David Levene wrote:At London 2012, and the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow 2014, the 10m and 50m ranges were combined.
I hadn't seen the London 2012 shooting or the venues till I looked them up just now. Quite an innovative use of temporary structures. I'm very impressed.
IMO, to make international competition affordable one of two things needs to be done. Either a limited number of installations on regular rotation or the use of temporary structures either transported from site to site or easily duplicated.
IMO, big empty facilities gathering dust and slowly decaying that never get to relive their glory days (and literally only days) are depressing. Better that the competition facilities are temporary and a reasonable sized permanent installation is built for local training and competition.
For example, the Pan-Am shooting centre in Toronto looks wonderful. But how difficult will it be to maintain that size of facility with only local training and shooting? And if I understand correctly, it is built somewhere that originally had only trap and skeet. So is there even enough local interest to keep smaller facilities going there in that location?
Seeing as OG venues are used immediately after the OG for the Paralympic Games, couldn't/shouldn't all the non-OG events lobby to have a World Cup event (minus the events in the OG ASAP following or just prior to the OG. Might not get the limelight (but who are we kidding, shooting has no limelight at the OG), but might get some attention and will reduce the costs of holding an international event.
I don't disagree with your logic, but putting together a portable shooting range that will be usable with the upcoming ISSF world cups and Olympic games is a daunting bureaucratic challenge. Everybody has their own building code and cultural requirements concerning construction.
I'm not even going to try to wrap my head around the shotgun events and this issue.
Chia wrote:I don't disagree with your logic, but putting together a portable shooting range that will be usable with the upcoming ISSF world cups and Olympic games is a daunting bureaucratic challenge. Everybody has their own building code and cultural requirements concerning construction.
I'm not even going to try to wrap my head around the shotgun events and this issue.
Shotgun would be 'comparatively' easy.
EST for 10, 25 and 50mm would be interesting (it has been done before - e.g. Lahti World Championships, London OG, Glasgow CG)
Infrastructure and OG Overlay gets REALLY interesting!
Chia wrote:I don't disagree with your logic, but putting together a portable shooting range that will be usable with the upcoming ISSF world cups and Olympic games is a daunting bureaucratic challenge. Everybody has their own building code and cultural requirements concerning construction.
I'm not even going to try to wrap my head around the shotgun events and this issue.
Just look at what was used for London 2012.
Everything was temporary, and the venues were sent to Glasgow for the 2014 Commonwealth Games.
David Levene wrote:Some tables and chairs were transferred, but not much else.
The 25m and 10/50m ranges for Glasgow 2014 are listed as temporary and all the London 2012 sites say the equipment and exterior shells of the ranges were transferred.
The scaffolding was standard construction rental stock, so wouldn't need to be transported.
I might be reading lies. But I'm happy to be directed to better information.
David Levene wrote:Some tables and chairs were transferred, but not much else.
The 25m and 10/50m ranges for Glasgow 2014 are listed as temporary and all the London 2012 sites say the equipment and exterior shells of the ranges were transferred.
The scaffolding was standard construction rental stock, so wouldn't need to be transported.
I might be reading lies. But I'm happy to be directed to better information.
Transferred where? Was the equipment rented or bought? Can we get some source material for what y'all are talking about here?
David Levene wrote:Some tables and chairs were transferred, but not much else.
The 25m and 10/50m ranges for Glasgow 2014 are listed as temporary and all the London 2012 sites say the equipment and exterior shells of the ranges were transferred.
The targetry was hired.
The firing point boxes were a totally different design.
Some of the material from the outside of the Olympic ranges might have been used at Glasgow, but only after having gone through a recycling plant.
David Levene wrote:Some tables and chairs were transferred, but not much else.
The 25m and 10/50m ranges for Glasgow 2014 are listed as temporary and all the London 2012 sites say the equipment and exterior shells of the ranges were transferred.
The targetry was hired.
The firing point boxes were a totally different design.
Some of the material from the outside of the Olympic ranges might have been used at Glasgow, but only after having gone through a recycling plant.
I'm afraid that when publicity entered the Games, in OG of Los Angeles if I'm not mistaken, the future of those sport that are not visually appealing to the camera has finished. And in spite of the electronic targets, where action and result are shown, almost at the same moment, the target shooting sports are no 'interesting' to the general public. Even for target shooters there is some doubt: just ask your shooting friends if they watch the finals on their computer?
I'm sorry to sound pessimistic about the future of shooting in the OG, but all decisions seem to point in that direction. As far as Free pistol goes, how come that big nations like the US, Russia, China haven't protested (so far?).
Believe me: I truly hope I'm wrong!
BTW: sign the petition that is at least one thing that the sport shooting community can do!
gn303 wrote:Even for target shooters there is some doubt: just ask your shooting friends if they watch the finals on their computer?
Hmm LA was 1984. I dont even think Microsoft even start distribution of windows yet. Home computers were not as prevalent as today.
Not positive that LA finals were on line.. if there was such a thingy around then.
I might be incorrect.
But I agree with the post. LA 84 sowed the seeds of destruction for shooting sports.
Atlanta 96 was the last gasp for getting shooting anywheres main stream in the US. And sad to say the US dominates the market share, viewing rights, etc etc for all OG so shooting/guns and all of the political crap we deal with in the US has lead us down this path.
SlartyBartFast wrote:It would be interesting to interview the London 2012 Architects and 2014 Organisers to see why the initial plans fell through then.
I'd bet you a bottle of 1792 small batch that it was building codes and permits.
SlartyBartFast wrote:It would be interesting to interview the London 2012 Architects and 2014 Organisers to see why the initial plans fell through then.
I'd bet you a bottle of 1792 small batch that it was building codes and permits.
Slarty, take the bet.
The reason was costs. I can't point to any documentation to back that up but anyone who was at Glasgow will know that it was done on a shoe-string.
Aside from the shoestring budget, I'd also just point out the comparative scales and the lack of overlap between London and Glasgow.
The CWG didn't have a finals hall at all - finals were shot on the Qualification Ranges, so that was one facility from London that simply wasn't needed in Glasgow.
The 10m/50m range needed far fewer points, and the clay layouts didn't need any of the protective down-range netting, which means that really once you've built a layout you just need generic "stadium seating", which isn't the sort of thing you buy - there's plenty knocking around the Scottish rental market for use at various Golf Championships, etc which you just rent in for the Games.
So in the end the ranges at Glasgow were mostly just standard commercial marquee/tentage rented in, likewise the targetry. They didn't go to the efforts to "brand" the actual venue in terms of styling the structures like they did for the OG. Just standard tentage with branding done via signage.
