Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
backstop
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Nobody mentioned shooting into the air, so the issue of suitability doesn't enter into it. As I've pointed out earlier, a 1.5 degree angle would equate to 13.5m at 500 yards by which distance (assuming the 1.5 degrees is above sightline) a .22 round would have hit the ground whereas a .308 would still be travelling. That in itself is a significant difference which would bring the terrain and land suitability into question.
Our conversation was about whether land suitable for .22 would also be suitable for .308 and vice versa; an assertion you made in response to tac foley's post and with which I disagree. Ranges came into it because they differentiate between rimfire and centrefire quite significantly.
Shooting into the air was mentioned in Patsat's defence earlier in the thread.
I have seen folk fire .22lr and .223 on the same 100 yard range.
Main difference was sound insulation
There is a fair drop on a .308 too, one of it's Achilles heels.
Almost 4 feet @ 500 in some grains.
So lads, it is all relative.
It all comes with experience and training/instruction.0 -
After he made the statement about land being suitable for both calibres, not before which makes it irrelevant to this discussion, which is about that statement.Tackleberrywho wrote: »Shooting into the air was mentioned in Patsat's defence earlier in the thread.
But the range is authorised for centre fire and so also for rimfire. If it was only authorised for rimfire, you wouldn't see or hear it :rolleyes:I have seen folk fire .22lr and .223 on the same 100 yard range.
Main difference was sound insulation
So what takes care of the other 40 feet?There is a fair drop on a .308 too, one of it's Achilles heels.
Almost 4 feet @ 500 in some grains.0 -
After he made the statement about land being suitable for both calibres, not before which makes it irrelevant to this discussion, which is about that statement.
But the range is authorised for centre fire and so also for rimfire. If it was only authorised for rimfire, you wouldn't see or hear it :rolleyes:
So what takes care of the other 40 feet?
Well I don't normally use 40 feet hold over 0 -
It's not a holdover, it's a misaimed or misdirected shot 1.5 degrees above the line of sight. Not beyond the realms of possibility; a badly handled recoil would have a similar effect or a mistimed trigger release coming down on to the target.Tackleberrywho wrote: »Well I don't normally use 40 feet hold over0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
Doesn't matter whether it's the first or last if the other mechanical elements of being on target fail for an unforeseen reason. Misdirected shots happen, they don't happen often, but they do happen regardless of your utopian dream. Which is why you try to engineer the situation to cover such unforeseen possibilities
The line of sight is a direct line from the rifle to the target. It's not rocket science, it's simple mechanics. Your sights may be offset to take account of the path of the bullet, but the line of sight is always straight. A deviation from that line happens at the shooters end and can be caused by anything from a sneeze to a fouled barrel.
A fouled barrel will not send a round at 100 yards out of the ballpark, as I use Moly I have no fouling
No we are talking about statistical probability, only last week we had a poster here complaining about 10 shots missing his target completely for a (then) unknown reason.
Probability dictates variation is natural, not every shooter experiences same issues. Experiences would have stopped the experienced shooter after shot 1 was not on target to Investigate, Root cause, Trouble shoot which ever expression you prefer
And if your judgment does not take into account the possibility of a misdirected shot then it's not very good is it?
My judgement is just fine
The trigger finger is the ultimate safety.
when in doubt don't deploy finger.
backstops like the Himalayas are for worst case scenario's.
As you have already explained in simple terms for us lay people. A small hill as a backstop at 100 is just the bees knees.
Or the sugar loaf if you are a bad shot 0 -
Complacency is the worst thing you can bring to the field: You're never in doubt when you do something wrong, that's why it happens. I have been shooting for over thirty years and fired tens of thousands of rounds and I freely admit that I've had my fair share of misdirected shots through any number of factors.Tackleberrywho wrote: »My judgement is just fine
The trigger finger is the ultimate safety.
when in doubt don't deploy finger.
backstops like the Himalayas are for worst case scenario's.
As you have already explained in simple terms for us lay people. A small hill as a backstop at 100 is just the bees knees.
Or the sugar loaf if you are a bad shot
The trigger finger is not the ultimate safety, anything but. It's the most dangerous part of the shot routine and is wont to do any number of unpredictable things through weather, stiffness, carelessness or just plain in the wrong place at the wrong time.
I've managed to catch the trigger whilst closing the bolt, not felt the second pressure through coldness and slipped off the woodwork because of sweat in extreme heat.
And please don't minimise the need for an adequate backstop, if you don't have one, chances are it'll be when you need it most. You may think you're completely safe, but you cannot in all honesty tell me that every shot you ever took went where you wanted to send it.0 -
-
You can't use a 40 gram trigger with gloves on without creating more problems. The slip of the finger only happened once. You however have missed my point entirely, which is that sh*t happens whether you think you've prepared for it or not. And a misdirected shot is a misdirected shot regardless of where it ends up and quite frankly how do you know where it ended up if it was misdirected? In my case, the end result was a six instead of a ten so the only thing damaged was my prideTackleberrywho wrote: »I never said that a back stop was not important, I was being proportional that is all RRPC.
I would recommend shooters gloves for winter, and checkering for your timber or an ergo grip.
I have been only hunting 25 years or so, but these were the tips I picked up.
Of course I have missed targets RRPC, But I was always in the ball park. not in the next parish.
I have to thank my granddad lord rest him for that.
He was a great instructor.
What you seem to be arguing for here Tack is that people should ignore all the learned data about shooting and rely entirely on their own abilities and not take any account of the phsyical characteristics of the land they are shooting on. That they should take every shot secure in the knowledge that they can do no wrong and that there is no need to take into account even the merest possibility of a shot going astray.
I pointed out that the smallest angular deviation of a rifle (no more than a twitch of a half degree) can send a round 20 feet above the line of sight at 500 metres when we're discussing firearms that can send bullets up to seven times that distance and you claim I'm not being proportional?0 -
You can't use a 40 gram trigger with gloves on without creating more problems. The slip of the finger only happened once. You however have missed my point entirely, which is that sh*t happens whether you think you've prepared for it or not. And a misdirected shot is a misdirected shot regardless of where it ends up and quite frankly how do you know where it ended up if it was misdirected? In my case, the end result was a six instead of a ten so the only thing damaged was my pride
What you seem to be arguing for here Tack is that people should ignore all the learned data about shooting and rely entirely on their own abilities and not take any account of the phsyical characteristics of the land they are shooting on. That they should take every shot secure in the knowledge that they can do no wrong and that there is no need to take into account even the merest possibility of a shot going astray.
I pointed out that the smallest angular deviation of a rifle (no more than a twitch of a half degree) can send a round 20 feet above the line of sight at 500 metres when we're discussing firearms that can send bullets up to seven times that distance and you claim I'm not being proportional?
I never ignore lkearned data
I do a risk assesment every time I go shooting. So do you I expect.
Every time we fire or discharge a firearm we run a risk.
I said we were broadly in agreement about 4 posts ago.
Yet we are still talking about it!
You speak to me about angles if I have no concept of them?
If you want to send a projectile 7x500 metres, you need serious hold over.
So 1 deg would not cut the mustard.
I take my hat of to anyone who can hold over at that distance.
Flat shooting round or not.
I am affording proportionality to the rounds speed weight and SD.
Two guys from Oz Recently tested a back stop for an Air Rifle.;)
I really think we have talked this to death. we are in agreement on a backstop is needed, we both say it needs to be higher than the target, we both say it has to be able to absorb the round
Can we move on now?
More interesting Threads on the go 0 -
More like ten posts and then you jumped into a subsequent discussion between myself and patsat and away we went again :rolleyes:Tackleberrywho wrote: »I said we were broadly in agreement about 4 posts ago.
Yet we are still talking about it!
