Yeah, it makes sense to take a good look at the range. I wasn't sure
how long the "approval" process was so I wanted to get some
classifiers picked as soon as possible. If the process is quick, I
can take the time to compare some of the field courses to our range,
and equipment.

I'll print out some field courses and bring them to the next match.

Hey, anyone know if TASC has a list of recent classifiers shot like
Richmond? I can't check the website from work :(

Thanks again.

--- In bauspsa@yahoogroups.com, "tyro480" <tyro480@...> wrote:
>
> Andy:
> Selection of classifiers are always the hardest part, as you know
the
> range configuration is the problem. I would suggest picking some
> backs ups (I am sure you've already done it) and try doing a dry
> (visualization) set up at the next match.
>
>
> > Thanks for the feedback. Someone else suggeted field courses
too. I
> > was concerned that we might not have the props of the right
> > dimensions. CM 99-52 has *some* movement and CM 03-16 as well
(but
> > not sure we can accomodate the angles safely).
> >
> > Any suggestions as to which field courses you think we could
setup?
> >
> > Thanks again,
> >
> > Andy
> >
> > --- In bauspsa@yahoogroups.com, "tyro480" <tyro480@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Andy
> > >
> > > The choice is yours to make since you've volunteered to take
on
> > this
> > > task. However asking for suggestions is a positive to get
people
> > > envolved. TASC has done a lot of speed shoots or shall I say
> high
> > > HF classifiers. I would suggest looking at having a couple of
> > Field
> > > courses as a balance. The draw back is the step up time. You
> can
> > > count me in on helping to set those.>
> > >
> > > > There is a special classifier match scheduled in August
> (pending
> > > > approval) at which we plan to have four classifiers. I have
> > > > proposed a few and wanted to get some inputs. Please let me
> know
> > > what
> > > > you think.
> > > >
> > > > Proposed: CM 99-28, CM 99-52, CM 99-57, and CM 03-04.
> > > >
> > > > I thought CM 03-16 would be good as well, but I was not sure
if
> > we
> > > > could have T1 and T4 at such tight angles at Chabot.
> > > >
> > > > Alternates: CM 99-08, CM 99-11, CM 99-42, CM 99-58, CM 03-
02,
> CM
> > > 03-08.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > > Andy
> > > >
> > >
> >
>