Help with USPSA rules in these situations, please

[dv8]

Hi guys,

It's not a great image (I'm still looking for an actual photo), but here's a diagram of a Forward Falling Pepper Popper ("FFPP").

Vince,

Looks like it should be more reliable than the evil ones. Can such popper still be set up to fail somehow?

[Vince Pinto]

Can such popper still be set up to fail somehow?

Not in my experience.

When set, they're angled forward (at, say, 15 degrees?), and they're held in that angle by a loose hook. When you shoot them, they rock back a nano-smidgeon (say, 1-2 degrees), the hook reacts to gravity, then the popper flops forwards and out of the "V" channel, because they are simply not permitted by design to rock rearwards beyond the vertical when shot.

Build one, and you'll see how deceptively simple (and reliable) they are.

[davidwiz]

Vince, I think you meant 4.4.2; 4.5.2 deals with removing a stage from the match due to chronic malfunctioning equipment.

And while your reading of Appendix C, and the paragraph you quoted above is correct, have a look at the first paragraph of Appendix C on pg. 82 where it says,

When Pepper Poppers are used in competition, the Range Master shall make arrangements to ensure that they are calibrated prior to comencement of the competition, and at any time required during the competition.  Ephasis added.

The US rules use the same quoted language on pg. 83 of Appendix C. And, refer to the language that myself and Troy quoted above that says, "In cases where the calibration of the popper is brought into question..."

I'm not seeing how a popper can be challenged (for correct calibration) only if the current compeitor (if I'm reading correctly what you wrote) calls for a calibration, as opposed to anyone with a concern about the calibration before the start of COF, as laid out in Rule 4.4.2 and other language in Appendix C.

-David

[omnia1911]

4.4 deals with Rearrangement Of Range Equipment Or Surface.

4.4.1 (paraphrased) states that the competitor cannot rearrange the ground or range equipment prior to shooting a stage.

4.4.2 (paraphrased) states that the competitor can get the CRO or the RM to rearrange the ground or range equipment on his behalf, provided the Official believes that a correction is warranted.

In the case of poppers, an Official cannot determine if a calibration/correction is/was warranted without actaully shooting the popper, as the competitor would during his COF, to see if it falls.

4.5.1 (paraphrased) gives a non-inclusive list of possible range equipment failures. A suspected mis-calibrated popper is not mentioned. All the items listed in 4.5.1 and 4.5.1.1 relate to equipment that failed after the COF started or was completed, requiring a re-shoot. In the case of a popper that doesn't fall after the start signal, Appendix C applies.

[omnia1911]

Can such popper still be set up to fail somehow?

Not in my experience.

When set, they're angled forward (at, say, 15 degrees?), and they're held in that angle by a loose hook. When you shoot them, they rock back a nano-smidgeon (say, 1-2 degrees), the hook reacts to gravity, then the popper flops forwards and out of the "V" channel, because they are simply not permitted by design to rock rearwards beyond the vertical when shot.

Build one, and you'll see how deceptively simple (and reliable) they are.

If the base that a FFPP is mounted on somehow shifts due to the repeated falling of the popper, wouldn't it possibly come out of adjustment, as any other popper design would?

[dv8]

If the base that a FFPP is mounted on somehow shifts due to the repeated falling of the popper, wouldn't it possibly come out of adjustment, as any other popper design would?

It is probably possible, but the good news is that it would be immediately apparent to the guy resetting the FFPP. All you'd have to do is to make sure the popper doesn't fall back.

[omnia1911]

If the base that a FFPP is mounted on somehow shifts due to the repeated falling of the popper, wouldn't it possibly come out of adjustment, as any other popper design would?

It is probably possible, but the good news is that it would be immediately apparent to the guy resetting the FFPP. All you'd have to do is to make sure the popper doesn't fall back.

Whether it kept falling backwards and wouldn't stay hooked, or not, isn't the adjustment that I would be concerned about. I'm concerned about the base shifting so that the forward pressure is too heavy, which would prevent a minor caliber from pushing the popper back to release the retaining hook. That maladjustment is not as readily apparent to someone setting the steel.

[mactiger]

I'll post a final statement here, because this thread has drifted quite a bit, (with plenty of help from me, I'm sure).

4.5.2 The competitor may request that Match Officials take corrective actions to ensure consistency in respect of the range surface, the presentation of targets and/or any other matter. The Range Master will have final authority concerning all such requests.

The rules (both USPSA 14th and the new Jan. 2004 edition) can be read to say (and I don't think that Vince has shown otherwise) that a competitor can request the range staff/RM to take certain actions. The rules do not say that the request must be honored. So, for all of you that think this will delay some match beyond infinity--the final action rests with the RM. The rules do not specifically prohibit such requests. If you'll go back and read what I wrote, you'll see that I never said it had to be done, only that a competitor could request a calibration check. Competitors can request a lot of other things, too--those requests may or may not be granted, but nothing says you can't ask.

David Wiz summed it up pretty well.

As for setting poppers, we don't normally initially set a popper to fall by shooting it. It's set by finger testing, looking, pushing, whatever, and then it's shot to check it's calibration: to ensure that it falls when struck by minor ammo. There are tons of ways to check a popper during a course to make sure that it's staying in about the same position, calibration wise, and a good CRO/RO will make sure that their steel is maintained.

Troy

[BDH]

Anyway, I convinced him, in a kind and gentle way, not to &$%# with competitor's minds, and he relented. He also thought there was a solar eclipse when I was speaking with him (Hi BDH!)

Huh? What did I do to get brought into this fray?

I've just been minding my own business....

[omnia1911]

I would like to see King Vinnie consider eliminating the power factor requirement for poppers, and the present calibration methods used in the rule book.

Use the major/minor scoring on paper and the chrono to test for power.

I would use the method that Troy mentioned in his last post for setting the poppers by the "touch method".

The RO/CRO, with a minimal amount of experience, can learn to use this method each time the popper is set for the next shooter to insure that any maladjustment that occurs after falling is adjusted out immediately. We use this method at our monthly matches, and it is a quick and easy system to use. Setting the popper just beyond its point of falling will insure that any USPSA legal ammo will knock it over. I have rarely, if ever, seen a popper that doesn't fall when maintained in this fashion.

If the popper falls when struck anywhere on its surface, one alpha is scored. If the popper doesn't fall after being struck in what we now call the calibration zone, it is range equipment failure, and a reshoot is required. If the popper doesn't fall after being struck below the calibration zone, a miss is scored. Hits on the poppers need to be painted between shooters.

[mactiger]

I wouldn't eliminate the calibration or the PF requirement. As it is, the poppers are usually set to fall with a light breeze, much less a 125 PF hit in the circle. We have to have some method of assuring that poppers will fall with a minor load that is accurate and repeatable, and shooting them down makes the most sense. Too much variation from finger to finger/RO to RO.

With FFPP, a lot of that is eliminated, because they are already set to fall--all they need is to be "tripped".

Troy

[Vince Pinto]

With FFPP, a lot of that is eliminated, because they are already set to fall--all they need is to be "tripped".

Bada-bing!

I haven't actually tried it yet, but I'll try to shoot down an FFPP with a 22LR or 32ACP pistol. I suspect both will cause the FFPP to fall, because that's how light they're set, and that's why they never fail. As Troy said, you're basically "tripping" the hook at the rear.

Of course when Harry Hoser comes along with his 200PF pud-thumper, the popper actually goes down faster, because when the FFPP rocks back at 88MPH, the retaining hook on the back of the popper drops due to gravity and the body of the popper hits the rigid rear section of the hook so hard, it's actually kicked forwards and out of the "V" channel.

However I can talk about FFPP till the cows come home. Go to your range, and either convert a hinged popper or build a new one and try it out.

Then send me flowers and candy

[omnia1911]

As it is, the poppers are usually set to fall with a light breeze, much less a 125 PF hit in the circle.

This is the "touch method".

We have to have some method of assuring that poppers will fall with a minor load that is accurate and repeatable, and shooting them down makes the most sense.

See qoute above.

The only reason for having the method that IPSC/USPSA uses for setting poppers is because they require poppers to measure power. No power, no need for a base line measurement with match ammo. The popper only needs to fall reliably.

Reactive targets are an enjoyable addition to a stage, but poppers don't need to measure power any more than a 6 inch plate does. They both need to fall, but the mechanics of how each falls differs.

Too much variation from finger to finger/RO to RO.

The variation that may occur in using the "touch method" for setting the popper is nothing compared to how much variation occurs over time in using calibration ammo to set the steel. The "touch method" works out any possible maladjustments between shooters. The match ammo/calibration method corrects the problem after the popper fails to fall during a shooter's COF, possibly ruining an otherwise great run. It is unreasonable to expect that the popper be recalibrated with match ammo between shooters.

[mactiger]

Perhaps I haven't been clear in my posts--I think you and I are on the same page, but looking at different sentences.

When I say "manage the steel", I mean use the touch, finger, bump, whatever to ensure that the poppers are set to fall when struck (light, in other words). Nothing wrong with that, in fact when I RM any match, that's one of my main instructions to the staff--manage your steel. Nothing wrong with a competitor asking if a popper is heavy before he shoots and the RO going down and giving it the old finger test, either. If it is heavy, it can be adjusted. The RO's should be periodically checking the poppers throughout the day to make sure they are good.

But, in cases where the popper calibration is officially challenged (hit it, didn't fall, wants calibration) the only way to do that and ensure consistency is with a calibration gun and ammo. That way there can be no question about differences in "touch" between staff members. The calibration ammo will "touch" them all the same.

And, for the record, if someone asks to have one shot (and it happens, but rarely), if I'm the RM, I'll do it. It doesn't waste that much time. Most of the time, though, competitors and range officers can tell when the steel is getting a little heavy--the RO's should make adjustments as needed, "on the fly".

That's all I'm saying.

Troy

[Jim Norman]

I have mixed feelings on this subject.

At first pass I like eliminating the PF requirement since we have Chronos now that are inexpensive and reliable. However on second pass, it is one more step away from our roots. Just how are we to recognize power?

At Club matches am I going to have to have Chrono stage available when w have a shooter that we "THINK" is using light ammo? Now I have to single him out and test his ammo, Bad For Business if you ask me, especially if he chronos OK!

As to setting the steel and testing it, IF you paint the steel between each shooter and the hit is full diameter above the line at the bottom of the circle, I would call it REF, no calibration, if the hit is partial or below the line it is a MIKE. My reason is that once the popper has been hit, it is no longer in the same condition it was in when the shooter engaged it. A Fly Fart could knock it down, or not.

Third on my list, and I brought this up before is a Calibration Hammer. A 16oz. hammer (weight as an example only), pivoted from the horizontal so that the hammer head impacts in the exact center of the popper circle, if it falls it is good, it stands, it needs adjustment. inexpensive, no need to clear the range to use it, no need to wait for the RM, you could have one per stage for probably $10 or less.

As to the FFPP, I would opt to retain the hinge so as to be able to insure the proper activation of targets. Having the popper fall out of a notch may or may not correctly activate swingers, drop turners, out & backs and other fun little point eaters.

Jim Norman

[omnia1911]

Perhaps I haven't been clear in my posts--I think you and I are on the same page, but looking at different sentences. 

When I say "manage the steel", I mean use the touch, finger, bump, whatever to ensure that the poppers are set to fall when struck (light, in other words).  Nothing wrong with that, in fact when I RM any match, that's one of my main instructions to the staff--manage your steel.  Nothing wrong with a competitor asking if a popper is heavy before he shoots and the RO going down and giving it the old finger test, either.  If it is heavy, it can be adjusted.  The RO's should be periodically checking the poppers throughout the day to make sure they are good.

But, in cases where the popper calibration is officially challenged (hit it, didn't fall, wants calibration) the only way to do that and ensure consistency is with a calibration gun and ammo.  That way there can be no question about differences in "touch" between staff members.  The calibration ammo will "touch" them all the same.

And, for the record, if someone asks to have one shot (and it happens, but rarely), if I'm the RM, I'll do it.  It doesn't waste that much time.  Most of the time, though, competitors and range officers can tell when the steel is getting a little heavy--the RO's should make adjustments as needed, "on the fly".

That's all I'm saying. 

Troy

I agree that we probably aren't that far apart.

There is no provision in the rule book for anyone making periodic adjustments to a popper by using the touch method. The only method that is approved for popper adjustments is Appendix C. A popper is adjusted with the match ammo before the match, and is generally reset continuously throught the match without adjustment until a problem occurs, requiring a calibration. If you are making corrections by hand, you are in violation of the rule book (Appendix C and 4.5.1.1). At least that is how I read it.

