ips
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 15,642
Its a big man who accepts he got it wrong.edit the above is boll***** Ian your figs are correct!just did a re calc.. oopps sorry and to 40UP
target angle
- Thread starter ips
- Start date
Help Support :
Ian although my figs were correct I forgot to re calc with respect to the peg 3 position so 40UP is quite correct... now there is a surprise ! However notwithstanding all of that I would still rather be on peg 5 expecting that target than standing in front of a bank that had a 45 rl and a 35 lr in it but that is a concept thought on my part
Another fascinating talk and has given me more insight. My final thought ... maybe is ABT actually harder than OT for me no andI stick with that, there are the possibilities for it to be though but it can also throw a lot of very favourable targets for the shooter. Is it less than fair most definitely purely from the point of view of where you are standing at the time those whiz bangs are thrown
Another fascinating talk and has given me more insight. My final thought ... maybe
is ABT actually harder than OT for me no andI stick with that, there are the possibilities for it to be though but it can also throw a lot of very favourable targets for the shooter. Is it less than fair most definitely purely from the point of view of where you are standing at the time those whiz bangs are thrown
ips
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 15,642
Well john I disagree, personally I would rather be on any OT peg with my stance set nicely for a left or right 45 (I have no issues with L or R preference) that appears directly in front of me than be on peg 1 or 5 at ABT and be faced with any more than my fare share of 50 degree low 80m target that I only see when its covered 2m and has popped out 1.5m to the side of my peripheral vision. And remember that even if I set up to favour this target if I don't get it I don't get a straight one either as that target is now rising about 2m to the right of my barrel. Decisions decisions, compromise compromise.
A very interesting discussion this
A very interesting discussion this
Ian I never have a problem saying "I got that wrong" that is what scientists have to do soooo often
I am not saying though that my perception that OT is harder than ABT is wrong ! But my perception comes from a very short time in trap shooting. I personally have bests of 45ex50 and 23ex25 for ABT on a number of occasions not brilliant but not shabby either and hard to believe ... but true is the ones I missed were almost straights. I have quite a few times been on for a 25 only to miss a straight.. to be asked afterwards how did you miss those straight targets? My OT best is 37ex50 ! Now that could , almost certainly is, because I shoot it less. My UT is only 43ex50 I have shot that quite a lot I just find it tougher than ABT. I don't have your experience so I have to use my own and how I perceive the discipline, maybe when I shoot more and have greater experience this will change... as it stands just now I don't see me shooting too many 23's at OT to be brutally honest!
I am not saying though that my perception that OT is harder than ABT is wrong ! But my perception comes from a very short time in trap shooting. I personally have bests of 45ex50 and 23ex25 for ABT on a number of occasions not brilliant but not shabby either and hard to believe ... but true is the ones I missed were almost straights. I have quite a few times been on for a 25 only to miss a straight.. to be asked afterwards how did you miss those straight targets? My OT best is 37ex50 ! Now that could , almost certainly is, because I shoot it less. My UT is only 43ex50 I have shot that quite a lot I just find it tougher than ABT. I don't have your experience so I have to use my own and how I perceive the discipline, maybe when I shoot more and have greater experience this will change... as it stands just now I don't see me shooting too many 23's at OT to be brutally honest!
ips
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 15,642
John
As I have said many many times before it is my opinion that certain people are suited to certain disciplines. This is for many reasons, style / technique and mind set, also we all seem to perceive targets differently so what one shooter considers hard another considers not so and vice versa.
Take me as an example, after 5yrs shooting by 1991 I had settled into a self taught style and did not consider any other way of doing it (I refer you now to my ignorance is bliss post) even though it was quirky and everyone said "you cant shoot ABT with a moving gun or with your right arm up there and you shoot way to fast" they said this whilst I was B class and shooting 22 and 23s and 75 straights and high gun wins of 90+ (my very good friend of too many years to remember DF who reads this forum but does not post could confirm this is all true, hi DF) now because of this very fast style that worked for me at the time I shot very well in wind in fact I used to pray for wind every sunday morning as my scores were never effected when most other peoples score was, this was because I shot them that fast and without thinking or knowing any better, therefore I was very suited to ABT both in technique and in mind set. I could not shoot good consistent DTL as it didn't suit. My point is this I considered ABT easy by comparison to DTL and considered wind to be my friend.
I could bore you with the reasons I now find ABT much more difficult but that's another story from the riverbank.
As I have said many many times before it is my opinion that certain people are suited to certain disciplines. This is for many reasons, style / technique and mind set, also we all seem to perceive targets differently so what one shooter considers hard another considers not so and vice versa.
Take me as an example, after 5yrs shooting by 1991 I had settled into a self taught style and did not consider any other way of doing it (I refer you now to my ignorance is bliss post) even though it was quirky and everyone said "you cant shoot ABT with a moving gun or with your right arm up there and you shoot way to fast" they said this whilst I was B class and shooting 22 and 23s and 75 straights and high gun wins of 90+ (my very good friend of too many years to remember DF who reads this forum but does not post could confirm this is all true, hi DF) now because of this very fast style that worked for me at the time I shot very well in wind in fact I used to pray for wind every sunday morning as my scores were never effected when most other peoples score was, this was because I shot them that fast and without thinking or knowing any better, therefore I was very suited to ABT both in technique and in mind set. I could not shoot good consistent DTL as it didn't suit. My point is this I considered ABT easy by comparison to DTL and considered wind to be my friend.
I could bore you with the reasons I now find ABT much more difficult but that's another story from the riverbank.
Actually 50 degrees is not correct. The total angle view from peg 1 or 5 is actually 54 degrees assuming you are set up looking at the trap house!edit the above is boll***** Ian your figs are correct!
DT
JohnDT can you show me the calcs for that
I may be using the wrong dimensions
Distance from trap house to shooting line is 15 metres (from peg 3). Peg 1 is 6 metres to the left of peg 3 so if pointing directly at the centre of the leading edge of the TH the angle compared with the peg 3 position is 21.8 degrees. Add that the max target angle from peg 3 (32.5 degrees) and your effective target angle at peg 1 is 54.3 degrees.
In reality you would actually be pointing a metre in front of the TH (if your gun hold was on the LH corner of the TH) so the angle reduces slightly to 20.6 degrees resulting in a true target angle of 53.1 degrees relative to your hold point.
Simples!
DT
Last edited by a moderator:
ips
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 15,642
Those are exactly my figs and are simple to derive but I did not know if you could simple add the to angles and get a true resultant for what you would see. I revisited the dimensions and got the correct tangent fig did not have table but gut a angle of about 22 degrees so I actually came up with 54.5!
Wonko the Sane
Well-known member
If you people shoot like you compute, you are in some real trouble.
just saying
just saying
PhilR
Well-known member
* 32.5 degrees plus or minus 2.5 degrees. Anglemeters and trap mounting plates are calibrated in 5 degree segments so you'll have, all things being equal, a 30 or 35 degree target.
Me, I don't worry about perceived target angles I'm out there shooting what exits the traphouse. See you at Southern Counties.
Bebo
Well-known member
I'm pretty sure that you can't just add the angles like that. The actual angle you swing the gun through is going to depend on how far out the clay is from the trap house before you hit it.
The easiest way to explain why the angle would change with distance is to use peg 3 as an example. If a clay comes out of the trap house at 32.5deg to the right and you hit it 10m out (unlikely but we can all dream) you can imagine a right angle with the hypotenuse of the triangle being the 10m between the trap and the clay. Sine 32.5 * 10 gives you the offset to the right from the centreline of the trap house to the clay (5.37m), whilst cosine 3.25*10 gives you the distance the clay is out from the trap house if measured perpendicular to the front face of the trap. (8.43m). If you are standing 15m directly behind the trap, then the right angled triangle between you and the clay would have an 'opposite' side of 5.37m (as it is the same offset as from the trap) and an 'adjacent' side of 15m + 8.43m = 23.43m. Inverse Tan 5.37/23.43 would mean the gun would need to point at an angle of 12.9 deg to the right to hit the clay.
If we then look at the situation with the clay 20m out, the 'opposite' increases to 10.74m and the 'adjacent' increases to 31.86m. Inverse Tan 10.74/31.86 gives an angle of 18.63 degrees. Ergo the further out the clay gets the bigger the angle you need to swing the gun through.
If someone wants to give me a typical estimate of how far the clay is out of the trap when its hit I can use the above method (plus the sine and cosine rules) to work out the max angles to the left and right from pegs 1 and 2 (you'd then just need to reverse them for pegs 4 and 5).
PS. I'm better at trigonometry than shooting.
The easiest way to explain why the angle would change with distance is to use peg 3 as an example. If a clay comes out of the trap house at 32.5deg to the right and you hit it 10m out (unlikely but we can all dream) you can imagine a right angle with the hypotenuse of the triangle being the 10m between the trap and the clay. Sine 32.5 * 10 gives you the offset to the right from the centreline of the trap house to the clay (5.37m), whilst cosine 3.25*10 gives you the distance the clay is out from the trap house if measured perpendicular to the front face of the trap. (8.43m). If you are standing 15m directly behind the trap, then the right angled triangle between you and the clay would have an 'opposite' side of 5.37m (as it is the same offset as from the trap) and an 'adjacent' side of 15m + 8.43m = 23.43m. Inverse Tan 5.37/23.43 would mean the gun would need to point at an angle of 12.9 deg to the right to hit the clay.
If we then look at the situation with the clay 20m out, the 'opposite' increases to 10.74m and the 'adjacent' increases to 31.86m. Inverse Tan 10.74/31.86 gives an angle of 18.63 degrees. Ergo the further out the clay gets the bigger the angle you need to swing the gun through.
If someone wants to give me a typical estimate of how far the clay is out of the trap when its hit I can use the above method (plus the sine and cosine rules) to work out the max angles to the left and right from pegs 1 and 2 (you'd then just need to reverse them for pegs 4 and 5).
PS. I'm better at trigonometry than shooting.
Last edited by a moderator:
