F/TR Varmint/Heavy Sporter/Tactical Discipline?

[brown dog]

A South-West range like WMS is being worked on and may well be up and running by summer 2010 ...... there might well be a 1,400m .338max range, up and running in the next year or so:)

 

Tiff,

 

You first mentioned this in excess of 6 months ago. I have a gut feel that you're presenting a "wouldn't it be great if" idea as something rather more than it is (and the last 6 words quoted above reinforce this perception!).

 

....and so, I'd just like to get a feel for quite where this sits on the "Dream vs Reality Continuum"

 

Could you give a very broad outline of your current planning timeline (ie, what/when are the significant waypoints and go/no go criteria)?

 

A steer on the following would also be appreciated:

 

How many targets (or how many target arrays) and at what distances, how many firing points?

 

What type of targets?

 

What bearings of fire (ie all points of the compass or one direction only)?

 

What sort of acreage (single valley or multi valley)?

 

What sort of terrain (all downhill shots, or up and down?)

 

What on-site infrastructure?

 

What vehicular access to FPs?

 

Is the range to be run full time or part time?

 

 

I hope you won't feel any of that falls under the 'trade secrets' category

[Streeker59]

This thread started by looking at a way in which the sporter / varmint rifle owner could shoot on a level pegging with other such owners within a national competiton framework did it not ?

 

We've heard the pros and cons from many parties on what would work and what wouldn't and the thread has been steered from an F class format to a Tactical format. Fair enough if that's the direction the majority want to go in .

 

I cant help thinking that this style of shooting is well catered for already is it not ? Or have i missed something ?

 

http://www.practicalrifle.co.uk/

[Andrew]

I stepped away from this topic as I am truly out of my realm here but I keep thinking about it. Pardon another intrusion from a person who could only hope to someday shoot in the finalized version of the competition.

 

I like the idea of knock over targets. Make the targets scaled to the distance (smaller ones closer) and say a bank of ten per distance, say 200, 400, 600 yards. In truth it reminds me of my metallic silhouette days but it makes scoring quick and easy: if the target goes down it's a hit. If it doesn't -even after a hit - it is a miss... and no arguments. A "30" would be a Possible. A tie is settled by a shoot-off at the longest distance. A "hit or miss" scoring is something that any hunter/varmint shooter can relate to. No long discussions about scoring. No disputes. Just show up and shoot.

 

Ok. I'll go away now.~Andrew

[Streeker59]

No need to go away Andrew mate, your views and opinions are as valid and are valued as any other member of this forum...

[brown dog]

Grant,

This thread started by looking at a way in which the sporter / varmint rifle owner could shoot on a level pegging with other such owners within a national competiton framework did it not ?

Broadly, yes (although the idea is varmint/heavy sporter/tactical). But the idea of holding it within the F-Class framework was talked out; less for 'tactical' reasons and more for 'lack of flexibility' or 'constraint' reasons to my mind; see following point:

 

We've heard the pros and cons from many parties on what would work and what wouldn't and the thread has been steered from an F class format to a Tactical format. Fair enough if that's the direction the majority want to go in .

 

I don't read it that way; although some would clearly like a tactically oriented comp, the desire here is for a multi range precision rifle event that engages the interest of the raft of precision riflemen out there for which no competitive discipline exists.

 

I cant help thinking that this style of shooting is well catered for already is it not ?

http://www.practicalrifle.co.uk/

 

Although it's a great point; taking as a start point that what's being proposed is multi range precision rifle event, not a tactical event; I think the answer's 'No'.

 

I know virtually nothing about Practical Rifle; my perception is that -in broad terms it's about civvies recreating APWT type shoots. Nothing wrong with that, that's fun. But I believe it's won with straight pull AR15s, you need 20rd magazines to be competitive and the targetry is 90% Fig 11 or Fig 12 (ie not precision oriented). As such, if you turned up with a rebarrelled tikka 595 or a custom nesika heavy sporter or even a rifle with a military heritage such as an AW you'd stand no chance. (Perhaps someone who knows more on Practical rifle would like to chip in?)

 

Now, whilst I'd love for those fellows to have a crack at the comp being proposed here (ie 'inclusivity' (as long as they don't dress like they think they're prepping for re-entry to fallujah )), I would hope that in designing a precision COF with single digit round counts on each stage, we come up with something that offers no advantage to straight pull assault rifles (although I'm sure some of the accurised ones would be competitive).

