The electronic targets at Talladega CMP range

Yesterday the CMP held a rimfire and pistol EIC match at the new range in Talladega.  Dane Hogle and myself made some inquiries about the match.  Specifically how the electronic targets worked.

It has come to our attention that the targets were scored using the center of the bullet hole, not the edge as prescribed by the rules.  This information came from an email written by COO Mark Johnson to Dane.

This is a clear rule violation.

5.10.1 Scoring Individual Shots
All shots shall be scored according to the highest value scoring ring that is hit or touched by that shot. A shot hole where the outside edge of the shot hole touches or is tangent to the outside edge of the scoring ring must be scored the higher value.

Scoring targets using the center point of the bullet hole will cost shooters match points and even worse, cost them precious leg points.

Electronic targets may very well be the future of our sport. The problem that many of us have is the way certain people at the CMP and NRA are trying to implement them before they are truly ready to be used.

Interesting but it won't cost anyone a match or Leg Points as everyone is being subject to the same conditions.

Kevin, 
The electronic targets are not using the edge of the hole. They are using the center. If you were to shoot a NMC on paper with the exact shot placement as you did on an electronic target you can lose points because of how the target is scored.

Wouldn't the target program have an input compensation for the bullet diameter?

I have an email in to the TECHNICAL director to clarify.

Bullet impact is determined by the center of the bullet but they use the diameter of the bullet to score as per the Konsberg technical data. A target mask is established with a default bullet size and scores are determined based on this size. There are target masks on the Kronsberg website for NRA pistol targets with .22 (5.56mm) & .45 (11.43mm) defaults.

What is in question is did they change the default bullet size by shooter as in centerfire portion .32 or 9mm verses the default of .45.

- Dave

What is stored in the system data is the impact point, scores are determined based on this info (using the target default bullet diameter) this may be where the confusion is coming from.

I did not see them survey the line prior to the first shot in Relay 3 of the Service Pistol EIC match, nor did my score change later on in the day (as could have happened if they collected caliber data from the filled out scorecards).  Unless they have some sort of automated way of detecting the bullet diameter when the shot is fired, it would seem that no distinction was made between .45 and 9mm.  I do know that a manual change to account for diameter was previously required in the system when, at a practice session weeks prior while the range was still being set up, I switched from .22 to .45.  Since no one asked or verified Sunday whether I was using .45 or 9mm, I wonder how the difference in diameter was accounted for.  If the diameter difference was not accounted for, then obviously .45 shooters were penalized, and the results questionable.  The CMP, from the highest levels, really should address this and let us know what the system is capable of, how it works in general terms, and recognize if a mistake was made.

I wish the CMP would act as if it was important to them to get things right.  They seem to just want to get things done.

Wouldn't it have been best to bring this up before shots were fired?

We really didn't know whether they had everything figured out until after the match.  If we had received answers that were consistent with the rules, we wouldn't have had this discussion.

I'm not sure we would have known which questions to ask if we asked prior to the match.

Is this not how electronic target scoring machines work ?

The rules were made for 2 legged mammals with eyeballs using plugs and overlays.
The computer uses acoustics and a program, not eyes/vision.

If the machine knows the exact center of the target, scoring ring sizes, bullet diameter then it can acoustically locate the shot in the target as they were designed to do.

They have been using these things in the international/Olympic arena for awhile with good success.

Clarence

Did the targets turn?  If not, are we surprised that other things were done differently?

First matches have these types of occurrences. 

The rifle EIC at the 2014 Eastern Games was fired in a manner different than the rules. Nothing happened. The lesson learned is to shoot better no matter what.

Clarence,

There is no problem with international shooting on electronic targets because so many of those targets never need to measure holes made by any caliber other than .22 since centerfire competitions on electronic targets are so much rarer, and the maximum caliber for international is .38

dronning has posted that the electronic targets are reprogrammable to consider the size of the shooter's bullet, but that doesn't seem to have been done at this match.

Rob Kovach wrote:dronning has posted that the electronic targets are reprogrammable to consider the size of the shooter's bullet, but that doesn't seem to have been done at this match.

Well Rob, then that is a horse of a different color.
I figured they would have used the proper programming.
You would think that would be obvious when shooting a CF match.

Clarence

Ive read several replies from the cmp and none said they were not done right, they just said, values were based off the center of the shot, that's how its always been done off the center with the score going to the circumference allowed for the caliber. is this just speculation or did someone loose points cause a shot was not scored right? What I understood from before when we had many pages of topics on electronic targets is it recognized the fired shot by its size and scored accordingly.

Rob Kovach wrote:...
dronning has posted that the electronic targets are reprogrammable to consider the size of the shooter's bullet, but that doesn't seem to have been done at this match.

The Kongsberg systems can accommodate bullets ranging from .17 to .50.

Based on some of the info from people that attended the match no one was asked for their caliber so I guess that a .22 default target mask was used for the .22 matches and a .45acp target mask for all other matches. Unless an official walked the line and took notes of what was being shot and entered the info without the shooters knowledge - I guess anything is possible.

- Dave

So, someone shooting a 9mm, may have scored slightly higher than they would have if conventionally scored. That can be fixed.

The rifle shooters got printouts of each stage and the score. Did the pistol shooters get the same printouts?

How do you challenge an electronic score???

james r chapman wrote:How do you challenge an electronic score???

Several of the electronics have an indexing paper back up. Electronic scores can be challenged. I've seen targets malfunction. The results can be obtained.

How do these electric targets score/sense a miss?  Shots that hit the framework or miss all together?

They score the miss by the count of impacts in the scoring area.

It would be nice to know if they turned.

Jack H wrote:How do these electric targets score/sense a miss?  Shots that hit the framework or miss all together?

Just like on paper there is no hole. Is there anything preventing you from shooting an 11th shot other than your conscience, no but just like on paper if you get caught you get DQ'd

- Dave

BUt I an a bad shot and can't count and fired 3 misses.  Also my neighbor crossfired on me twice......

The electronic targets don't have the capability of turning. It exposes the sensors to getting shot

Jack H wrote:BUt I an a bad shot and can't count and fired 3 misses.  Also my neighbor crossfired on me twice......

How would you score that on paper LOL!

- Dave

Rob,  How did the targets move from 50 to 25? Were they on rails?

Len