4.3.1.1 says that poppers are to recognize power. I keep asking the question, why? Is it just an antiquated hold over from the days before accurate chronographs were available?

In reality, poppers don't recognize power. Unlike paper targets, they only recognize, by way of Appendix C, minor power. Both major and minor score the same on poppers when they fall. I realize that a popper will probably fall faster when struck by a major load, as opposed to a minor load, but that would still be happening even if we were using the touch method to set poppers, rather than Appendix C. The popper's reaction to the ammo's power factor is not lost with the touch method.

Appendix C has the potential for being very punitive to the shooter, all because of the possible mechanically failings of a target, and what I would classify as range equipment failure. It is no different than a drop turner or a swinging target failing to function correctly. A popper is a target constructed to rotate on a pivot point when struck so that gravity can bring it to the ground. It's a mechanical device. Mechanical devices fail sometimes.

Let's say a popper had some unknown mechanical problem preventing it from falling when struck by a competitor, and he calls for a calibration. It just so happens that the competitor's hit semi-corrected the problem to the point that the calibration hit completely fixed the problem and caused the popper to fall. The competitor is assumed to be in error and gets a penalty, and heaven forbid, the popper activated other targets.

I suppose the other assumption is that the competitor's ammo doesn't even make minor, because the popper was certainly calibrated to 125PF. If that is the assumption, why isn't some of the competitor's ammo immediately pulled from his mags, with him receiving a trip to the chrono?

What if he has already been to the chrono and was certified as making major? What has in fact happened is that a possible mechanical error in the popper has trumped what the competitor's relatively accurate chrono test had proven otherwise. I believe that is the wrong way to treat competitors.

[mactiger]

There is no provision in the rule book for anyone making periodic adjustments to a popper by using the touch method. The only method that is approved for popper adjustments is Appendix C. A popper is adjusted with the match ammo before the match, and is generally reset continuously throught the match without adjustment until a problem occurs, requiring a calibration. If you are making corrections by hand, you are in violation of the rule book (Appendix C and 4.5.1.1). At least that is how I read it.

There is nothing in the rule book that prevents "maintenance" of any kind of mechanical target. The rules you cite only deal with what happens when something fails to function. In 4.5.1.1, position doesn't mean setting, it means physical location.

I agree that poppers really don't recognize power; however, they are are a recognized official target and must be dealt with. True, a shot may change something in the poppers setting that makes it easier for the calibration gun to knock it down. That is the reason the range staff needs to constantly check all mechanical devices on the stage; it eliminates a lot of possibility for failure, and of a competitor getting hosed due to a rock. That's also why the first step of the procedure for a calibration challenge is to examine the popper.

The current calibration procedure, however unfortunate for the competitor, is what we have to deal with until it's changed. That may happen in the next iteration, I don't know. For now, though, good management of poppers by the range staff can help eliminate a lot of problems.

Troy

[omnia1911]

The current calibration procedure, however unfortunate for the competitor, is what we have to deal with until it's changed.

I agree.

Thanks Troy.

[Jim Norman]

Let's say a popper had some unknown mechanical problem preventing it from falling when struck by a competitor, and he calls for a calibration. It just so happens that the competitor's hit semi-corrected the problem to the point that the calibration hit completely fixed the problem and caused the popper to fall. The competitor is assumed to be in error and gets a penalty, and heaven forbid, the popper activated other targets.

I suppose the other assumption is that the competitor's ammo doesn't even make minor, because the popper was certainly calibrated to 125PF. If that is the assumption, why isn't some of the competitor's ammo immediately pulled from his mags, with him receiving a trip to the chrono?

What if he has already been to the chrono and was certified as making major? What has in fact happened is that a possible mechanical error in the popper has trumped what the competitor's relatively accurate chrono test had proven otherwise. I believe that is the wrong way to treat competitors.

This is what I have said for a couple years, albeit not here.

We should make the assumption that based upon the fact that a minor load should take down a popper, a "Good Hit" on a popper should cause it to fall, especially with a Major Load. If the hit falls above a horizontal line draw between the intersection of the vertical side of the popper and the circle on one side and the same point on the opposite side of the face of the popper. If the hit is a full diameter hit and the popper fails to fall it should be called REF, period, reshoot shall be issued. If the hit is less than 100% or is below the line, then sorry, you left it, it is a MIKE. Most of the time you can easily tell if the hit is full, the bullet does leave a fairly noticable mark in the paint.

I have seen moved popper bases, dropped pins, sand jambing the popper, high wind gusts just as you shot, all work to keep a popper upright.

Once the popper has been shot and hit, it is no longer in the same condition it was when the shooter engaged it. Period.

The solution presented above does require painting the face of the popper after each shooter. Given the cost of spray paint these days, i would gladly pay $0.20 more to shoot if that is the hold up! You won't use an entire can of paint on a stage in a club match. we are talking $4 a can maybe?

As to calibrating with a 9mm, we require the ammo to be "Close to 125 PF", but not at 125. So we could have a 131PF calibration gun and have a shooter with a 126PF not take the steel down. That strikes me as patently unfair to the competitor. If we insist on using a gun to calibrate the steel, it should be chrono'd at no more than 125PF since that is the minimum PF required to compete.

[Vince Pinto]

4.3.1.1 says that poppers are to recognize power. I keep asking the question, why? Is it just an antiquated hold over from the days before accurate chronographs were available? In reality, poppers don't recognize power. Unlike paper targets, they only recognize, by way of Appendix C, minor power. Both major and minor score the same on poppers when they fall. I realize that a popper will probably fall faster when struck by a major load, as opposed to a minor load, but that would still be happening even if we were using the touch method to set poppers, rather than Appendix C.

Poppers recognise power for the reason you've stated - it's virtually a never-ending sliding scale. A 200PF bullet will result in less "lag" with a falling popper when compared to a 170PF bullet, both of which are Major. Taking it to another level, purely for argument's sake, if you were shooting 300PF loads, you'd have even less "lag", but of course you'd have to deal with greater recoil and muzzle flip. It's a trade-off decision which each competitor must make.

If you watch the top competitors in a Shoot Off, you'll often see them shoot the final popper in the array while the first popper they shot still looks vertical. The better shooters can use lighter loads for less recoil and muzzle flip because they know where their shots went, but the average punter shooting light loads does not have the same degree of certainty. And poppers only have one scoring zone.

Paper targets reward power factor (note the different word "reward", and the extra word "factor"), by virtue of the different point values for Minor and Major scoring, decided by shot placement, not from which end of the power factor band your bullets happen to be (e.g. from 125 to 169 for Minor). I also remind you that an Alpha on a paper target is always worth 5 points, whether you've been chronographed as low as Minor 125PF to Major (pick a number from 170PF to whatever). We simply reward you with more points for peripheral shots on paper, as a kind of "compensation" for your use of Major PF rounds.

I suppose the other assumption is that the competitor's ammo doesn't even make minor, because the popper was certainly calibrated to 125PF. If that is the assumption, why isn't some of the competitor's ammo immediately pulled from his mags, with him receiving a trip to the chrono?

Because the round he's already fired is the one in contention, not the others he's carrying. Why should we declare REF, when it might well have been the competitor's ammo which was the problem? What if a squib load has sufficient energy to reach the target and make a mark? Should we count that for score if the popper didn't fall?

This is why conventional wisdom says "It might be a sticky popper and/or it might be a slightly under-powered round, so I better shoot the damned thing again, because I don't want to risk having loosened the impediment and giving the next round in the RM's gun (which has more "ooomph"), an easy ride".

However the bottom line remains unchanged: Clubs and match organisers now actually have an advisory in the rule book to use FFPP, and this advisory is there because considerable experience garnered from around the world has shown that FFPPs (especially those without hinged bases), present far fewer problems, and that's the right way to treat competitors.

Anyway, I'm not here to prolong a debate which has now reached 5 pages - I'm merely explaining the current thinking which, whether you support it or not, applies equally to all.

[dv8]

...

I suppose the other assumption is that the competitor's ammo doesn't even make minor, because the popper was certainly calibrated to 125PF. If that is the assumption, why isn't some of the competitor's ammo immediately pulled from his mags, with him receiving a trip to the chrono?...

