Palma shooting

[TSnodgrass]

I use the scat to Hopefully improve my long range prone. Can I get a suggestion on the correct F Coefficient setting? I’m set at 65, not sure what this means but that’s where it set.

 

[CharlesD]

I generally use 40, which is the default for newer systems when using the 300m 7.6mm Rifle target, which is my target of choice for training as it is a tight target and relatively representative of fullbore shooting. If you can score well on that target your technique is good - all you have to worry about at long range will be reading the wind! Various other UK fullbore shooters have come to the conclusion that an F Coefficient of 40 is about right, but if anyone knows any better we would love to hear.

 

[Peter]

I use the scat to Hopefully improve my long range prone. Can I get a suggestion on the correct F Coefficient setting? I’m set at 65, not sure what this means but that’s where it set.

I generally use 40, which is the default for newer systems when using the 300m 7.6mm Rifle target, which is my target of choice for training as it is a tight target and relatively representative of fullbore shooting. If you can score well on that target your technique is good - all you have to worry about at long range will be reading the wind! Various other UK fullbore shooters have come to the conclusion that an F Coefficient of 40 is about right, but if anyone knows any better we would love to hear.

Hello there,

F-coefficient has been recently renamed into Ballistic Ratio. Thus, I will refer to it accordingly

Ballistic Ratio's value varies from gun to gun and depends on a bunch of factors (gun's barrel, cartrige quality, bullet speed, etc.)
Hence, you can't simply copy-paste the ratio of your shooter peers at the range. Also, there's a reason we have different ratios set up by default, as these ratios vary from event to event taking a bunch of factors into account - that's why we calculated some values that usually work quite well for the vast majority of users

However, if you are keen on finding your personalized Ballistic Ratio, we highly recommend shooting a group of 10 (at least, but the more - the better) live shots with SCATT and comparing both groups (real shot-holes vs. what SCATT displays). When this is done feel free to start adjusting the Ratio back and forth in the settings until both groups look almost identical. After the optimal value for the gun and particular exercise is established - it would be a good idea to write it down in case you happen to switch laptops (so you won't have to go through this calibration again).

The shot holes will most likely not match 100%, as any SCATT model is a training tool first and foremost and should not be used as a substitute for an electronic scoring system. Generally speaking, SCATT is really good at predicting where the bullet should go, but it can't take into account that say, bullet number 8 is going to be flawed and won't go where a perfectly-manufactured bullet should go.

In a nutshell, even if the Ballistic Ratio you arrive at doesn't yield identical shot holes - it's OK and you shouldn't get discouraged, for it would be a good idea to analyze the shots that don't quite match the real shot-holes. This discrepancy may be in fact indicating that you have too much trigger-jerk during the last 250 milliseconds of the shot. So your hand flinches and gives the bullet enough sideways momentum that it flyes and curves away from the software-predicted trajectory. In this case, I'd highly recommend taking a closer look at how you are operating the gun in regards to those particular shots (S1 vs. S2 dynamic in the stat-table).

 

[CharlesD]

However, if you are keen on finding your personalized Ballistic Ratio, we highly recommend shooting a group of 10 (at least, but the more - the better) live shots with SCATT and comparing both groups (real shot-holes vs. what SCATT displays). When this is done feel free to start adjusting the Ratio back and forth in the settings until both groups look almost identical. After the optimal value for the gun and particular exercise is established - it would be a good idea to write it down in case you happen to switch laptops (so you won't have to go through this calibration again).

This is certainly the way to go to determine the best Ballistic Ratio (F Coefficient for those of us with older Scatt systems). However, it depends on two things: You need a live fire Scatt system (MX--) and you need to be shooting in an environment where wind has minimal effect (indoors or at short range). Fullbore shooters in Commonwealth countries generally shoot at distances of 300-1000 yds (300-900m). US High-Power shooters spend most of their time at 1000 yds. This Ballistic Ratio test might work at 300 yds/m on a relatively calm day, but you will need a very calm day to do a comparison at any longer distance.
Furthermore, friends who have tried live fire Scatt at fullbore targets have generally been unsuccessful in getting the sensor to recognise the target. This may be due to the relatively small area of white surrounding the aiming mark (the background beyond the edges of the target is usually a brown sand stop-butt) and/or the proximity of adjacent targets on the range (we rarely get the opportunity to shoot with just one target displayed). If the Scatt sensor had a narrower field of view it might help it to recognise the target. The 300 yds target has the largest amount of white with a 22" (7 minutes of arc - MOA) diameter black aiming mark on a 72" (22.9 MOA) square white target. At 500 yds the aiming mark is 39" (7.5 MOA) on a 72" (13.8 MOA) square white target. At 600 yds the same aiming mark on the same size target is used, but the MOA figures are 6.2 and 11.5 MOA respectively due to the greater distance. At 1000 yds the aiming mark is 44" (4.2 MOA) on a 72" (6.9 MOA) square white target (US dimensions - UK & Canada use a 48" (4.6 MOA) diameter aiming mark on a target that is the same height but slightly wider - 96" in Canada and 120" in the UK). As you can see, it needs a very narrow field of view sensor to recognise this as a target, hence the problem, even if you have a live fire Scatt (which most fullbore shooters in the UK don't - we bought ours before the MX versions became available). In the absence of an ability to determine a more appropriate Ballistic Ratio value, we use 40, which seems to give about the right results. However, as Scatt is mainly used as a training aid, the precise value is of limited importance, provided we stick to the same value for all our sessions (to enable performance over time to be monitored). Furthermore, as we mostly use similar ammunition (7.62mm/.308" and 155 grain bullets) in similar rifles, if we all use the same Ballistic Ratio (F Coefficient), then we can compare our Scatt results directly with each other.

 

[TSnodgrass]

Thank you for all your in depth response, very helpful. I do have the MX Scat and have tried live fire at 600, wasn’t the only shooter so I couldn’t spent much time getting it working. At any rate, I feel that just using Scat, being in position, dry firing and seeing results in trace is VERY useful, wish I had this tool 50 years ago. I will change my Ballistic Ratio to suggested 40. Once again thank you both.

 

[ptf18]

Any suggestions for setting the F Coefficient for the NRA/CMP Highpower Across the Course like targets? I understand the variables but maybe a ballparkish figure?

 

[TSnodgrass]

Hmm, maybe I don’t understand what the Ballistic Ratio is for. I’ve been using Scatt with Ballistic Ratio set at 65, changing it to 40 seems to inhance my performance.

 

[GimpsWithGuns]

If you are not shooting live should you set it to zero?

 

[CharlesD]

If you are not shooting live should you set it to zero?

No - shooting with an F Coefficient/Ballistic Ratio of zero is not representative of real shooting and gives results that are better than you are likely to achieve with live firing.
The effects of an unsteady hold and triggering faults, in particular, will show up better if you have a larger F Coefficient/Ballistic Ratio. (See the threads on the tips about 'DA' and 'Hard trigger jerk and how to spot it'.) This effect is a vertical and/or lateral movement of your muzzle (and the aim point) at the instant of firing which, with live fire, will 'throw' your shot in the direction the muzzle is moving and by a distance that is proportional to the speed at which the muzzle is moving. Being able to identify these faults and see the scale and effect of them is essential to improving your performance. Once a fault has been identified, you can focus your training on trying to eliminate the fault and Scatt is the ideal tool to help monitor your progress towards eliminating the fault. Scatt will show whether your approach to eliminating the fault is having any effect and, if not, you can try something else. Golden rule: Only ever change one thing at a time and give it a chance to make a difference (several weeks, at least). That way you can see if it makes an improvement. If it doesn't, go back to your previous set-up/technique and try something else. If you change more than one thing, the effects can cancel - one thing may have improved your performance but another may have made it worse. You won't know that you had done something beneficial.

 

[ptf18]

Charles. "throwing" the shot is EXACTLY what I see when the "F" CoE is set "higher". Kind of "discouraging" BUT it is "telling" you something.

 

[TSnodgrass]

So my guess is, setting “f CoE” to 65 like I have now is a good thing especially if I get favorable results.

 

[Gale Stewart]

As a 50M smallbore shooter that has been 'pushed into retirement' when ISSF pulled the event from the Olympics, I went back to Palma style fullbore shooting. I have been using Scatt since 2003 and have gazillions of 50M Scatt files to refer to.

Although the simulated Palma targets are available I am sticking to the 50M when dry firing with my fullbore guns as I know exactly what the areas for improvement and the significance of the output are. Of course, I use the same parameters as I would for 50M as I don't want an apples to oranges comparison when I look at my results. The 50M 10 ring is approximately 1.25 MOA, close enough to the size of the V-bull for the purpose.

As Peter rightly said, Scatt is a training aid, one should not worry too much about being 100% realistic. What really matters is being able to improve your technique through Scatt and that this improvement translates into real live improvement (the latter is another topic by itself).

Gale Stewart
Quebec City, Canada

 

[Myk]

So off topic a bit. Novice to the Scatt system, and have been using the Scatt Expert software due to when I initially installed the software, the Scatt Professional did not have the NRA LR target available. Upon calling support, they suggested using the Expert. I am unfamiliar with the F Coefficient and am unable to locate this setting in the Scatt Expert. Can someone point me to the correct location or should I be using a different software?

 

[Peter]

So off topic a bit. Novice to the Scatt system, and have been using the Scatt Expert software due to when I initially installed the software, the Scatt Professional did not have the NRA LR target available. Upon calling support, they suggested using the Expert. I am unfamiliar with the F Coefficient and am unable to locate this setting in the Scatt Expert. Can someone point me to the correct location or should I be using a different software?

F-coefficient has been recently renamed into Ballistic Ratio in SCATT Expert.
It's in your most upper right corner under the three parralel line sign; adjustable by clicking +/- or with a slider

 

[Albany Mountain]

I believe I was using 65 as a coefficient. This setting drove me to hold harder and smaller to get decent results of the shot impact.
(Dry firing indoors with Mx-02

 

[CharlesD]

Holding hard introduces muscle tensions which are what a good shooter tries to avoid. A good position allows the rifle to sit in position with a completely relaxed hold. Provided the Natural Point of Aim (where the rifle points when the body is totally relaxed) is properly aligned with the aiming mark, there should be no need for any muscled hold. Generally the trace length (S1) is much smaller for a properly aligned and fully relaxed hold than for a muscled hold.

 

[nate]

Around 30-40 seems to match fairly well to what I'd expect for centerfire rifles. I'll often turn it up fairly high (70+) to punish sloppiness during practice, but 30-40 matches reality fairly well.

 

[Shooterbruce]

Why does the new software not have the Bisley targets and where can I get them?
Also, how do i get a large screen showing all of my shots on one target once I done my string?

 

[BullsEye]

I generally use 40, which is the default for newer systems when using the 300m 7.6mm Rifle target, which is my target of choice for training as it is a tight target and relatively representative of fullbore shooting. If you can score well on that target your technique is good - all you have to worry about at long range will be reading the wind! Various other UK fullbore shooters have come to the conclusion that an F Coefficient of 40 is about right, but if anyone knows any better we would love to hear.

Good point you shared here. I generally use a 37 (F Coefficient) but I will try 40. I agree with training on the 300m 7.6mm Rifle target. This info was also shared by other UK fullbore shooters. We should create a match in this forum for 300m 7.6mm Rifle target.

 

[CharlesD]

Good point you shared here. I generally use a 37 (F Coefficient) but I will try 40. I agree with training on the 300m 7.6mm Rifle target. This info was also shared by other UK fullbore shooters. We should create a match in this forum for 300m 7.6mm Rifle target.

Most people I know find that the 300m 7.6mm Rifle target defaults the F-Coefficient to 40, but check it to confirm (mine is old and defaults to 70 !).