Improperly Set up Classifier

[boz1911]

Still leaves me with a question, how close is close enough? I have searched high and low, strong with the google fu this one, but for the life of me I can't find any rules or information on how accurate it needs to be for the classifier to be legal. Just wondering if anyone here in the brain trust could help me answer this one just to satisfy curosity.

Joe W.

I don't think you're going to find a plus or minus measurement anywhere. I would think just do the best you can is all anyone could ask, besides considering all the variables with elevation, target stands, etc there is no way they will ever be perfect.

[LPatterson]

Still leaves me with a question, how close is close enough? I have searched high and low, strong with the google fu this one, but for the life of me I can't find any rules or information on how accurate it needs to be for the classifier to be legal. Just wondering if anyone here in the brain trust could help me answer this one just to satisfy curosity.

Joe W.

Close enough for government work. We have sent astronauts to the moon using that specification.

[joecichlid]

I don't think you're going to find a plus or minus measurement anywhere. I would think just do the best you can is all anyone could ask, besides considering all the variables with elevation, target stands, etc there is no way they will ever be perfect.

OK, thanks very much. That answers my question and now I can feel better about setting up classifiers. One of the things I got to thinking about is that the stages are designed for a flat bay but a lot of the outdoor clubs have bays that are uneven or slopped. Say a given classifier (el pres) calls for target to be set at 5 feet at the shoulder but the bay has a slope of say 12 inches over 30 feet that would put the target either a foot high or a foot low (compaired to a flat bay) depending on the way the ground slopes. Should you try to adjust the targets so that they are in the same relation as if they were on a perfectly flat bay? Say using a laser level? Heck a laser level on a flat bay would be nice so you can insure the targets are the correct heigth. Trust me, I have been thinking about a laser level and a tripod for our club. lol

Close enough for government work. We have sent astronauts to the moon using that specification.

Heck, we got to the moon on 3.14 and a slide rule. lol

Joe W.

[LPatterson]

Joe,

This is getting extreme. If you take a tape and measure the height to the shoulder as is the norm and it is +/- your fudge factor, that part is good (personally an inch). Most classifiers use a center line and rear target line so if you use a triangulation measurement to insure the rear line is perpendicular to the center line you are getting closer than most. Once the center & rear lines are established, multiple tape measures can locate target feet locations (again that personal inch). It is usually not covered in setup notes but for targets 5-6' off center line I like to angle the outside of the target a couple of inches toward the shooter for better presentation.

[joecichlid]

Joe,

This is getting extreme. If you take a tape and measure the height to the shoulder as is the norm and it is +/- your fudge factor, that part is good (personally an inch). Most classifiers use a center line and rear target line so if you use a triangulation measurement to insure the rear line is perpendicular to the center line you are getting closer than most. Once the center & rear lines are established, multiple tape measures can locate target feet locations (again that personal inch). It is usually not covered in setup notes but for targets 5-6' off center line I like to angle the outside of the target a couple of inches toward the shooter for better presentation.

I know what you mean. Sometimes I do get carried away with things like that, just my nature to be as close to spot on as possible. For shoulder heigth I usually have a piece of lath about 5.5 foot long and mark it at 5 foot and use that, easier to do that when I am by myself than to extend my tape measure when I am doing several targets at a time. I guess the laser level is the gadget freak/open shooter in me. Not like my club would spring for it though. lol

Joe W.

[ima45dv8]

OK, thanks very much. That answers my question and now I can feel better about setting up classifiers. One of the things I got to thinking about is that the stages are designed for a flat bay but a lot of the outdoor clubs have bays that are uneven or slopped. Say a given classifier (el pres) calls for target to be set at 5 feet at the shoulder but the bay has a slope of say 12 inches over 30 feet that would put the target either a foot high or a foot low (compaired to a flat bay) depending on the way the ground slopes. Should you try to adjust the targets so that they are in the same relation as if they were on a perfectly flat bay? Say using a laser level? Heck a laser level on a flat bay would be nice so you can insure the targets are the correct heigth. Trust me, I have been thinking about a laser level and a tripod for our club. lol

Joe W.

At Area 6 a few years ago a setup crew volunteer insisted on setting up the classifier. That was the only type of stage he was comfortable building because it was the only one that had exact measurements. He said that using imagination and being creative was not his strong suit. The classifier was CM 99-39, "Off Balance Blast".

When we went to inspect his work I mentioned that the targets were too short. He explained in a very serious manner that they were not. Since that classifier required shooting under a horizontal cross bar, and the bay sloped upwards towards the targets, he put a string level on the barricade and ran it downrange, setting the height of the targets relative to the shooting position. Not doing so would have required the competitors to crouch down even more to shoot 'uphill' at the targets. After several minutes of discussion and head-scratching we agreed with his logic. Even so, I made some comment about it not being rocket science or nuclear physics.

With the same deadpan expression he said, "It must be done according to design or not at all, because I actualy AM a physicist."

[matt2ace]

OK, thanks very much. That answers my question and now I can feel better about setting up classifiers. One of the things I got to thinking about is that the stages are designed for a flat bay but a lot of the outdoor clubs have bays that are uneven or slopped. Say a given classifier (el pres) calls for target to be set at 5 feet at the shoulder but the bay has a slope of say 12 inches over 30 feet that would put the target either a foot high or a foot low (compaired to a flat bay) depending on the way the ground slopes. Should you try to adjust the targets so that they are in the same relation as if they were on a perfectly flat bay? Say using a laser level? Heck a laser level on a flat bay would be nice so you can insure the targets are the correct heigth. Trust me, I have been thinking about a laser level and a tripod for our club. lol

Joe W.

At Area 6 a few years ago a setup crew volunteer insisted on setting up the classifier. That was the only type of stage he was comfortable building because it was the only one that had exact measurements. He said that using imagination and being creative was not his strong suit. The classifier was CM 99-39, "Off Balance Blast".

When we went to inspect his work I mentioned that the targets were too short. He explained in a very serious manner that they were not. Since that classifier required shooting under a horizontal cross bar, and the bay sloped upwards towards the targets, he put a string level on the barricade and ran it downrange, setting the height of the targets relative to the shooting position. Not doing so would have required the competitors to crouch down even more to shoot 'uphill' at the targets. After several minutes of discussion and head-scratching we agreed with his logic. Even so, I made some comment about it not being rocket science or nuclear physics.

With the same deadpan expression he said, "It must be done according to design or not at all, because I actualy AM a physicist."

+1 for a string level......a cheap and easy way to assure target height is correct when a bay is sloped.

We use a string level for our classifiers for the same reason. We use the same bay every month and it has a 1--2ft rise. We would end up with the targets way too high if we did not use a level to set target height.

[joecichlid]

At Area 6 a few years ago a setup crew volunteer insisted on setting up the classifier. That was the only type of stage he was comfortable building because it was the only one that had exact measurements. He said that using imagination and being creative was not his strong suit. The classifier was CM 99-39, "Off Balance Blast".

When we went to inspect his work I mentioned that the targets were too short. He explained in a very serious manner that they were not. Since that classifier required shooting under a horizontal cross bar, and the bay sloped upwards towards the targets, he put a string level on the barricade and ran it downrange, setting the height of the targets relative to the shooting position. Not doing so would have required the competitors to crouch down even more to shoot 'uphill' at the targets. After several minutes of discussion and head-scratching we agreed with his logic. Even so, I made some comment about it not being rocket science or nuclear physics.

With the same deadpan expression he said, "It must be done according to design or not at all, because I actualy AM a physicist."

LOL Glad to see I am not the only one out there that can get fussy about making sure it is to the letter as best I can.

Joe W

[Nik Habicht]

With the same deadpan expression he said, "It must be done according to design or not at all, because I actualy AM a physicist."

But was he a German physicist? Or employed as a rocket scientist? :roflol: