Soft Cover Barrels

[TRNinTX]

Stage 10, "Have You a Dot?", at the A8 Championship this weekend gave shooters the option of shooting targets from two or three positions, the far targets were Zebra stripe hard cover at appx 25 yds, or moving forward and engaging several targets on the move and engaging the HC at about 7-10 yds. If you decided to stay back one of the targets, T4, was open from the start position, but required a turn and stop or shooting on the move before moving to the second position to engage the remaining targets, where it was hidden by two stacked barrels.

Here's the question. All barrels were deemed soft cover for the match unless specifically noted in the stage briefing. BJ decided to shoot the first two targets then sprint to the last position and engage the remaining targets from there including T4 by shooting through the barrel. If he did not have to make two make ups on the far hard cover targets, it would have been a very fast way to shoot the stage.

BJ got Alpha, Bravo on T4 by engaging through the barrel, however after the match the CRO came up and said that if another RO wanted to be CS he might have given him two Mike and an FTE because the stage briefing said "engage targets as they become visible".

There are arguments on both sides and I'm not sure what the ruling should be. Any thoughts?

[XRe]

BJ got Alpha, Bravo on T4 by engaging through the barrel, however after the match the CRO came up and said that if another RO wanted to be CS he might have given him two Mike and an FTE because the stage briefing said "engage targets as they become visible".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

One word - "freestyle". Unless otherwise stated, a shooter is allowed to engage the targets in whatever order they see fit, as long as they do so safely and within the rules. If the barrels are defined as soft cover, you can shoot through them. If the stage doesn't say "shoot T1 from this spot, T2 from this spot, T3 from that spot, and T4 must engaged anywhere but through the soft cover barrels", it's fair game.

The phrase "as they become visible" is probably not the best choice. But, even the popular "as they become available" has the same basic meaning. Neither would be construed to enforce any sort of engagement order on the shooter. If they were to be, it should be mentioned in the walkthrough. It's not supposed to be a game of "let's see how we can screw the shooter with tricky wording in our stage descriptions".

If the CRO meant that "you can't see the target through the barrel, and therefore can't shoot at it", he should be aware that nothing in the rules prevents you from shooting through soft cover, and that he can't score mikes/FTEs on you for doing so, regardless of whether he wants to or not. That's the point of soft cover - it provides a visual barrier that can be shot through, adding, in this case, a risk/reward point for shooting at a target that is not completely visible, and taking the risk of doing it poorly. If the barrel was meant to *not* be shot through, it should have been designated as hard cover....

[BDH]

9.1.6 Unless specifically described as "soft cover" (see Rule 4.1.5.2 <BDH comment, I think this is a typo and they are refering to 4.1.4.2>) in the written stage briefing, all props, walls, barriers, vision screens and other obstables are deemed to be impenetrable "hard cover".....

Based on this, I am not sure that the match can define all barrels as soft cover...

[Paul B]

Not only that but shooting through a barrel is very iffy. You can have all kinds of ricochettes and bullets can even come straight back. It's amazing how tough the plastic ones are. I've seen bullets fail to pentrate the rim in a direct shot.

Most of us have heard a trapped bullet whine around inside a plastic barrel for what seems like a long time. Wouldn't want it to find an exit hole in my direction.

We all use them but we try to use them so they don't become a target themselves, be sure they are not too shot up (too holey) and they are never soft cover.

[TRNinTX]

9.1.6 Unless specifically described as "soft cover" (see Rule 4.1.5.2 <BDH comment, I think this is a typo and they are refering to 4.1.4.2>) in the written stage briefing, all props, walls, barriers, vision screens and other obstables are deemed to be impenetrable "hard cover".....

Based on this, I am not sure that the match can define all barrels as soft cover... 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Brian,

It was specifically mentioned in the shooters meeting and the question was asked again immediately before the LAMR command on the stage and the answer was affirmative.

[Clay1]

At a stage a couple of weeks ago I thought that I would try to shoot through a barrel and asked the RO and was told that all barrels were hardcover at this particular match.

Sometimes I feel like you get one answer if you ask first and quite another answer if you just do what you feel is best and then argue about it later.

