Competitive rifle shooting- steel target considerations to address frag?

arcticcathonda

arcticcathonda

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
105   0   0
Location
Southern Alberta
HI there, just wondering if any clubs out there have had concerns or issues raised regarding the firing of high velocity rifle rounds and the use of AR500 plate? How did your club address these concerns and meet compliance?

Before everyone jumps on their high horse proclaiming this is not an issue, our club exec has cited this issue needs to be addressed before we are to integrate rifle fire on steel into our 3 gun events. Understand, our 3 gun program is in its infancy, and we fought hard for it against much resistance! It is a matter of appeasing those in charge starting out.

I remember shooting at the EESA years ago and they may have had similar concerns and used a nifty 2 board and carpet design?

Thanks
 
Last edited:
arcticcathonda said:
....our club exec has cited this issue needs to be addressed before we are to integrate rifle fire on steel into our 3 gun events. Understand, our 3 gun program is in its infancy, and we fought hard for it against much resistance! It is a matter of appeasing those in charge starting out.
Click to expand...

Which club are you with?
 
A simple wooden shroud should suffice.
Here in Ontario we're required to shroud steel that is shot with pistol/rifle bullets.
I suppose it's meant to mitigate fragments leaving the range.
I don't see the point as that's what berms are for and material that goes straight up... Comes straight down.
Plus... spatter fragments don't have a lot of mass... How far can they really travel anyway?
 
667 said:
A simple wooden shroud should suffice.
Here in Ontario we're required to shroud steel that is shot with pistol/rifle bullets.
...
Click to expand...

Thanks for the constructive comment. Anybody here with experience making these shrouds? Design types for different steel target types? (I'm working with arcticcathonda on this)
 
alpining said:
Thanks for the constructive comment. Anybody here with experience making these shrouds? Design types for different steel target types? (I'm working with arcticcathonda on this)
Click to expand...

The shrouding requirement in an Ontario thing. We shoot Steel Challenge and no additional protection is required. While rifle projectiles have more kinetic energy, the have very little mass and should have a similar ejecta pattern.

Why is anything required?

Instead of generating a solution for a potentially non-existent problem, why not conduct some tests with layered cardboard shrouding around the steel and compare the relative penetration of plate ejecta (handgun vs. rifle projectiles) on the shroud? There either is a problem or there isn't. The pattern of ejecta will be the same. The mass of ejecta (rifle vs. handgun) will be less (62 gr. vs. 124 gr.). The velocity of ejecta for the rifle bullet will be higher. I'm willing to bet that the penetration in a test media (i.e. cardboard) is the same. If it is, why would you build anything?
 
We use minimum steel target engagement ranges of 11 meters for handguns and rimfire firearms, and 50 meters for centerfire rifles. No other precautions beyond the usual.
 
fingers284 said:
The range guide manual shows a steel target surrounded by R/R ties incorporated/supported into an earthen structure.
Click to expand...

That's "bunkering"... More suited to permanent install of a gong.

I've made shrouds out of everything from 2x6 lumber to plywood lined with rubber conveyor belt to scrap wood from pallets
Two sides and a top. ..
 
667 said:
Plus... spatter fragments don't have a lot of mass... How far can they really travel anyway?
Click to expand...
Funny you should ask. The Federal DOJ actually knows. According to the guy that wrote the DOJ Range Construction guidelines, 200 yards downrange was the farthest they could get a ricochet from a 308 shot at a popper laying down using radar to track it at Bisley. Apparently, once a bullet is malformed, it's aerodyamics slow it real fast.
 
1riot1ranger said:
The shrouding requirement in an Ontario thing. We shoot Steel Challenge and no additional protection is required. While rifle projectiles have more kinetic energy, the have very little mass and should have a similar ejecta pattern.

Why is anything required?

Instead of generating a solution for a potentially non-existent problem, why not conduct some tests with layered cardboard shrouding around the steel and compare the relative penetration of plate ejecta (handgun vs. rifle projectiles) on the shroud? There either is a problem or there isn't. The pattern of ejecta will be the same. The mass of ejecta (rifle vs. handgun) will be less (62 gr. vs. 124 gr.). The velocity of ejecta for the rifle bullet will be higher. I'm willing to bet that the penetration in a test media (i.e. cardboard) is the same. If it is, why would you build anything?
Click to expand...

I am in complete agreement with you on this. The club executive disagrees. It's possible that we might be able to change their minds. In the interim, if we want to shoot steel with rifles, we need to shroud.

I saw some simple shroud solutions at WRAS on Saturday that will fit the bill with minimal cost (basically just two pieces of lumber hinged together and set up as a "doghouse" over the steel).
 
I have built shrouds for autopoppers out of two inch lumber and they have contained all fragments no problem. That was probably overkill though. Judging by how deep the fragments go into my shrouds (i.e. pretty much just stuck on the surface) I doubt you'd get overpenetration even with 3/8" or 1/2" plywood. I overbuilt mine so that I knew no one would claim they were insufficient. If anything you need to worry more about making the structure thick enough so that if someone misses and hits the shroud directly that it won't become kindling right away.

And yes, the shrouds are pointless. I have shot my autopoppers on private property (with no stupid CFO intervention to worry about) and 99% of the splatter goes down into the ground, and the rest doesn't go far at all.
 
Ganderite said:
You might want to have a look to see if steel core ammo is more of an issue, or the 5.56 62g ammo with the steel perpetrator. A test with a wood shroud to see how much energy is involved.
Click to expand...

For the sake of our steel, we have asked that steel core ammo not be used on the metal targets provided by members (myself and alpining) as dimpling starts to occur at a faster rate. If we are shooting paper, go nuts! or bring your own AR500 plate!
 
We've hung steel inside an old tire, an idea I saw the Team Hoser guys use. Makes for an easy setup...roll out tire, couple of ground stakes to hold it upright, voila - you have a shrouded target.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom