Plastic barrels

[Schutzenmeister]

4.1.4.2 does not define what material you use ... It merely defines what soft cover is. It is something which obscures targets but which shots may poss through for score or penalty. From Webster's:

Definition of OBSCURE

1a : dark, dim

b : shrouded in or hidden by darkness

c : not clearly seen or easily distinguished : faint <obscure markings>

I think 1c is the definition which applies to our usage. Hence, anything which the bullet may pass through for score or penalty, and which makes it difficult to see or discern the target behind it, can be used as soft cover. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the referenced sentence from 4.1.4.2 applies. My opinion only.

[aztecdriver]

the one target on the two foot stand directly behind the softcover barrel with just the center stripe of the target (aka a zone to the head) and the rest hard cover blacked out? We're saying that's illegal?

[Nik Habicht]

the one target on the two foot stand directly behind the softcover barrel with just the center stripe of the target (aka a zone to the head) and the rest hard cover blacked out? We're saying that's illegal?

If the barrel is soft cover, then yes, that would appear to be what the rules are saying.....

[sperman]

But if you declare the barrel hardcover, the target presentation is legal.

[22 shooter]

In my post: The barrels are considered hard cover and the area on the target covered by the barrel are blacked out so that if you shoot through the barrel you hit the hard cover area of the target and it is a miss.

[mhs]

In my post: The barrels are considered hard cover and the area on the target covered by the barrel are blacked out so that if you shoot through the barrel you hit the hard cover area of the target and it is a miss.

4.2.4 specifies "in one of the following ways". In your example you are using two of the ways.

4.2.4 When the scoring area of a paper target is to be partially hidden, course

designers must simulate hard cover in one of the following ways:

4.2.4.1 By actually hiding a portion of the target (see Rule 4.1.4.1).

4.2.4.2 By physically cutting targets to remove the portion deemed to be

hidden by hard cover. Such targets must be fitted with a

replacement non-scoring border, which must extend the full

width of the cut scoring area (see Rule 4.2.2).

4.2.4.3 By painting or taping the portion of the target deemed to be hidden

by hard cover a single and visibly contrasting color.

[coldchar]

Can we go back to 9.5.5 vs the 9.1 rules on full and partial hits using steel hard cover (my dream). Given that barrels are used as hard cover I am thinking that the 9.1 rules fit the situation better. At one of our well known ranges, some but not all RO's and CRO/MD use 9.5.5 to say that any hits on a barrel which then go on to hit the target are misses as it was a richochet.

That was not my understanding of the reason behind 9.5.5 and seems to be the easy way out. I am talking about definite bullet holes going from the front to the rear of the target after grazing a barrel, not a richochet off a steel target which may do weird things to an nearby target such as go thru backwards or a stick punching a hole thru the target etc.

One day I was visiting the range. On one stage I grazed the barrel and the round went on to hit the target with no weird tumblinhg. Nice clean hit. I considered it a partial hit on hard cover and apparently the RO agreed as the hit was scored and life was good. At a later stage almost an identical shot, (my day for pushing the edge) and this time another RO scored it as a miss under 9.5.5. I cut a nice neat groove on the barrel and a perfectly recognizable bullet hole on the target.

I was pissed, but did not say what I wanted to ,and went on later to chat with the MD,rm later who said all hits on paper score.

I just cannot see using 9.5.5 in that situation to solve a problem with terrible hard cover. Your thoughts?

By the way I am running a match tomorrow with barrels as hard cover and my assistant from the other range disagrees strongly with me.

[Singlestack]

If you run them as hard cover you have to maintain them. All hits must be painted, taped, fixed.

[ima45dv8]

I learned a good lesson regarding of barrel maintenance when used as hardcover at the Mississippi Classic. They simply spray paint any new hits on a barrel after each shooters run is scored. I've gone the route of pasting, and taping, and painting, but I now see that painting alone works very well. You can tell after each shooter if there is a new hit and then score appropriately. A simple and elegant solution that saves on duct tape and pasters, too.

That said, I don't like the scoring issues that result from partial hits on a medium that changes after it is struck. A bullet that otherwise could/might be visible as a partial hit on a hardcover barrel, thus clearly scoring on the target behind, sometimes causes the plastic of the barrel to 'flow' around the path of the bullet and give the appearance of a full-diameter impact. Step back a few feet and the reality of the partial-diameter hit is evident by the bulge outside the vertical edge of the barrel, but not every RO backs up a few feet to examine them.

Some of our local ranges don't even bother to write that barrels are softcover in their WSB's any more. You just know going in that to them "...a barrel is a barrel." Shoot through it if you want or can. At their range(s) they're always softcover.