Oh, I would absolutely love to do that. My current ammo chronos at 142+, with SD under 6%. If all production shooters had to chrono their ammo every time a popper doesn't go down, it would be a perfect demonstration of how much more attention should be paid to PPs calibration!

However the bottom line remains unchanged: Clubs and match organisers now actually have an advisory in the rule book to use FFPP, and this advisory is there because considerable experience garnered from around the world has shown that FFPPs (especially those without hinged bases), present far fewer problems, and that's the right way to treat competitors.

Anyway, I'm not here to prolong a debate which has now reached 5 pages - I'm merely explaining the current thinking which, whether you support it or not, applies equally to all.

I see the Light! I see the Light!

[Jim Norman]

I do not have a problem with FFPP as long as they have a hinge, at least on those FFPP's that are used as activators. A FFPP will supposedly fall if any significant round hits it so they no longer reward higher PFs. They do continue to reward accuracy. One drawback to FFPPs is that you can't make them fall faster by shooting them multiple times in rapid succession, in fact you can stand them up and keep them from falling. With unhinged type, this may not be a problem, but it looks like it would simply stand against the bracket that holds the hook unless the bottom "hopped" out of the retention angle. Does anyone have any experiance with this? or with using unhinged FFPPs to active movers?

I still think that we should address the calibration of backward falling PPs and the verification of the correct calibration after a shot has been fired.

Jim Norman

[omnia1911]

Because the round he's already fired is the one in contention, not the others he's carrying. Why should we declare REF, when it might well have been the competitor's ammo which was the problem? What if a squib load has sufficient energy to reach the target and make a mark? Should we count that for score if the popper didn't fall?

That is the problem. We don't know for certain what the cause was.

I'm not an advocate of awarding points on any popper that doesn't fall, provided the COF required it to.

Paper targets reward power factor (note the different word "reward", and the extra word "factor"), by virtue of the different point values for Minor and Major scoring, decided by shot placement, not from which end of the power factor band your bullets happen to be (e.g. from 125 to 169 for Minor).......We simply reward you with more points for peripheral shots on paper, as a kind of "compensation" for your use of Major PF rounds.

It is just as easy to place a MAJOR round into the C or D zone on the first shot, as it is for someone shooting MINOR. The reward for power factor comes into play on the follow up shot/s due to recoil. So, why are the first shots on paper scored differently in major and minor?

If you take a look at Appendix C2 in the new rule book. you will notice that the poppers no not include the base, the hinge, or attached steel rod that the poppers pivot on. The only official part of the target is what you see in Appendix C2. The base and various versions of pivot points are simply range equipment; no different than a paper target attached to a swinging mechanism or a drop turner. When the target fails to drop it can only be classified as range equipment failure, as swingers and drop turners are. Yes???

[Vince Pinto]

If you take a look at Appendix C2 in the new rule book. you will notice that the poppers no not include the base, the hinge, or attached steel rod that the poppers pivot on. The only official part of the target is what you see in Appendix C2. The base and various versions of pivot points are simply range equipment; no different than a paper target attached to a swinging mechanism or a drop turner. When the target fails to drop it can only be classified as range equipment failure, as swingers and drop turners are. Yes???

No, I think not. When a moving paper target fails to work correctly, the only reason can be REF, right? In other words, the activator failed or perhaps the connecting cable is broken etc.

However when a popper fails to fall, it does not necessarily mean the (non-target) base is the problem. It could well be that the competitor's ammo was under-powered, which is why we calibrate the popper (but we don't calibrate paper swingers).

Vive le difference !

[Jim Norman]

But, it also does not mean that the shooter's ammo was underpowered. In fact it is very unlikely that a shooter shooting Major that is chrono'd at 170 will have sub minor loads. True enough he could, but just as likely is the possibility of REF in a Popper not being set properly or having sand or stone in the base.

Again, no one addresses the FACT that once the popper has been hit, maybe even hit twice, it is no longer in the same condition as it was first engaged in. True a calibration shot may take the popper down, but so may the beating of a butterfly's wings in China.

Of course this assumes a righteous hit inthe first instance. The hit must be above the baseline (chord) horizontally drawn across the two vertical sides where they intersect the cirlce. If the hit is below this, then I havve no problem calling it a MIKE, above it and 100% on the face, REF. At least this is how I'd like to see it.

Jim Norman