Vince Pinto Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 We've touched upon this subject in other threads, but I'd like to gather views in this thread. Q1: Does our popper calibration method work? Q2: Should we insist on using 9x19mm or allow other calibres to be used, provided they meet the PF? Q3: Should we lower the calibration PF (e.g. 120PF for calibration, 125PF for competitors)? Q4: Should we drop the current system and, if so, what's a better way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skywalker Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 Hi Vince, as I posted before in other threads: 1) Yes, but could be improved. 2) No, for the phisycal reasons I posted in a previous thread, provided the correct PF is reached, the caliber has no influence on calibration procedure. 3) IMHO yes, this could solve all possible disputes if competitor discovers his ammo scores PF 126 and calibration ammo scores 127 at chrono verification. 4) No, the only improvement I can figure is to enlarge the ammo sample to be chrono'ed (at least 10 rounds) just to have a meaningful statistical sample. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 Q1. It works. Q2. Power Factor ought to be the standard. Q3. I am with Skywalker67 on point 3. Instead on the calibration gun being as close to, but not less than 125...as close to, but not more than 125 would make sense. This assumes a standard that a 125pf hit should take down the popper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benos Posted January 10, 2003 Share Posted January 10, 2003 I love linking this HATE topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lynn jones Posted January 11, 2003 Share Posted January 11, 2003 our club has converted a half a dozen pepper poppers to forward falling pepper poppers. the forward falling pps need no calibration. this makes the problem go away. i think the rules committee should include the ffpp design in the rule book as an alternative to the regular pp design. brian, the first ffpps i every saw/shot was at rio salado desert classic. i think they are about 10 years old now. please talk to those guys and get them to replace them with new ones. as a matter of fact, all the steel at that range needs replacing. ) ) ) lynn jones (Edited by lynn jones at 7:37 am on Jan. 14, 2003) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noname Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 I'm with BE, or at least his "link". Stop calibrating poppers. It's a waste of match resources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted January 12, 2003 Author Share Posted January 12, 2003 Lynn, Even when using FFPP in Hong Kong, we still "calibrate" them to ensure they are set correctly. This basically means ensuring that when the FFPP rocks backwards, the stopper is at the right distance sufficient to allow the hook to fall but so the FFPP cannot go rearwards beyond the vertical. However once they're set, I've never had a calibration challenge in four years of using them and we now use FFPP exclusively. The meaning of the term "calibration" has changed over the years. Originally it meant "don't fall at under 125pf but fall at 125pf or higher". In recent years, I'm not aware of any calibration which tested the "don't fall at under 125pf" bit. The focus has changed to a simple "fall when hit" and we deal with PF at chrono. I'm not sure about the rulebook though, because we only have a diagram of the actual popper dimensions, not the operating mechanism, and I wouldn't want to limit design. Maybe we could include diagrams of mechanisms "for information purposes only". Then again, these might be better placed on the website. Anyway, thanks for the suggestion, which I'll run past my Handgun Rules team for comments. (Edited by Vince Pinto at 1:16 am on Jan. 12, 2003) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xcount Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 I was puzzled by Lynn's "don't need calibration" comment. I thought poppers would always be subject to start-of-match calibration and re-calibration as necessary. So, I was glad to see Vince's latest post. But a section in that post caught my attention........ Vince sez -- "The meaning of the term "calibration" has changed over the years. Originally it meant "don't fall at under 125pf but fall at 125pf or higher". In recent years, I'm not aware of any calibration which tested the "don't fall at under 125pf" bit. The focus has changed to a simple "fall when hit" and we deal with PF at chrono." The focus has changed to a simple "fall when hit"....... hmmm, I think Vince is right. It seems to me that what happens now goes something like this -- Bang!! (with shooter's gun) Popper doesn't fall. Shooter asks for re-calibration. Bang! (with 9mm) Popper falls. Shooter loses points. The reasoning? -- If the popper fell with 9mm, it must not have been a good hit (or hit at all) with shooter's gun. Too bad. But having recently had an "experience" with a FFPP, I'd like to throw out another line of thought. Let me tell the story. The popper in question was the last target shot on the stage. I hit it. I hit it good enough to rock it back and forth. I saw this, the RO saw this, the scorekeeper saw this. But the release mechanism did not release. The popper did not fall. I stopped shooting and said to the RO "That popper's screwed up, you'd better get the test gun". He didn't, he gave me the hit instead. Afterward I got to thinking. Did that release mechanism move at all while that popper was rocking back and forth? Could it have moved to the point where it was just about to drop free? Then what would happen if the popper had been re-calibrated with a 9mm? The mechanism could have dropped free, the popper would have fallen, and I would have gotten the shaft. I would have been left arguing that a popper which rocks but doesn't fall with a major PF .38 super hit but, yet, does fall with a subsequent minor PF 9mm hit must not be functioning properly. How far would I get with that? Not far, I'm sure. So here is my question -- keeping in mind that without "approved" designs there will be a myriad of FFPP designs in use, the FFPP has a mechanical aspect to it that the old B(ackward)FPP did not (mechanical releases vs. overcoming inertia). Can the same blanket "It feel when tested, your hit must have been inadequate" logic be applied to a popper that functions mechanically? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noname Posted January 13, 2003 Share Posted January 13, 2003 Quote: from Vince Pinto on 1:13 am on Jan. 12, 2003 Lynn, Even when using FFPP in Hong Kong, we still "calibrate" them to ensure they are set correctly. This basically means ensuring that when the FFPP rocks backwards, the stopper is at the right distance sufficient to allow the hook to fall but so the FFPP cannot go rearwards beyond the vertical. However once they're set, I've never had a calibration challenge in four years of using them and we now use FFPP exclusively. The meaning of the term "calibration" has changed over the years. Originally it meant "don't fall at under 125pf but fall at 125pf or higher". In recent years, I'm not aware of any calibration which tested the "don't fall at under 125pf" bit. The focus has changed to a simple "fall when hit" and we deal with PF at chrono. I'm not sure about the rulebook though, because we only have a diagram of the actual popper dimensions, not the operating mechanism, and I wouldn't want to limit design. Maybe we could include diagrams of mechanisms "for information purposes only". Then again, these might be better placed on the website. Anyway, thanks for the suggestion, which I'll run past my Handgun Rules team for comments. (Edited by Vince Pinto at 1:16 am on Jan. 12, 2003) What does IPSC/USPSA now say is the meaning of the term "calibration", as it has evolved? When you set your FFPP, are you setting them to mechanically be able to fall, or are you measuring a shooter's power factor? If you are setting them to mechanically be able to fall, does it require a minimum of a 125 power factor hit to do so? It's not that hard to set the poppers by hand to insure that they fall with almost any hit. It is very difficult to calibrate a popper at 125 power factor, then have it maintain the setting even after falling a couple of times. IDPA doesn't calibrate the poppers. There is no need to, because the have only one power factor per each division. IPSC uses an antiquated method that is a hold over from when a mechanical devise was used to make a distinction within a division of shooters using two different power factors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted January 13, 2003 Author Share Posted January 13, 2003 There is no published (IPSC) definition of the word "calibration" but I stand by my comments in respect of "common practice". All aspects of popper calibration will be discussed during the rules committee meetings in Orlando next month. I appreciate all the input and I will include all comments during the meetings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted January 13, 2003 Share Posted January 13, 2003 I'll see if I can get any pics of my new Matt Bigham FF popper up.. They're very cool. A .22 can usually drop 'em, AR-500 plate, and with the activator attachment they can yank small planes out of the air. They also don't use the wimpy hook-and-hole mechanism that caught xcount and are almost totally windproof. (Edited by shred at 10:44 pm on Jan. 12, 2003) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted January 13, 2003 Author Share Posted January 13, 2003 Show me! Show me! If you need a server to store the image, just email it to me and I'll be happy to host it on my server and provide a link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xcount Posted January 13, 2003 Share Posted January 13, 2003 After reading the newer posts and giving this some more thought I may have gone full circle and come to believe Lynn was correct with the statement that FFPPs don't need calibration (and certainly not re-calibration). A