[XRe]

I *would* agree with Paul that I don't think it's such a great idea to purposefully shoot through a barrel... but that doesn't stop it from happening... And that doesn't change the circumstances we're talking about

[Ron Rodgers]

9.1.6 Unless specifically described as "soft cover" (see Rule 4.1.5.2 <BDH comment, I think this is a typo and they are refering to 4.1.4.2>) in the written stage briefing, all props, walls, barriers, vision screens and other obstables are deemed to be impenetrable "hard cover".....

Based on this, I am not sure that the match can define all barrels as soft cover... 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Brian,

It was specifically mentioned in the shooters meeting and the question was asked again immediately before the LAMR command on the stage and the answer was affirmative.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I did declare all barrels as soft cover at the shooter's meeting. Barrels were primarily used to block vision of targets so the shooters couldn't break the 180.

In this particular case though, the barrels acted as a vision barrier on a target - which we thought would prevent shooters from engaging most of the targets from one position. We never thought anyone would intentionally engage a totally hidden target through a plastic barrel.

Although it maybe isn't the safest thing to do, my interpretation of the rules is that shooting a target through a (soft cover) barrel is legal. I guess we'll have to use more wooden walls in the future.

[Flexmoney]

Barrels are tricky.

Ron, I think what BDH is saying is that the rule book doesn't "technically" allow you to just declare them as softcover...you are supposed to put that in the written stage briefing. Regardless...it sounds like you covered the bases. (it sure is hard to get all the rule right all the time...that is what makes discussion forums like this so valuable).

Anyway...

If we use a barrel as hardcover, then we have to find some majic way to know if a full bullet diameter has passed thru it or not.

The guys that ran the the Targeting Education match had a nice fix. They cut the top off the barrels, then filled them with earth. (It helps that they have real sandy dirt...and a Bobcat loader.)

[BDH]

It was specifically mentioned in the shooters meeting and the question was asked again immediately before the LAMR command on the stage and the answer was affirmative.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Understood, and I have seen this before. Just saying that it doesn't appear that making a general announcement is allowed. Defining them as softcover in the stage briefing would make them softcover, and then the wisdom of shooting though them becomes another issue (as Paul B pointed out)....

The guys that ran the the Targeting Education match had a nice fix. They cut the top off the barrels, then filled them with earth. (It helps that they have real sandy dirt...and a Bobcat loader.)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That is a great solution for more than one reason.... from the safety angle of a bullet whizzing around inside and potentially exiting in an unsafe direction... from the stage consistency standpoint (as I bet those barrels never moved once they were filled with dirt)... and from a scoring standpoint as two center shots on a barrel filled with sand would most likely be scored 2 Mike!

[Ron Rodgers]

The guys that ran the the Targeting Education match had a nice fix.  They cut the top off the barrels, then filled them with earth.  (It helps that they have real sandy dirt...and a Bobcat loader.)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

We did something similar on stage 3 at Area 8 - "Wall Stripes 3". We filled a few plastic barrels with shredded bark and used them as a backstop for a low target in the middle of the stage. 700+ rounds, and no shoot throughs.

Now that the match is over, if we can just figure out how to remove the barrels ........

[LPatterson]

From a safety standpoint, I think we should rethink the idea of placing a barrel (plastic or steel) in the line of fire. We know that we can get ricochets from barrels so why do we continue to wait for a shooter or spectator to be injured and/or sue before we change how/where they are used. Yes, they make cheap hard cover or a prop for placing something on so lets restrict them to that. At a major match I worked the barrels had to be turned several times because the RO couldn't tell where that competitors shot had hit the barrel or if the paster had been knocked off.

// RANT MODE OFF//

Please Match Directors and Range Masters think about the consequences.

[Flexmoney]

Now that the match is over, if we can just figure out how to remove the barrels ........

LOL...that sure is the truth. I think Dale T. still has his Bobcat/skid-steerer, it might be for sale.

[Hotmetal10]

There is an article in the Jan/Feb 2002 Front Sight titled barrel trouble. I had never given much thought about the danger of using empty barrels in a course, specifically as hard or soft cover, but after reading that article, I never use an empty barrel in a course were it can take a stray or direct hit.

[Carlos]

Ron - I think you did a fantastic job running what was a great match. Hats off to you.

Ron specifically designated the barrels as soft cover even during the lightly-attended Friday shooters meeting when I shot; apparently he did the same thing on Sat & Sun.; I do not have the match book or stage descriptions handy but since softcover was consistently designated, it appears BJ was in the right. Whether it is safe to shoot barrels (the Frontsite article's point) - that is another matter not relavent to TRN's question. I do tend to agree that empty barrels downrange are to be avoided if possible.