[mhs]

I shot in a club match recently where plastic barrels were used as hard cover. There were several instances where the barrels were shot and the bullet continued on to hit the scoring target. When I was looking at the barrels I could find full-diameter hits that bulged out past the original edge of the barrel. These appeared as if they would have been partial diameter hits if the barrels were of a more rigid material, but the plastic barrel distorted around the bullet. How would you score the hit on the target from one of these bullets?

I work as an RO at A2 and the CRO for our stage does score by what is on the target, not by what was a partial or full hit on the barrel. If there is a circumference on the target it is scored as a hit. We can hear and sometimes see hits to the barrel, but knowing it the hits are partial or full with tape flying off is difficult to call properly, so what is on the target is used.

I look for any evidence that whatever went through that hole was a bullet. If there is no grease mark, then I need to some outline, or partial outline that I can identify as having the shape of a bullet ... the nose, the base, a radius that is appropriate for the shooter's caliber, whatever. If I cannot find such evidence, then per 9.5.5 it's a miss, not a reshoot.

That said, I don't like the scoring issues that result from partial hits on a medium that changes after it is struck. A bullet that otherwise could/might be visible as a partial hit on a hardcover barrel, thus clearly scoring on the target behind, sometimes causes the plastic of the barrel to 'flow' around the path of the bullet and give the appearance of a full-diameter impact. Step back a few feet and the reality of the partial-diameter hit is evident by the bulge outside the vertical edge of the barrel, but not every RO backs up a few feet to examine them.

Some of our local ranges don't even bother to write that barrels are softcover in their WSB's any more. You just know going in that to them "...a barrel is a barrel." Shoot through it if you want or can. At their range(s) they're always softcover.

Seems like there might be some differences of opinion as to how to score in these situations. Has anyone had one of these go to arb at a big match, or asked DNROI about it?

[ima45dv8]

I shot in a club match recently where plastic barrels were used as hard cover. There were several instances where the barrels were shot and the bullet continued on to hit the scoring target. When I was looking at the barrels I could find full-diameter hits that bulged out past the original edge of the barrel. These appeared as if they would have been partial diameter hits if the barrels were of a more rigid material, but the plastic barrel distorted around the bullet. How would you score the hit on the target from one of these bullets?

I work as an RO at A2 and the CRO for our stage does score by what is on the target, not by what was a partial or full hit on the barrel. If there is a circumference on the target it is scored as a hit. We can hear and sometimes see hits to the barrel, but knowing it the hits are partial or full with tape flying off is difficult to call properly, so what is on the target is used.

I look for any evidence that whatever went through that hole was a bullet. If there is no grease mark, then I need to some outline, or partial outline that I can identify as having the shape of a bullet ... the nose, the base, a radius that is appropriate for the shooter's caliber, whatever. If I cannot find such evidence, then per 9.5.5 it's a miss, not a reshoot.

That said, I don't like the scoring issues that result from partial hits on a medium that changes after it is struck. A bullet that otherwise could/might be visible as a partial hit on a hardcover barrel, thus clearly scoring on the target behind, sometimes causes the plastic of the barrel to 'flow' around the path of the bullet and give the appearance of a full-diameter impact. Step back a few feet and the reality of the partial-diameter hit is evident by the bulge outside the vertical edge of the barrel, but not every RO backs up a few feet to examine them.

Some of our local ranges don't even bother to write that barrels are softcover in their WSB's any more. You just know going in that to them "...a barrel is a barrel." Shoot through it if you want or can. At their range(s) they're always softcover.

Seems like there might be some differences of opinion as to how to score in these situations. Has anyone had one of these go to arb at a big match, or asked DNROI about it?

There might be a difference of opinion, but I rest easy knowing mine is the right one!

Seriously, I haven't yet seen an arb at a major using barrels as softcover. I suppose it could happen one day, but I haven't seen it yet.

[Schutzenmeister]

I just cannot see using 9.5.5 in that situation to solve a problem with terrible hard cover. Your thoughts?

The intent and purpose of 9.5.5 is to deal with situations where the hole in the target is noticably larger than the bullet being fired at it AND there is no discernable mark (grease mark, radius or crown of a bullet, etc.) along the edge of that hole indicating that a whole (or substantially whole) bullet passed through the hole. It most generally, though not always, occurs after a round has firmly struck steel and pieces of the jacket or core splatter on to the target ... which does not score.

A bullet which grazes the outside edge of a barrel, whether hard cover or soft, then goes on to strike a scoring or penalty target, should receive the appropriate score so long as there is ample evidence (see the above) that it was a bullet which passed through the target. This is what was drilled into my head over numerous Nationals and during my RM studies ...

[mhs]

Seriously, I haven't yet seen an arb at a major using barrels as softcover. I suppose it could happen one day, but I haven't seen it yet.

I meant in the case of a plastic barrel being used as hard cover, and a hit that made the plastic flow to a new position.

[mhs]

The intent and purpose of 9.5.5 is to deal with situations where the hole in the target is noticably larger than the bullet being fired at it AND there is no discernable mark (grease mark, radius or crown of a bullet, etc.) along the edge of that hole indicating that a whole (or substantially whole) bullet passed through the hole. It most generally, though not always, occurs after a round has firmly struck steel and pieces of the jacket or core splatter on to the target ... which does not score.

A bullet which grazes the outside edge of a barrel, whether hard cover or soft, then goes on to strike a scoring or penalty target, should receive the appropriate score so long as there is ample evidence (see the above) that it was a bullet which passed through the target. This is what was drilled into my head over numerous Nationals and during my RM studies ...

In the case of a bullet hitting the edge of a plastic barrel and continuing on to make a hole in a scoring target, what would you need to see on the target to not score it? I don't see any options but scoring it, unless it is clearly a small fragment.

[ima45dv8]

Seriously, I haven't yet seen an arb at a major using barrels as softcover. I suppose it could happen one day, but I haven't seen it yet.

I meant in the case of a plastic barrel being used as hard cover, and a hit that made the plastic flow to a new position.

I can't say that hasn't happened, but it hasn't happened when I was CRO on a stage with softcover barrels. Like I said, I will if necessary stand back and look at the edge of that "tunnel" the bullet sometimes makes on the edge of a barrel. If it's sticking out in space, that's a clear edge/non-full diameter hit to me. We then have to score the hit(s) on the target behind it, even if a No-Shoot that took the partial hit.

9.5.5 Enlarged holes in paper targets which exceed the competitor’s bullet diameter will not count for score or penalty unless there is visible evidence within the remnants of the hole (e.g. a grease mark or a “crown” etc.), to eliminate a presumption that the hole was caused by a ricochet or splatter.

Mike, I've had to call 9.5.5's on softcover plastic barrels, too. Shooting them is a risky proposition with some bullet/charge combinations And not necessasarily light combos either. Im not the only one who's seen 45s get sideways and come out the back of a barrel. If it rips out a big chunk plastic and hits the target flat, the hole can be impressive with no sign of a bullet impact.

"...and one Mike"

You rolls the dice; you takes your chances.

[mhs]

I've had to call 9.5.5's on softcover plastic barrels, too. Shooting them is a risky proposition with some bullet/charge combinations And not necessasarily light combos either. Im not the only one who's seen 45s get sideways and come out the back of a barrel. If it rips out a big chunk plastic and hits the target flat, the hole can be impressive with no sign of a bullet impact.

"...and one Mike"

You rolls the dice; you takes your chances.

If you read all of 9.5.5 it is meant to apply only in cases of a ricochet or splatter. 4.1.4.2 specifically states that "Shots which have passed through soft cover and which

strike a scoring target will score. Shots that have passed through soft cover before hitting a no-shoot will be penalized."

If soft cover damaged or deflected a bullet to the point that it didn't score, I would consider it REF.

[ima45dv8]

I've had to call 9.5.5's on softcover plastic barrels, too. Shooting them is a risky proposition with some bullet/charge combinations And not necessasarily light combos either. Im not the only one who's seen 45s get sideways and come out the back of a barrel. If it rips out a big chunk plastic and hits the target flat, the hole can be impressive with no sign of a bullet impact.

"...and one Mike"

You rolls the dice; you takes your chances.

If you read all of 9.5.5 it is meant to apply only in cases of a ricochet or splatter. 4.1.4.2 specifically states that "Shots which have passed through soft cover and which

strike a scoring target will score. Shots that have passed through soft cover before hitting a no-shoot will be penalized."

If soft cover damaged or deflected a bullet to the point that it didn't score, I would consider it REF.

If a large chunk of plastic propelled by a bullet rips a large hole, and the bullet passes through the hole behind it without touching the target, I have few choices on how to score that.

That's only assuming the bullet was behind it. It could have been a chuck blown off in the direction of the target while the bullet went elsewhere. Stranger things have happened.

If I can't prove it did pass through the target I can't give points for it, can I?

[mhs]

I've had to call 9.5.5's on softcover plastic barrels, too. Shooting them is a risky proposition with some bullet/charge combinations And not necessasarily light combos either. Im not the only one who's seen 45s get sideways and come out the back of a barrel. If it rips out a big chunk plastic and hits the target flat, the hole can be impressive with no sign of a bullet impact.

"...and one Mike"

You rolls the dice; you takes your chances.

If you read all of 9.5.5 it is meant to apply only in cases of a ricochet or splatter. 4.1.4.2 specifically states that "Shots which have passed through soft cover and which

strike a scoring target will score. Shots that have passed through soft cover before hitting a no-shoot will be penalized."

