trying to minimise any contact with equipment and others has lead us to consider shooting rounds where everyone moves forwards to the next line as you would on a 2 way shoot. so for a national, short national etc everyone moves to the 10 yd line rather than peopel moving the targets and having to dress in masks and gloves that then get binned after 10 seconds use.
Now this has raised an issue that has gone unnoticed for at least 10 years and that is the overshoot requring a minimum range and safety zone length of 150 yds if compounds are being used. If we move forwards then that means the last 10 yds of the zone disappears but be have a berm at 145m from the shooting line that would hoover up any stray arrows. As this wasnt mentioned in out self certification to AGB many menbers say that it doesnt exist as a safety feature and we are all doomed if we either take it into account or ask AGB to alter the paperwork.
having looked at the guidance and specificatiosn I can see 3 versions and only 1 is dated and ambiguous anyway so whe the guidance was drwan up was it based on a flat template or does it actually take into account ballistics and vertical angles for safety templates as do outdoor ranges for rifles and pistols where different take off angles are considerd for the types of guns but also their different muzzle energies of the projectile.
Haivng done a bit of measuring I am baffled as to why a
compound bow that loose an arrow at a lesser speed than a 50lb draw
recurve needs and extra 50 yds of beaten ground when the arrow drops within a foot of the
recurve arrow when loosed at the same angle. another odd thing about berms is the closer you are to them the more of a distance behind the target they protect so stand 40 yds from a 3.5m bund 10 yds behind the target and you get a safety zone of 100yds when using the same angles as you would for standing 150 yds away on flat ground
Why is a wall an inpenetrable backstop on an indoor range but not an outdoor one?
can anyone tell me who made these decisions or is the range template just something that was a best fit to a playing field as the rest of the guidance for constructing a facility is like a millionaires shopping list of likes rather than what would be practicable for almost anyone starting a club.
You could apply the same questioning of logic to the 5m distances between targets when only 1 person per target- why not 4m?
If al the best peopel are advising the govt on their strategy who have AGB employed to come up with their scheme and why is the hazard added to the risk figure in the new risk assessment forms rather than multiplied to determine the overall figure.
For example a giant meteor hitting the eath will wipe out the entire population so an enormous hazard. The liklihood of this happening in the next billion years is almost zero so the risk is close to zero and the overall outcome is a negligible one. The AGB would rate the meteor as 3 and the risk as 1 and make 4, the same as a novice pointing a bow at someone 50 yds away where the outcome could be a fatal injury is serious but not certain and the chances of the novice hitting the poor sod much reduced so 2+2 and again 4.
The changes have made me question a lot more of how AGB actually functions and what it does to actually benefit the people paying their salaries and expenses so sorry to go off at a tanget a little as I always get the same shout down- "it will invalidate our insurance" when there is no such indication that is true and if you take that to be correct the if Fred shot me on a normal shooting day will they avoid paying out because I was wearing jeans at the time?