TexasCHLforum.com

She did have a bit of an advantage.

"She hit 100% of her shots using a TrackingPoint precision-guided firearm.
Piatt hit 59% of his shots using the same weapons our troops use in combat."

http://www.khou.com/story/news/local/te ... ntent=link

She did it with technology. Not with her own ability.

I can see rifles like she used being banned from competition in the future.

MeMelYup wrote:She did it with technology. Not with her own ability.

I can see rifles like she used being banned from competition in the future.

Are they allowed now? This was an exhibition event for charity.

Yes, she - and she says she doesn't even count herself as a "marksman" - pulled a perfect score with technology over a champion shooter shooting the old way.

You and I weren't the audience for this 'competition'. The armed forces and police departments were. Just think how many of them could save how many dollars by putting one of TrackingPoints outfits in the hands of a 'dedicated marksman' without having to actually train him much more than a regular grunt?

No need to whip it out for a measuring contest - the point is that the Tracking Point equipment can make up for a person's lack of skill.

I was invited as VIP and, unfortunately, I did not have a chance to attend.
It is a Charity and Fund raising event. Take it with a many grains of salt. There was $1,000,000 for Charity.

Note, I am a believer in Trackpoint technology. It is the future of long range shooting.

Beiruty wrote:I was invited as VIP and, unfortunately, I did not have a chance to attend.
It is a Charity and Fund raising event. Take it with a many grains of salt. There was $1,000,000 for Charity.

Note, I am a believer in Trackpoint technology. It is the future of long range shooting.

The technology is pretty amazing, but the tech/company some hurdles to overcome. The unsecured wireless connection was one (granted it was VERY short range) and the fact that the company is essentially on the rocks.

The main problem with it, in my opinion is that it takes the training of marksmanship out of the equation. If, for some reason, your weapon system is disabled, you are suddenly left with a very expensive club in the hands of someone who may or may not actually know how to shoot long distances when it counts...

I'm reminded of Isaac Asimov's Foundation series where science has been lost and those who actually understand it are "magicians" and if anything goes wrong, those who are in charge of caring for the technology don't know enough about how it works to fix it or work around it.

What does your sniper do if he isn't trained in the "old" ways and batteries fail?

MeMelYup wrote:What does your sniper do if he isn't trained in the "old" ways and batteries fail?

Train him as usual. Be proficient in old tech. Give him a smart rifle and he would have 5X productivity.
Biggest issue for tracking point is Auto wind reading is not there yet.

I keep my powder horn and musket handy for the day that my fancy autoloader technology breaks down.

Dude!! I want one of those!! Da yum lol

Interesting demonstration.

It included a "fully concealed" event. "In the fully concealed portion of the event, Taya Kyle was able to hit 100% of all shots taken from a fully protected position using TrackingPoint’s ShotGlasstm wearable glasses. With ShotGlasstm the shooter can see the scope view without having their head or body behind the gun, allowing the shooter to make shots over walls or around corners without exposure to enemy fire. Bruce Piatt was unable to make any shots from fully protected positions."

http://tracking-point.com/taya-kyle-win ... r-shootout

When the gun malfunctions you just do what any technology pro does: reboot it.

I think the word "beats" in the title is (unintentionally) misleading. What happened is that a piece of technology, which can easily be taught to anyone able to operate something as simple as a cellphone or TV remote, beat an NRA champ. With all due respect to Taya Kyle, whom I believe to be a genuinely intelligent and strong woman of integrity, she agreed to allow the use of her name to help promote the foundation named after her late husband, which is I am sure is a worthy cause. But the subtext to all of that is that she is who she is by virtue of her late husband's prowess on a rifle, and that use of her name also associates this product with that prowess......... implying that any of us can shoot like Chris Kyle if we'll put up the ducats for this sighting system. The advertising concept fails entirely if it is my wife on that gun.

AND..... it may be true to some extent that we can all be Chris Kyle on the rifle if we have enough money. Sure, it would be interesting to try out that equipment. But like scottDSL implied, it is far more valuable to be boned up on the basics of shooting well and to own the means of doing so, because technologies can and do fail. It happens all the time on the battlefield. Computers crash (TrackingPoint uses a computer); optics break (TrackingPoint uses optics); and mounts break or lose zero (TrackingPoint uses mounts). Sooner or later, you had better be able to connect with iron sights.