Shooting the breeze BASC - The British Association for Shooting and Conservation  
Go Back   Shooting the breeze > The Chat > Hunter / Field Target

Hunter / Field Target Anything metal target related...

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 29th April 2014, 06:54 PM
Yorkshiretea's Avatar
Yorkshiretea Yorkshiretea is online now
B Grade Bandit
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Member of: Anston FTC
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 2,356
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobF View Post
Firstly the big thing about shooters is that they aren't very objective and scientific. They're generally swayed by feeling and impression over cold hard data, and this is where I think the device would score... as an objective training aid.
I don't think that is true Rob, there's something to be said for being comfortable on the gun but have you met Brian Samson
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 29th April 2014, 06:58 PM
JamesO's Avatar
JamesO JamesO is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 797
Default

I don't think this is for me. But I see no reason why people shouldn't use them if that is what they fancy doing.

The beauty of FT is the fact that we can play around with our kit, we aren't restricted like many target sports are.

Also we should be encouraged that a company is willing to invest in a controversial bit of kit for FT, shows we are here to stay
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 29th April 2014, 07:09 PM
saddler's Avatar
saddler saddler is offline
Phil Gee
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Member of: Millride
Location: Pelsall, West Mids
Posts: 698
Default

Seems like a very technical solution to a problem that doesn't exist, but I'd say if someone wants to spend 450 on one, then knock yourself out
__________________
Big Nikko
Millride FTC
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 29th April 2014, 07:10 PM
RobF's Avatar
RobF RobF is offline
My Empire of Dirt
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Member of: Southampton Buccaneers, Parkstone, South Dorset
Location: Poole, Dorset
Posts: 10,564
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yorkshiretea View Post
I don't think that is true Rob, there's something to be said for being comfortable on the gun but have you met Brian Samson
I don't follow.

Yep comfort is important to a certain extent but you can't record comfort to a specific degree. Like pain or discomfort. Or without kit you can't record wobble objectively.

Start sticking recording equipment into the training process and it reveals all sorts of things that apparently shooters don't do.
__________________
BFTA/NSRA County Coach
CSFTA Chairman/BFTA Rep
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 29th April 2014, 07:25 PM
Yorkshiretea's Avatar
Yorkshiretea Yorkshiretea is online now
B Grade Bandit
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Member of: Anston FTC
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 2,356
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobF View Post
I don't follow.

Yep comfort is important to a certain extent but you can't record comfort to a specific degree. Like pain or discomfort. Or without kit you can't record wobble objectively.

Start sticking recording equipment into the training process and it reveals all sorts of things that apparently shooters don't do.
It was a jokey quip at you saying that shooters aren't objective etc,

I think they very much are, perhaps some can't verbalise it but I very much disagree with your opening statement. Bri is one of the most technical people I know in the game, he knows the theory and practice but I also believe that many others shoot well without knowing all the theory because they've put the practice in and do things automatically and there's nowt wrong with that either.

I can see that the DSW would be useful but still not seeing the massive advantage unless it's super accurate on the wheel movement beyond 45yds and the human hand and eye has a lot of difficult on those final 4 to 5 mill on the wheel between 50 and 55yds. I know John said it could measure 2 microns but the human hand isn't that accurate.

I don't think it should be banned either but I'm interested to see how it develops.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 29th April 2014, 08:35 PM
RobF's Avatar
RobF RobF is offline
My Empire of Dirt
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Member of: Southampton Buccaneers, Parkstone, South Dorset
Location: Poole, Dorset
Posts: 10,564
Default

I think Brian is probably the exception to the rule. he seems to actually work with some data...

But how many times have we heard about lock time being better on x gun, or how much power a gun is running because of the way it hits a target or the time it takes to get there. How much wind a stripper takes or how much recoil it reduces. Shooters that don't cant or ******. Scopes that rangefind better than others. Etc... How is all this actually measured?

