rtr Posted June 1, 2006 Share Posted June 1, 2006 At our club we have these step pads, basically a square that is about 14x14" and a couple inches tall. When you step on it it activates a target, ie swinger, bear trap, etc. The top of the pad opens, basically each half of the top is a piece of wood on hinges, to access the innards to reset the thing. They look basically like this: At our state match this past weekend I took a position right next to the pad to engage targets, when I lifted up my foot to step down on the pad I caught the edge of one of the doors and flipped it open (or at least thats what I think happened). RO called range failure and I got a reshoot. I was so intent on having a good reshoot that I didn't pursue it, but I'm curious if this is in fact a range failure or not. So what would you call and cite the rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted June 1, 2006 Share Posted June 1, 2006 That is a tough one. I predict the answers will be split on this question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted June 1, 2006 Share Posted June 1, 2006 I'd call it bad prop building and work on a second version...... My call would be range equipment failure as well..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schoonie Posted June 1, 2006 Share Posted June 1, 2006 I have to disagree, it has to be shooter failure. My club owns one of those step on activator props, and as RTR speculated, the shooter must have inadvertentley opened the prop. The prop was not broken, just mis-used. Think of opening a door that allows access to targets, the shooter doesn't rotate the knob far enough to open it, or he chooses to push instead of pull it to open, how is this the prop's fault? A better example is not opening a door far enough to activate moving targets. The shooter must do what is required of the prop, ie. follow the written stage procedures ... 'step on activator, shoot target', or 'open the door to activate the swinger, shoot target'! Props used in matches have to function the same for all shooters. Woe be onto any shooter who influences the props to prevent their correct functioning, they are obliged to set it right (undo whatever they did to it) and get on with the shooting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waltermitty Posted June 1, 2006 Share Posted June 1, 2006 I think it's a good 4.6 call. You inadvertently flipped up the top on the activator, stood there for a moment, with a loaded gun, probably trying to decide if there was a way to reset the prop and keep shooting, the RO said STOP, range equipment failure. Good call. The difference in the example of the door is that the state of the door does not change (usually) if you push instead of pull, or fail to twist the knob enough, however, if an eager beaver pushed on a "pull" door and jammed it in the frame, it would be range equipment failure. Lots of props fail for lots of reasons, some caused by the shooter, some not. The shooter is required to follow the course description, but the props have to be robust as well. Now, if it looked like you did it intentionally at the end of a stage you just trashed, you'd be calling the RM regarding your 10.6 DQ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Posted June 1, 2006 Share Posted June 1, 2006 Range equipment failure for sure. No matter how a competitor comes at a prop, if he is denied access at the point he properly attempts to activate the prop no matter what occured up to that point, then the prop is at fault. This is nothing but an un-discovered "fault mode" of the prop in question. It either needs to be re-designed, or deployed so this possibility is minimized, or eliminated. End of story. This is not at all like a competitor doing something backwards and penalizing himself. This is a lot more like snagging a prop with your shirt and it falling over on you because it was flimsy. A prop should handle all possible ranges of shooter input without failing to perform it's primary task. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigbadaboom Posted June 1, 2006 Share Posted June 1, 2006 I wouldn't have stopped you but I would have given you a procedural and referenced Rule: 4.5.1 Just kidding. I would call it a reshoot per 4.6. We had one (I think it was Shoonies') at the Fl. State Match and didn't seem to have any problems with it. I do have to disagree with you on this one Jim. Like Waltermitty stated, if you push a door in lieu of pulling it you can stiil push it when you realize the mistake. I compare it to a "Pull the rope in this direction" type of activation; If the shooter pulls the rope the wrong way and the rope breaks then it's a range malfunction. Unless, during the walk-thru, you stated "If your foot gets caught under one of the doors and you inadvertantly kick this prop open the this is how you fix it" then how is the shooter supposed to know what to do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted June 1, 2006 Share Posted June 1, 2006 Not speaking of this particular situation, but making a general observation. It is funny that 299 out of 300 shooters can use a particular prop and have no problems. Number 300 can't do what the other 299 did and it is the prop's problem Gary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackdragon Posted June 1, 2006 Share Posted June 1, 2006 Range Failure. Ivan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waltermitty Posted June 2, 2006 Share Posted June 2, 2006 Not speaking of this particular situation, but making a general observation. It is funny that 299 out of 300 shooters can use a particular prop and have no problems. Number 300 can't do what the other 299 did and it is the prop's problem Gary For those of us involved with the design and engineering of functional products, you have no idea... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmoney Posted June 2, 2006 Share Posted June 2, 2006 I'm with Schoonie on this one. The activator didn't break, and it didn't malfunction. The problem was wholly caused by the conduct of the shooter. It was a simple honest mistake, but ultimately the problem was caused by carelessness on the part of the shooter. It was also completely "fixable"--simply flip the lid back shut with the foot and keep on runnin'. If this is range equipment malfunction, then what isn't?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckS Posted June 2, 2006 Share Posted June 2, 2006 I am not sure what I would call as an RO but as a shooter I would look at it as another opportunity to tell a story in "match screwups", kick it closed and get on with business. Just because a shooter finds a "novel" way to operate a prop, let's not blame the prop. He knew exactly what he was doing: minimal foot travel to activate the target. Gaming at it's finest! (That's a good thing). But as we all know, sometimes those tricks bite us in the butt! Thank that RO. I would not expect such a call for moi, but I am pretty sure I would take it Later, Chuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ankeny Posted June 2, 2006 Share Posted June 2, 2006 (edited) Shooter failure. Close the lid, activate the prop, and keep on shooting. Edited June 2, 2006 by Ron Ankeny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wide45 Posted June 2, 2006 Share Posted June 2, 2006 Range equipment failure. A properly constructed door can open, or not open. It can't do anything else. The Pad should activate, or not activate, depending on the competitors actions. There should be no third option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobydog Posted June 2, 2006 Share Posted June 2, 2006 (edited) For myself, I would have flipped the lid closed, activated it and moved on, figuring it was my fault. As an RO, I don't think I would have called range equipment failure, because it could have still been activated properly. We have several of these at our club, this type of problem hasn't occured. (Yet!) Edited June 2, 2006 by tobydog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shooterbenedetto Posted June 2, 2006 Share Posted June 2, 2006 i agree a range failure for sure...i'll give you a reshoot..if thats ok with the rest of the squad? or i can just dodge the bullets like the matrix style move? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeInNePa Posted June 2, 2006 Share Posted June 2, 2006 Of course it's Range Equipment Failure and a reshoot. What else can it be? If a shooter slides to a stop in front of and trips into a door that is supposed to be pulled open, causing the door to jam shut hard enough that he can't get it opened, would we say that that is a shooter problem? Would we expect the shooter to climb over the door? Take the misses on the targets behind the door? Crawl under or run around the wall section and take procedurals? OR Would we give him a reshoot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waltermitty Posted June 2, 2006 Share Posted June 2, 2006 Range equipment failure.A properly constructed door can open, or not open. It can't do anything else. The Pad should activate, or not activate, depending on the competitors actions. There should be no third option. This is the definitive distinction very well said wide45. It's not really about blame or fault, it's about inanimate objects sticking to the course description. There are slight differences in the design of these boxes, and some of them require a pretty light touch to reset. If a shooter had the presence of mind to reset it instantly and go on shooting I probably wouldn't have stopped him/her, but I wouldn't have stood there letting a shooter putz around with an activator that had changed from "set" to "not set" for whatever reason without activating. Besides, the shooter doesn't get off scott free; thay have to reshoot. And everybody knows how the Range Gods feel about reshoots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vluc Posted June 2, 2006 Share Posted June 2, 2006 shooter boo-boo. Learn and move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LPatterson Posted June 2, 2006 Share Posted June 2, 2006 I vote for the reshoot. Yes the shooter caused the problem but it was still equipment failure. To say the shooter should have kicked it closed and continued is a bit much. What would the call be if the shooter got to that position and the cover was still up after having reset the plungers? Same difference. I know Mr Murphy personally so I understand screwups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFD Posted June 2, 2006 Share Posted June 2, 2006 I say it's a prop problem. If the prop had been setup differently (rotated 90 degrees), then there's no way the shooter could have flipped one of the lid halves up. I used these activators before and they were always set up so one of the hinge sides was facing the direction shooters would approach the prop. No way to catch anything with your foot if they're turned in the proper direction. Too many people don't know how to setup these pressure pad activators. I had 7 reshoots on a stage at an outlaw match last year because they chose the wrong activator for the wrong mover. I lost interest after reshoot #4. Everything needs to be staked down really well with little slack in the cable since the pressure pad meachanism doesn't move very far. When in doubt, use a popper or a door. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtr Posted June 2, 2006 Author Share Posted June 2, 2006 I say it's a prop problem. If the prop had been setup differently (rotated 90 degrees), then there's no way the shooter could have flipped one of the lid halves up. The pad on this stage had to be facing the way it was because of where the cables had to go in order to activate the targets. Even if it were turned 90 degrees one could still do the exact same thing I did in accidentally opening the top by standing behind it, instead of next to it as I did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tman33_99 Posted June 2, 2006 Share Posted June 2, 2006 These activators typically have two spring loaded arms to be able to activate targets simultanously. What if RTR purposely flipped up the lid and acticated one rod shot some targets, did a reload and then activated the other rod? Award procedurals? On what grounds? Pat him on the back for even better gaming? Or call REF once the lid is flipped open so the stage remains as it was designed and intended? Curious minds want to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dunn Posted June 2, 2006 Share Posted June 2, 2006 Since we're playing what if, say you're more than 10m from an activator and shoot the pressure pad to activate it so the swingers will be almost static by the time you get there. Would that be unsportsmanlike conduct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevepitt Posted June 2, 2006 Share Posted June 2, 2006 Well Chris, It looks like this one goes down in the "depends on which RO you get" type of ruling. For what it's worth, if I would have been RO'ing you, my vote is shooter caused the problem, you wouldn't have gotten the re-shoot Steve Pitt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now