little more information about my FFPP "experience" story. After the match I had a beer with my good friend who designed & built these poppers and told him what had happened. He said he had tested these poppers with a .22 and they would fall, it should have fallen with my .38 super, and (here's the big one) someone must have set it wrong. Now I'm thinking about other things in stages that have mechanical releases and could be "set wrong". For example, let's say a stage has a firing point with a closed window in a wall. Pull a lever and the window will drop open so you can see the targets. Once the stage is built they have someone's 10 year old kid pull the lever - the window drops open - the prop is declared to work just fine. During the match a big guy shooter pulls the lever but the window doesn't drop open. The RO can see that the prop is not functioning properly. What happens next? Do they go get that 10 year old kid to test it? Or do they simply call it "range equipment failure" and issue a re-shoot? Re-shoot, right? Well, what's the difference with the popper that has a mechanical release? If someone set it "wrong" and it doesn't fall when struck by something larger than the .22 that has proven in the past to make it fall - isn't that range equipment failure? It certainly wasn't a failure on the part of the shooter to hit it. And it wasn't a failure on the part of the shooter to have sufficient power to make it fall. So, if the popper not falling was not as a result of any failure on the part of the shooter, how can we put the shooter in the position where he might be penalized when the "test gun" is brought out? My point is that if there is a mechanical release involved (as opposed to simply overcoming inertia) there is no way of knowing whether or not the first shot caused that mechanism to release part way. Under the current system, if the test gun bullet causes it to release the rest of the way - the shooter gets screwed. Of course, if you accept that any popper which doesn't fall could result in a "range equipment failure" re-shoot, then steps must be taken to ensure the RO will be able to see that the popper actually was struck by the shooter's bullet and make the appropriate call. And the only way I can think of to do this (other than having No Shoots behind every popper ) is to paint the popper for every shooter. (Recommended procedure anyway, right Vince?) BTW, I work in a hardware store / lumberyard with a national supplier. I'll ask the boss if we can set up a special IPSC account where we can have pallets of paint drop-shipped at clubs. No, I don't work on commission but it might help my Christmas bonus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted January 13, 2003 Author Share Posted January 13, 2003 Xcount, An interesting point and I share most of your views. The whole matter of Popper Calibration will be discussed next month in Orlando, and I expect the committee will arrive at some fresh new ideas. And I don't mean just for Handgun. Thanks for your input. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xcount Posted January 13, 2003 Share Posted January 13, 2003 Vince, As long as Popper Calibration is going to be looked at, take a moment to consider this hypothetical.......... With the championship of the universe at stake, the two leaders in the match are in a virtual tie going into the last stage and both fail to knock down the same popper. Shooter A has an unbelievably smoking run. Absolutely flawless. Except that one popper does not fall. He asks for a re-calibration and the RM arrives with the test gun. The RM fires and his shot strikes dead center of the circle. The popper falls and the crowd groans because Shooter A just lost 15 points. Shooter B steps up to the line and has nothing but problems. He hits 2 No Shoots, blows a reload, has a major jam, and that one popper fails to fall again. The RM is called again and this time his shot strikes the "head" of the popper - above the radius of the circle - above the calibration zone. And the popper falls. The spectators gasp because they know that under both IPSC & USPSA Appendix C rules Shooter B must reshoot the stage. I'll let you write your own ending to the story (depending upon how devoutly you believe in the existance of a Reshoot God) but it strikes me as being somewhat odd that the championship of the universe could be decided not by the shooting ability of either one of the match leaders but, rather, the ability of a 3rd party not even entered in the match. And, just in case you don't see a problem yet, let me add that Shooter B and the RM are brothers. Perception often is accepted as reality, after all. Finally, what's with this Orlando stuff? What's wrong with Montreal this time of year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted January 14, 2003 Share Posted January 14, 2003 No problems w/web space Vince. Got my own server and all, it's just my digital camera is getting very cranky and the heavy popper is out in my cold truck.. As for popper calibrations, I