As for the free-style language of "as they become visible" - that is not the same as "only while visible"; thus, the targets that BJ shot WERE visible. After they became visible, he shot them. They may not have been 100% visible at the moment that he shot them, but that was not required in the stage briefing. I do not see how they could have been scored as mikes within the rules that were in place at this match. Were they hard-cover, then sure, the hits did not occur. But under the circumstances, they were properly scored hits.

[Bill Nesbitt]

I'm not trying to stir up anything here, but, if the instructions say "engage targets as visible" could that not mean that you have to engage them as soon as they become visible. Rather than waiting to engage a target later as you get closer or a better angle? We might need better wording for stage instructions.

Bill Nesbitt

[TRNinTX]

The safety issue is something entirely different. If empty barrels are considered such a safety hazard then they should not be downrange at all, especially in cases where they partially obsure a target and can take hits in the sides. The shots that BJ took were really relatively easy in that the target was directly behind the barrel and very close. A shot through the center of the barrel almost guaranteed a good hit (especially with a 124 gr bullet @ appx 1400 fps).

[GuildSF4]

On the stages I have RO'd, we used the barrels as hard cover, and we taped all holes in the barrels (Duct tape works good for this) so you could tell whe the barrels where shot again, and if it was a full diameter hit.

That said IMHO I really don't like barrels where they could be shot due to the afore-mentioned Front Sight article, and that I have seen some weird things when they are hit.

[Jake Di Vita]

I think it is fine to shoot through barrels however I would probably never do it. I like to see the target I shoot at....if you don't you are shooting nothing but hopers. That (obviously unintentional) Bravo could have just as easily been a Mike.

[vluc]

How many shooters shot through the barrel? Was it just BJ?

Never occured to me to shoot through the barrel, regardless of it being soft cover. Maybe this tells us something of the need to win and place high at the higher levels...also shows us that no matter how well you look at a stage or diagnose it, someone will find a way to do it you did not think of.

Reminds me of the old story regarding some psychologists who created a room that had 15 ways to "escape" from it. The placed a chimpanzee in the room to see which way he would use. The chimp escaped...a 16th way.

[jrguar]

I think filling the barrels with wood chips is a decent fix.... also is you want to keep shooters from taking a short cut through barrels try hanging a few no shoots on them....

[Otisray]

Vince,

As near as I remember BJ was the only one to shoot through the barrel. No one really asked during the 5 minute walkthru about shooting through the barrel.

Steve

How many shooters shot through the barrel?  Was it just BJ?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[TriggerT]

Interesting that there were stages at two area matches where you could shoot through barrels. Area 3 had a simular stage, and most of the shooters I watched chose to shoot through the barrles. Not sure if it was legal or not, but still a fun stage.

[Rob Boudrie]

At a stage a couple of weeks ago I thought that I would try to shoot through a barrel and asked the RO and was told that all barrels were hardcover at this particular match. 

Sometimes I feel like you get one answer if you ask first and quite another answer if you just do what you feel is best and then argue about it later.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If a match is going to designate barrels as hard cover, they would do well to mark the hard cover areas behind the targets instead of trying to make the call based on the path of the bullet. It becomes very difficult to determine if a round wen tthrough the barrel. "Hardcover which isn't" can lead to an inequity if there is not a clear, and absolutely consistent, manner to determine if hard cover has indeed been hit.

[EricW]

From a safety standpoint, I think we should rethink the idea of placing a barrel (plastic or steel) in the line of fire.  We know that we can get ricochets from barrels so why do we continue to wait for a shooter or spectator to be injured and/or sue before we change how/where they are used. Yes, they make cheap hard cover or a prop for placing something on so lets restrict them to that. At a major match I worked the barrels had to be turned several times because the RO couldn't tell where that competitors shot had hit the barrel or if the paster had been knocked off.

// RANT MODE OFF//

Please Match Directors and Range Masters think about the consequences.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Le Roy's post needs re-emphasis. No offense to BJ or anyone else, but shooting barrels is just an accident waiting to happen. The danger is well-known, so it begs the question of why the practice was ever allowed to continue beyond the publication of the FS article which provided clear, empirical evidence of the problem.