 

Andrew,

 

Thanks for you ideas too. I think one of the main planning constraints here, that may not be readily apparent across the pond, is where we can run these. In UK the only readily accessible range type that's distributed across the country is the military gallery range ....and that means paper targets

 

 

 

Tiff/ TRG

 

Any response to my broad questions?

[grahamfarmer]

well we are all still trying to find some disicipline to shoot but just as an aside was watching some of the bi atholon shooting on eurosport and couldnt help but wonder at what fun you could have with a set of their reactive targets and they are only shooting rimfire at them at 50metres move them out to 300 and you could have hours of endless fun but it may become addictive.

 

 

graham.

[Tiff]

Tiff,

 

You first mentioned this in excess of 6 months ago. I have a gut feel that you're presenting a "wouldn't it be great if" idea as something rather more than it is (and the last 6 words quoted above reinforce this perception!).

 

....and so, I'd just like to get a feel for quite where this sits on the "Dream vs Reality Continuum"

 

Could you give a very broad outline of your current planning timeline (ie, what/when are the significant waypoints and go/no go criteria)?

 

A steer on the following would also be appreciated:

 

How many targets (or how many target arrays) and at what distances, how many firing points?

 

What type of targets?

 

What bearings of fire (ie all points of the compass or one direction only)?

 

What sort of acreage (single valley or multi valley)?

 

What sort of terrain (all downhill shots, or up and down?)

 

What on-site infrastructure?

 

What vehicular access to FPs?

 

Is the range to be run full time or part time?

 

 

I hope you won't feel any of that falls under the 'trade secrets' category

 

Hi BD,

 

It is very much a reality as far as the site goes and the shooting we do there

 

The problem is getting away from using an open ticket zeroing condition on an FAC and making it suitable legally for pure target shooters.

 

The issue here is the danger area required. I'll try and explain a bit about the range in the process.

 

There are 3 firing points progressing up the hill, one at 600m, 1,000m and 1,400m - all of which are accessible by vehicle. There is also a farmhouse on the site, so WC's, and food is not a problem. The targets are on the valley floor and opposing base of the valley, so all downhill shots.

 

The targets themselves are at varying distances between 400 yards from the furthest to closest (i.e. at 600 FP the closet is 200 yards away).

 

They are all within a 30 degree arc of fire. While fairly compact, this is necessary to be within the 'danger area' at is maximum 4034 yards.

 

All the reactive steel (gongs, fallers etc.) currently sit in the open. However we are still seeking clarification on how much they need to be dug in/encased the show that a ricochet outside of the danger area is not possible - thereby avoiding field firing classification and remaining within the 'stop butt' principal of a galley range. This is one of the key points that we are addressing, since it will affect the type, amount and positioning of the targets.

 

The other key issue is the legality of the danger area - this is the main problem we currently face.

 

Originally we assumed the opposite valley side at 250+' high above the highest target, would be sufficient to negate the need for a danger area. However due to the angles involves ect. the advice we received from a friend at the TAS of the army range inspectorate at Warminster was that the hill was of insufficient height to meet current regulations. Something that we are more than a bit confused by, considering the only 2 civilian run gallery 600 yard ranges in Devon and Cornwall both have a smaller vertical high hill behind them.

 

So we are therefore looking at having to incorporate land beyond which the single farmer owns. This is where it gets complicated...the land beyond is large enough to easily accommodate a 4,034 yard danger area required by .338. However it is open common land (4 commoners who are all ok with it), however they do not have the legal right to stop public access for anything other than work connected to their livestock. So we would need the introduction of a new bylaw....something we currently do not have the funds or time to try and get. In addition we would need a 3,000 ft aerial exclusion for the .338's to be used, so more legal costs there...

 

This issue above is the only seriously major issue we currently face, that is preventing it from becoming a reality for 'pure target' shooters. It's classification also affects whether it is run part-time (under 28 days) or as a full time range.

 

All of the above issues and other more minor ones, are being looked into from all the various angles which does take time I'm afraid.

 

As it currently stands there would be virtually no problem by summer 2010 inviting people with open vermin/fox/deer tickets to come and 'zero' their rifles. However depending on how easily we resolve the issues above, the time it takes to become a 'range' is still uncertain.

 

I hope that answers some questions and I'm sorry about being a bit vague with regards to location etc, but until we have all the required paperwork etc. in place we are keeping it quiet.

[brown dog]

Tiff/TRG (what am I to call you?! )

 

Good info. Thanks.