think I posted this before, but at Area 4 this year I had a popper fail to fall.. freshly painted, with a dead-center hit from a just-chronoed 168 PF load. RM comes over, and clang, it goes over from the 9mm. Next shooter gets up to the line. This guy's shooting a revolver and when he gets to the same popper, he dumps an entire cylinder on it. No go. Lucky for us the RM is still there and we both get reshoots-- In this case, it was part of an double-activator setup. Shooting either that popper, or one later in the course would trigger a bobber. When I shot, I didn't down the first activating popper, but did the second. So when they calibrated, the activator mechanism wasn't hooked up and the popper went over easily. When they tried with the activator attached, there was no way it was going over with a bowling pin load. I don't believe this situation is addressed with the popper calibration rules as they are now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted January 14, 2003 Author Share Posted January 14, 2003 Montreal? Never been there and I'd love to visit one of these days but, right now, I'm chasing the sun! You recounted an excellent example of why we need to revisit the whole concept of popper calibration. It's not an easy one to resolve and I expect we may end up with a controversial recommendation, but I think it's important to, as best we can, eliminate or further minimise the influence of mechanical devices on match results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lynn jones Posted January 14, 2003 Share Posted January 14, 2003 hey guys, if we eliminate Popper Calibration as part of our sport, what will be the procedure if a pepper popper won't go down because the "set bolt" backs out (not ffpp). Range malfunction? re-shoot? probably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noname Posted January 14, 2003 Share Posted January 14, 2003 Quote: from lynn jones on 8:55 am on Jan. 14, 2003 hey guys, if we eliminate Popper Calibration as part of our sport, what will be the procedure if a pepper popper won't go down because the "set bolt" backs out (not ffpp). Range malfunction? re-shoot? probably. A re-shoot is in order if the "set bolt" backs out using the system we have now, but now we have to call over the RangeMaster to recalibrate the steel, along with a possible discussion or arguement with the shooter; very time consuming. If it would be considered range equipment failure, the RO could reset the popper rather quickly, get the re-shoot completed, and keep the squads running more efficiently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Bagoly Posted January 15, 2003 Share Posted January 15, 2003 So any hit, partial hit, or low hit, must score? Just get rid if the steel. You are describing paper targets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noname Posted January 15, 2003 Share Posted January 15, 2003 Quote: from Rich Bagoly on 6:21 pm on Jan. 14, 2003 So any hit, partial hit, or low hit, must score? Just get rid if the steel. You are describing paper targets. You paint the steel between shooters so that the shooter and the RO can tell where the hit/s are. If the hits are below what is now called the calibration zone, and the popper doesn't fall, he has to keep firing. If the hits are in or above the calibration zone, and the popper doesn't fall, he gets a reshoot for range equipment failure. If the hits are below the calibration zone and the popper falls, he gets the score. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Bagoly Posted January 15, 2003 Share Posted January 15, 2003 Edge hit? Shooter hits it once... twice... three times a.... popper finally goes down. RO can't see the popper, later shown to have good hits. Reshoot? Shooter rings the steel, no joy. RO stops him, shot is low edge. Reshoot? Is it fair to the other competitors? We need to ask, "Why do we have steel targets?" Then we can tell how to score them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Di Vita Posted January 15, 2003 Share Posted January 15, 2003 IMHO any legit hit in the (articulate mode on) circular body of the popper (articulate mode off) should be scored. Why does it have to fall to score? Isn't that just left over from when they used to use poppers to measure the 125 PF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noname Posted January 15, 2003 Share Posted January 15, 2003 If you hit the steel on the edge, you didn't get a full diameter hit in the calibration zone. Keep shooting. How else are we going to activate the swingers, gravity turners, etc.? With only levers, ropes, doors, and platforms? I know of several shooters that would be happy not having to lug steel to the bays for a match, though. (Edited by noname at 10:10 pm on Jan. 14, 2003) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Di Vita Posted January 15, 2003 Share Posted January 15, 2003 If it can be made reliably, pressure mats. They do that at a local IDPA club and it works out pretty good. 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