It's probably a good example that you are saying shooters are objective that reinforces my point... How have you measured this exactly? From my experience of coaching many think they are but it's only when you get something to actually record the data do you see the difference between their perception and reality.
__________________
BFTA/NSRA County Coach
CSFTA Chairman/BFTA Rep
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 29th April 2014, 09:26 PM
Yorkshiretea's Avatar
Yorkshiretea Yorkshiretea is online now
B Grade Bandit
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Member of: Anston FTC
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 2,356
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobF View Post
I think Brian is probably the exception to the rule. he seems to actually work with some data...
Now, I love a bit of data and a good chart but I could point you at at least 5 AA shooters that stand nothing like all the data in the books suggest, yet they seem to hit the targets in spite of that and with any equipment they pick up. Is that some kind of new repeatable luck?

Do you think the data would make any difference to them? My argument rests on they are objective because they don't know the data or care about it, their facts are what is the gun doing and what is the wind doing. Your facts while technical correct have no influence and seemingly aren't required, yet they just carry on winning regardless. They can still be objective, they're not influenced, I'd argue that it's actually automatic and reinforced via repetition. Another example could be driving a car, when was the last time you had to think about the actual mechanics of driving from one place to another?

Last edited by Yorkshiretea; 29th April 2014 at 09:38 PM. Reason: Typo
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 29th April 2014, 09:48 PM
RobF's Avatar
RobF RobF is offline
My Empire of Dirt
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Member of: Southampton Buccaneers, Parkstone, South Dorset
Location: Poole, Dorset
Posts: 10,564
Default

One of the problems shooters have is a hard time seperating result from the process.

There are those shooters however who do that. I can think of two shooters this weekend. One dropped less than 6 and said he wasn't shooting well mind. Another dropped many more and said he was shooting well. That's because they are objective enough to seperate the process they can control from the result they can't.
That's not a common trend. The more common trend is that a score is a reflection on their shooting even though it's affected by variables outside of that shooters control.

It's only with data can you actually determine the bit you have control over is better.
You will tend to find the better shots that are consistent have the better approaches. But that doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement. And knowing or trying to work out where that improvement can be made is better off starting with data than trial and error, guess work, or luck.

Tell me, how do you know the scope you are using is the best for you for rangefinding? Did you get the idea from someone else? Did you try all the scopes and blind test your consistency and accuracy? Did you keep the one you had some good results with? How does it compare with other scopes?

When you look at how people learn, very few naturally work in a logical manner to determine the best result. Most are just happy to take the shortcuts that get them close or that fit the bill. If they get the results they expect or want generally they are happy. Doesn't mean though that they are performing at their optimum.
__________________
BFTA/NSRA County Coach
CSFTA Chairman/BFTA Rep
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 29th April 2014, 09:51 PM
RobF's Avatar
RobF RobF is offline
My Empire of Dirt
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Member of: Southampton Buccaneers, Parkstone, South Dorset
Location: Poole, Dorset
Posts: 10,564
Default

I'd also say that a lot of AAs don't stand the ideal way you would in 10m but that's because they tend to use rigs compromised by other positions which throw you out of the ideal.
__________________
BFTA/NSRA County Coach
CSFTA Chairman/BFTA Rep
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 29th April 2014, 10:05 PM
Steve Steve is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 686
Default

I agree with Rob.Anything that helps you to analyse your shooting is good.You can shoot hundreds if not thousands of pellets at 10m,but shoot for an hour using a Scatt and as long as you can understand the data it will be worth months of practise.
Yes there's shooters that are overly naturally talented but for the mere mortals amongst us if its within the rules why not?
I had a quick play on Sunday with it.would I buy one?Yes probably,will it improve me?No,my range and clicks are on my side wheel already,but its new and it adds to the enjoyment.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rowan Enginering Steve Bowers General Airgun Chat 0 4th May 2012 05:15 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
shooting-the-breeze.com Skin design and concept by Attitude