Well apparently you still don't understand what I'm talking about. I'll spell it out really carefully.You speak to me about angles if I have no concept of them?
If you want to send a projectile 7x500 metres, you need serious hold over.
So 1 deg would not cut the mustard.
I take my hat of to anyone who can hold over at that distance.
You take aim at a bunny at 300 yards, something goes wrong with your shot and it goes away one degree high (measured at the muzzle of your rifle). The bullet clears your bunny by a good 5m and carries on passing 500m now 9m above the original bunny bashing height. Merrily it carries on its way (having lost a few feet through trajectory) passing the 1000m mark some 18m above the line of sight minus trajectory shift. Your original backstop was a sandbank 20 feet high about 100 yards behind the bunny which the bullet cleared by a good four or five feet. Do you understand now?
Say yes and indeed we can move on. 0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
More like ten posts and then you jumped into a subsequent discussion between myself and patsat and away we went again :rolleyes:
Well apparently you still don't understand what I'm talking about. I'll spell it out really carefully.
You take aim at a bunny at 300 yards, something goes wrong with your shot and it goes away one degree high (measured at the muzzle of your rifle). The bullet clears your bunny by a good 5m and carries on passing 500m now 9m above the original bunny bashing height. Merrily it carries on its way (having lost a few feet through trajectory) passing the 1000m mark some 18m above the line of sight minus trajectory shift. Your original backstop was a sandbank 20 feet high about 100 yards behind the bunny which the bullet cleared by a good four or five feet. Do you understand now?
Say yes and indeed we can move on.
You are right, we can move on.
If the bunny was bunny, he lives on a sandbank.
If round misses, normally left or right due to wind speed.
In regards to your question?
I will never understand you
You have bunnies 100 yards from a ditch/Hill/backstop never happens.
the live at the butt of hills.
A miss to me is not hitting a bunnies head @ 300 not missing him by 5 metres.
You must get a nightforce and an accurised centrefire rifle.
missing by 5 metres, I'd return the rifle to RFD as a Dud 0 -
Tackleberrywho wrote: »
In regards to your question?
I will never understand you
I feel your pain!:D0 -
Oh. Good. Lord.Tackleberrywho wrote: »You are right, we can move on.
If the bunny was bunny, he lives on a sandbank.
If round misses, normally left or right due to wind speed.
In regards to your question?
I will never understand you
You have bunnies 100 yards from a ditch/Hill/backstop never happens.
the live at the butt of hills.
A miss to me is not hitting a bunnies head @ 300 not missing him by 5 metres.
You must get a nightforce and an accurised centrefire rifle.
missing by 5 metres, I'd return the rifle to RFD as a Dud
The shot is misdirected, not misaimed.
Something happens for it to go astray; you sneeze, a dog comes along and pees on you, a golden eagle swoops down and takes your hat, your bipod breaks, you're lying prone on sand and a mole comes up and eats your crotch. Something goes FUBAR and the shot goes wonky.
And the bunny came out of a burrow in a small ditch between you and your sandbank backstop.
I really think I might have to draw a picture :eek:0 -
Oh. Good. Lord.
The shot is misdirected, not misaimed.
Something happens for it to go astray; you sneeze, a dog comes along and pees on you, a golden eagle swoops down and takes your hat, your bipod breaks, you're lying prone on sand and a mole comes up and eats your crotch. Something goes FUBAR and the shot goes wonky.
And the bunny came out of a burrow in a small ditch between you and your sandbank backstop.
I really think I might have to draw a picture :eek:
picture would be good
No moles in ireland, all the Eagles are poisoned, I don't have hayfever and A dog peeing on me?
I'd pee on the dog.
FUBAR , that would be the Bunny. red Mist
I never disagreed about needing a backstop.
I even posted pics of a .308 after hitting a good backstop.
I did fie it @ 50 yards, which might mess up your maths as the rifle would have to be pointed into the air to overcome the backstop.
Maybe I should draw a picture too?
or post one?0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Advertisement