 

Big hand small map; where are you? (eg what's the nearest large town?)

 

Originally we assumed the opposite valley side at 250+' high above the highest target, would be sufficient to negate the need for a danger area. However due to the angles involves ect. the advice we received from a friend at the TAS of the army range inspectorate at Warminster was that the hill was of insufficient height to meet current regulations. Something that we are more than a bit confused by, considering the only 2 civilian run gallery 600 yard ranges in Devon and Cornwall both have a smaller vertical high hill behind them.

 

I would hazard a guess that he's advising you on the basis of the fact that you're firing at hard targets (I also suspect that there is no amount of digging in or sandbagging that will change a hard target into a soft target in the eyes of the Army).

[Andrew]

Ah. I keep forgetting about space constraints. That does present a problem for steel targets. Pity. I have an (informal but usable) 800 yard range 5 minutes from my house, and a 1200 yard range another 15 minutes past that. We could be shooting within the hour... ~Andrew

[Tiff]

Tiff/TRG (what am I to call you?! )

 

Good info. Thanks.

 

Big hand small map; where are you? (eg what's the nearest large town?)

 

 

 

I would hazard a guess that he's advising you on the basis of the fact that you're firing at hard targets (I also suspect that there is no amount of digging in or sandbagging that will change a hard target into a soft target in the eyes of the Army).

 

 

Hi Brown Dog,

 

Very roughly it would not be all that far from Launceston, Cornwall.

 

With regards to the hard targets, from our initial investigations it does seem that provided we can demonstrate no rounds will leave the area they would be allowed. However since the Army no longer carry out the inspections, its got a whole lot harder finding out clear facts without having to pay a consultant for them.

 

As for the name, It's Tiff

[onehole]

308 only,max 12x scope,List of approved Factory sporter/varminter actions at outset.{no exceptions}No alterations whatsoever other than a rebarrell {if necessary} in original type weight/format.Sounds simple doesn,t it?

Could also be an excuse/reason for another gun!!!!bril,cheers Onehole.

[Andrew]

308 only,max 12x scope,List of approved Factory sporter/varminter actions at outset.{no exceptions}No alterations whatsoever other than a rebarrell {if necessary} in original type weight/format.Sounds simple doesn,t it?

Could also be an excuse/reason for another gun!!!!bril,cheers Onehole.

 

If you allow "rebarrel" you open the flood gates to a major money race. How would one determine if the rebarreling was necessary... retrospectively? A custom barrel / chamber is just that and a decided advantage over most factory rifles if done correctly. My 2 cents... again! ~Andrew

[onehole]

I think the rebarrel element is relatively unimportant given the other total restrictions,theres more out there to mess you up that a barrel job wont help you with?

[Andrew]

I think the rebarrel element is relatively unimportant given the other total restrictions,theres more out there to mess you up that a barrel job wont help you with?

 

When I do a barrel I lap the locking lugs and square the receiver. It's just a standard of practice for many gunsmiths when rebarreling. If all else was equal, this would provide a distinct advantage for a particular shooter.JHMO~Andrew

[ds1]

If the course of fire is good then very few restictions are needed to make a level playing field. The idea is inclusivity.

 

Possibly only 3 restricions are needed - whatever is attached to the rifle in one position remains attached in all positions with the exception of a rear bag; so a ski bipod would be a plus prone but a minus standing, it would also rule out front rest. Rifle must have a saftey. Only field type clothes can be worn - so no target shooting jackets and padded gloves to gain an advantage.

 

David.

[onehole]

Personally I cant see the problem with allowing rebarrels.{a} what does a half decent sporter cost?perhaps £600-£1200? new or get a donor cheap and get it rebarrelled for say £600.Pays your money and take your choice.One front bag rest and thats it.Major money race don,t think so given the other restrictions.

[Andrew]

But if the rebarreled rifle is seen (perceived) to have given a competitive edge in the comp, the barrels will start coming off right and left; from a "donor" or no. Maybe you're right though. If rebarreled to sporter configuration and no other allowances made, I guess it would be all right. It's been my experience that in the end, it's the indian, not the arrow.~Andrew

[menial 1]

I have three rifles with factory actions that have been rebarrelled because they needed it or I wanted to change calibre using the existing .308 boltface.

They are all field use rifles and I'm fecked if I'm going to buy a new factory rifle to take part in a competition that was deemed to include allcomers

(if you can carry it, you can use it).

This could easily turn into an arms race when the man with the most wedge and time to practice just keeps buying new rifles till he finds a real shooter, so where would be the point to "over the counter only".

Is the man that finds his factory rifle shoots brilliantly with the factory barrel going to sell that action on when the barrel's done and take the chance that the next rifle be a shooter or simply put another barrel of your choice on what is obviously a good action, I know what I'd do.

I thought the idea was for a competition to reflect the shooters ability with limited time and kit and I really can't see those that have kit that would be deemed suitable saying bugger it, I''l blow another grand on a factory rifle I don't really want just so I can take part.

There's plenty of comps. with enough restrictions already, let's not see another one created.

Not all men are created equal, financially or physically, but it's a well known fact that in any sport, that any participant with sufficient skill level, finances

and decent equipment can excel with plenty of practice and dedication, practice to hone your existing skills costs money, if you don't have the time and the finances available you won't compete on that level playing field that everyone seems to think exists.

Sometimes you just have to piss with the cock you've got, not the one you wish you had.

Pete.

[TC]

Sometimes you just have to piss with the cock you've got, not the one you wish you had.

Pete.

 

A gem Pete

 

TC

[oaken]

Thankyou to Brown Dog for introducing me to the site, I had no idea there was a forum for this section of the shooting community and with regard to this thread I think it needs resurrecting as it seems to be just what I have been looking for.

I relish the way the discussion is coming around to a kind or amalgam between hunting and tactical disciplines rather than yet another subdivision of Fclass

 

First and foremost IMHO it needs to be called PRECISION HUNTER CLASS.

 

FTR used to be the sporter version of Fclass but everyone who wants to be competitive has tweaked their gear to the max. I guess that is human nature.

As I see it there are 4 main features that you must have on an FTR rifle for it to be effectively competitive, features that you will specify when building a rifle for FTR.

1/ The barrel will be 30” or longer

2/ The max weight of all components will be as near to weight limit as possible

3/ The bipod will be as stable as possible meaning it has a wide base and is rigid

4/ The scope will have at least 25x Mag

 

So, imho the simplest way to knock out the purpose built rigs is to have a max barrel length of 28” and an overall wheight of 16lb, a folding bipod that fixes to a lug that is fixed directly into the stock and a scope that comes down to 6x mag in a variable or a maximum of 18x in fixed mag.

 

Strait away all the purpose built FTR rigs would be excluded and the new PRECISION HUNTER CLASS would cater for all factory models (Stalker and Varmint) and standard rifles that have been modified - set triggers, fancy stocks, moderators, aftermarket barrels, home loaded ammo would all be acceptable, it would also include any calibre within a 3250fps and/or 4500joules(military ranges) limit.

 

This would accommodate the majority, including those with unusual hunting calibres. Those with modified rifles will not be excluded as most of us have a hunting rifle that we have had restocked or rebarrelled with a longer, heavier profile with a view to doing a bit of longer range precision shooting. In my experience, time spent behind the trigger is far more important than upgrading to a fancy new trigger!

 

Other factors could be introduced, like reducing the number of shots to 2 per target with no sighters and having difficult angles of fire from different firing points and having to carry your gear from point to point , there are venues that can cater for this, WMS or Tiffs project in Cornwall would be perfect.

 

I also think that by calling it PRECISION HUNTER CLASS, any rifle that appears to be purpose built rather than merely modified will automatically be frowned upon. The kudos in winning the PRECISION HUNTER CLASS would be enhanced if done with an off the shelf rifle. This could be emphasized by having a prize specifically for the best score with an unmodified rifle and promoted as more important than the overall highest score.

 

In fact I really like the way some air rifle clubs don't give the sponsors prizes to the winner, they raffle them amongst the competitors to prevent the trophy hunter mentality that always creeps in to these competitive events.

 

I must apologise for rattling on in my first post but projects like this need to be encouraged.

 

Matt, anything I can do to help, please ask.

 

Rup

[brown dog]

Rup,

 

Thanks for the resurrection!

 

Can't remember why attention wandered away from this -stunned to see a year has slipped by since we reached a 'visualised endstate'.

 

Right, the (possibly!) good news: The concept is having the dust blown-off it by one of the fellows here. Broad aim is to run a comp along the lines described earlier in the thread. Hopefully first half of next year. Hopefully Bisley. (Although, note the use of 'hopefully' ).

 

For ease; here's where we got to, this is broadly the current visualisation, The relevant chap is overseas just now, but may be able to chip in an update next week.

 

 

 

In line with what David suggests, I'm now visualising something that can be standardised to run on any 600m gallery range at paper targets.

 

The challenge will come in the way it's run and the nature of the targets cherry-picking what we can from the CZ ideas( I also think Bisley buy-in to both the requirement/concept and the comp design itself is vital). This sounds pretty much spot on (apart from the waffle pish about rempel bipods ):

...the COF seems to offer a reasonable balance where factory sticks are competitive. For example by having no sighters or spotted shots you balance 6mm and 6.5mm BC advantages against 308 Wins bigger hole in the target - easier to see esp at 300m in black targets. By keeping comps to 500m or so max the 6mm et al BC advantage does not really shine through. A COF requiring 5 shots within 2 mins or 2 shots in 2 seconds also balance against big boomers - 338 Lapua etc, where recovery time is longer between shots.

 

By doing away with crutches such as sighters, wind flags and spotted shots you start to test the person and how well he or she knows their kit. The idea is to ask one self "do I shoot well" not do I shoot well under a series of artifical conditions. Whens the last time you saw a varmint with a pouch full of marker disk - if you miss you see the splash or you dont.

 

.... At the same time inovation should not be stiffled - last year German SEK used X boxes to support rifles and not bipods, use a front rest if you like - but carry the bugger. This year a bloke from URNA and I will try the Rempel ski bipods - any better than a Harris - dont know yet. The acid test is what won last year - a 308 Win Blaser LRS2 with 6.5-20x Leupold, factory ammo. Nothing that special really, just a special bloke behind the trigger.

 

Some thought to the COF would tend to level the playing field quite well and allow for an inclusive aproach.

 

I would stick to standard distances, say 100, 300, 500, 600 yard courses - just for ease of running on UK ranges.

 

 

How long should a relay be? 45 mins?

 

If so -300m 5 shots standing unsupported fb 5 sitting precision; dress back to 500 and ready to fire within 5 mins; 10 shots at precision targets -know your limits type stuff etc, dress back to 600 and ready to fire within 5 mins & repeat.

 

Could be run with all shooters dressing back together or a la century with 3 lanes doing 300, 3 lanes doing 500 etc and move between relays.

 

No faffing, no sighters, rigidly enforced time limits.

 

Whole thing from first to last round on a time limit -10 mins to shoot relay. Once relay has ended; m5 mins to be ready at the next place etc.

Too slow setting up = 'unlucky' no reshoots.

Jams /failures to fire = 'unlucky' no reshoots.

Rounds not on target area= penalty points.

 

No rifle restrictions less for range limitations.

 

-the 300m standing and sitting unsupported as well as sharp time limits will thin out the F Class attitudes (sorry, that term made me laugh in an earlier post..couldn't think of a better one).

[oaken]

I shall be watching with interest

[terryh]

Matt,

 

A simple addition to the rules that we've instagated at my club is 'magazine fed', this removes the 'race gun' from the list and opens it up to real rifles that we are basically talking about.

 

The 'you carry it' is another good idea - you start the day with all your kit, no additions during the day, you want it, you hump it. Food and water excluded BTW.

 

The other standards already listed like no sighters, ralistic but compressed times for stages to create stress, add only one 'technical' point to think about per stage will sharpen things up. If at Bisley possibly hire the McQueens and then add a couple of no shoots in the series?

 

Terry

[AHPP]

I've had quite a good read of this thread (albeit getting a little comatose in the middle) but like the way it's going. I think that formal F class and F/TR can be left alone for the moment but am interested in the tactical/pecision hunter/field/sniper sort of competition as a "new" development.

I'm currently seeing it as a practical rifle meets service rifle meets US comps like the Snipers Hide Cup meets CZ plod comps. I like the idea of limitations along the lines of time constraints, difficult terrain and practicalities as opposed to prescribing a certain shooting position for a certain stage, having equipment limitations etc. A competition where you're moving quickly between firing points and needing to a make a horizontal shot from a 45degree slope will not be won by people lugging benchrest rifles and trying to shoot from prone all the time.

 

As for not wanting to come over as a bunch of walts, who cares. This sort of shooting appeals to lots of people and is a good challenge. I for one would happily sign my name up to the "Annual Walter Mitty Camouflage Underpants Tactical Weapons Civillian Sniper Competition" because it sounds fun.

I daresay there's also scope for competition with the army/police a little down the line.

[baldie]

An excellent comp could be sorted with all these great idea,s....but the most important point is the venue. It needs to be at Bisley.