If soft cover damaged or deflected a bullet to the point that it didn't score, I would consider it REF.

If a large chunk of plastic propelled by a bullet rips a large hole, and the bullet passes through the hole behind it without touching the target, I have few choices on how to score that.

That's only assuming the bullet was behind it. It could have been a chuck blown off in the direction of the target while the bullet went elsewhere. Stranger things have happened.

If I can't prove it did pass through the target I can't give points for it, can I?

Soft cover is intended to obscure targets, not to deflect bullets. If I can line up the holes in a soft cover barrel, and see that the bullet should have hit the target, but didn't, or if I see an entry hole in a soft cover barrel but no exit, I would consider that REF. If I see entry and exit holes lining up with a big hole from a chunk of plastic, I would look very hard for a sign of a bullet, and barring that call REF.

[Singlestack]

Soft cover is intended to obscure targets, not to deflect bullets. If I can line up the holes in a soft cover barrel, and see that the bullet should have hit the target, but didn't, or if I see an entry hole in a soft cover barrel but no exit, I would consider that REF. If I see entry and exit holes lining up with a big hole from a chunk of plastic, I would look very hard for a sign of a bullet, and barring that call REF.

If it is soft cover, how can you be sure you are looking at the right hole in the barrel? Normally, soft cover barrels are all shot up.

[Schutzenmeister]

If I can't prove [the bullet] did pass through the target I can't give points for it, can I?

Bingo ... That's the point of 9.5.5.

Soft cover is intended to obscure targets, not to deflect bullets. If I can line up the holes in a soft cover barrel, and see that the bullet should have hit the target, but didn't, or if I see an entry hole in a soft cover barrel but no exit, I would consider that REF. If I see entry and exit holes lining up with a big hole from a chunk of plastic, I would look very hard for a sign of a bullet, and barring that call REF.

REF ... On what grounds? 4.1.4.2 merely states that softcover must obscure some part of the target. It says nothing about not deflecting or damaging the bullet in the process. In that respect, it's very "real world," if you get my meaning.

I was CRO on a stage at the last World Shoot where we had large wicker barrels, for lack of a better description. I took one look at the set up on arrival and knew that allowing them to be called hardcover was simply NOT going to work. I spoke to the RM and he agreed ... They were softcover. I briefed it as such and informed all that shot it we would score whatever the round struck if it passed through. I also pointed out that the rounds were somewhat UNLIKELY to continue in the same straight line they were fired in afterwards. Not unlike a plastic barrel, IMO. I wound up scoring more than one keyholed bullet on that stage, but gave no more than one hit per keyhole.

[mhs]

REF ... On what grounds? 4.1.4.2 merely states that softcover must obscure some part of the target. It says nothing about not deflecting or damaging the bullet in the process. In that respect, it's very "real world," if you get my meaning.

Soft cover is not intended to recognize power factor, bullet type, or velocity. If two shooters are in the same division, and their bullets are not equal in penetration and/or deflection resistance, it is an unequal shooting challenge. This would be particularly unfair if the shooter is unable to see the hits.

Edited October 2, 2010 by mhs

[Nik Habicht]

Soft cover is intended to obscure targets, not to deflect bullets. If I can line up the holes in a soft cover barrel, and see that the bullet should have hit the target, but didn't, or if I see an entry hole in a soft cover barrel but no exit, I would consider that REF. If I see entry and exit holes lining up with a big hole from a chunk of plastic, I would look very hard for a sign of a bullet, and barring that call REF.

REF ... On what grounds? 4.1.4.2 merely states that softcover must obscure some part of the target. It says nothing about not deflecting or damaging the bullet in the process. In that respect, it's very "real world," if you get my meaning.

If a large hunk of plastic is lying behind the target, there's a large hole in the target that appears to have been caused by the plastic, and the hole's large enough that a bullet could have passed through, how do we not call that REF? I'm pretty sure that softcover is not intended to be set up in such a manner that it can interfere with the targets, if it's hit....

It does require policing up the bits of barrel, or redesigning the stage, if caught early enough....

Not everything falls neatly into the rulebook. Would you ignore a large hunk of plastic on the far side of the target?

[pjb45]

What great timing for this thread. Today during a match, there was a barrel as hard cover. I had one easily recognized bullet hole and one rather large oval hole. The RO called it a mike. There were no bullet holes in the barrel, the RO acknowledged the bullet did not penetrate the barrel but glanced off it. Two easy to see the two holes in the target, RO called it an Alpha Mike.

It did invoke a lively discussion among the whole squad. I early on accepted the call.

I need to start taking my rule book to matches again.