version of Talladega, they went there and looked, and preety much "duplicated" everything they looked at there .. our range just opened in July...steep learning curve, and may be costly.. you cannot ghelp but fall in love with those Kongsbergs at 1st blush.. and you will continue to love them.. until maybe you don't, LOL

 

[smoothy8500]

Uhhh, OK....I'm not sure what your original question was then...

 

[rimfireninja]

I was hoping maybe someone here had been thru the learning curve specific to this KTS type sytem, and had insights to share on how big a hole and/or shot density is a practical limit.. or maybe some inexpensive solutions to improve life and reliability of targets at lesser cost

 

[rimfireninja]

from my initial post above "just looking for any comments or opinions or experiences with similar e-targets.. what round counts do YOU trust on these things, etc .. have you found any practical solutions ??? ." (but topic got sidetracked re: the OPEN type systems)

 

[rimfireninja]

local news article on our local range opening
"The Ranges at Oakfield also boast the advanced Kongsberg Target System, which gives shooters instant feedback through a monitor at their shooting station. The Ranges at Oakfield is one of ***** only five ranges in the country ***** with the target system"

Officials: Ranges at Oakfield hits the target

THOMASVILLE — State and local officials said they more than hit their target Thursday morning at the opening of the Ranges at Oakfield.

www.timesenterprise.com

 

[rimfireninja]

this is what our place looks like.. (lots of pictures) https://www.facebook.com/rangesatoakfield/?ref=page_internal

 

[rimfireninja]

and this is our KTS cloud, 20 lanes http://live.kongsberg-ts.no/showcustomer?id=86abf0a7-d959-4058-9d9d-14ec6f5b2fda&location=1&lang=en

 

[rimfireninja]

and this is CMP Talladegas KTS cloud http://live.kongsberg-ts.no/showcustomer?id=7b183624-5118-4f8d-bcc2-a0871d4c02a6&location=4

 

[rimfireninja]

post by CMP Talladega Alabama 2015 announcement on KTS .. https://www.facebook.com/cmptallade...g-target-systems-kts-these-/1562105784063341/