Page 3 of 4

Re: Short Siberia - reply from Mercer

Posted: Sat Mar 02, 2013 9:31 pm
by Dougan
We have often moaned about the NRA not doing enough to generate revenue; so the decision to rent out SS privately and lucratively during the week, is as has been said, a no-brainer...

...however I'm still not sure about the arrangements for Century - Now I don't profess to fully understand the workings of the range, or suggest I could do any better; so this is a genuine question - What are the reasons why the left of Century (where the sheds are) can't be used to supplement short range shooting, and the range be run permanently in normal echelon (or whatever the correct term for that is) ?

Re: Short Siberia - reply from Mercer

Posted: Sat Mar 02, 2013 10:06 pm
by John25
Short answer.
In winter, it is always reverse echelon. In summer it alternates.
The left hand side of Century range is in the danger area of the lower layouts of NSC Clays. Pellets do fall on the 300x FP out to butt 12
Cottesloe Heath is in the danger area of the left hand side of Century.
It is slightly more complicated than that but it is a case of shared priorities.
Lots of clever people looked at alternatives, none were found.
I wrote an article for the journal a few years back explaining it more fully, I’ll see if I can dig it out and I’ll PM it to you.

Re: Short Siberia - reply from Mercer

Posted: Sat Mar 02, 2013 10:32 pm
by Dougan
Thanks John, and yes please if you can find the article...

Not knocking clay shooters in any way, but those ranges have a lot to answer for...but lets not re-open that can of worms...

Re: Short Siberia - reply from Mercer

Posted: Sat Mar 02, 2013 11:31 pm
by alexham
Dougan wrote:Thanks John, and yes please if you can find the article...

Not knocking clay shooters in any way, but those ranges have a lot to answer for...but lets not re-open that can of worms...
Amen!
It is never the shooters, but the clever council members who put it there and now no one will own up to it. We have lost the use of Winans. We lost the Shorts, which we need now. We put 300metre International partially out of action, and we suffered a massive parking problem on the right hand side of Century for the past 10 years.

And if you read the flash of brilliance in SteveE's email "Short Siberia was let to CNP because no one was ever on it in the week"!
And now we are building a new range at enormous cost so that those who were never on Short Siberia in the week could continue to be never there on the new range!

Sorry, Dougan for hijacking your message.

Alex

Re: Short Siberia - reply from Mercer

Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 5:32 am
by John25
Alex,

Turn you bed round.

It happened, just like yesterday, it happened.

Tomorrow is going to happen too, nothing we can do about it.

:cheers:

Re: Short Siberia - reply from Mercer

Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:01 pm
by Gaz
Alexham reminds me of stories I've been told of people who, in ye olde paper-and-ink days, would write multi-page rants to newspapers' letters pages. In green ink, and on hand-ruled paper, just to be sure someone noticed.

Re: Short Siberia - reply from Mercer

Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:45 pm
by Steve E
Gaz wrote:Alexham reminds me of stories I've been told of people who, in ye olde paper-and-ink days, would write multi-page rants to newspapers' letters pages. In green ink, and on hand-ruled paper, just to be sure someone noticed.
clapclap clapclap clapclap clapclap
You made I larf you did Gaz

Re: Short Siberia - reply from Mercer

Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:47 pm
by John25
Gaz wrote:Alexham reminds me of stories I've been told of people who, in ye olde paper-and-ink days, would write multi-page rants to newspapers' letters pages. In green ink, and on hand-ruled paper, just to be sure someone noticed.

You forgot CAPITALS and UNDERLINE and exclaimation marks!!!!!! we used to use.

Don't you people EVER PAY ATTENTION????????????


:shakeshout: :run:

tesnews

Re: Short Siberia - reply from Mercer

Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:58 pm
by dromia
Regardless of what people think of Alexhams approach to what he obviously see's as legitimate concerns a little bit of up front communication about what it is doing and intending to do would have saved a lot of board space and slowed individuals post counts.

On the face of Mercer's letter and most peoples interpretation of it, it would seem to make it a positive. Surely the NRA should be communicating such things to demonstrate that it is not in fact moribund and hibernating but is still trying to do a little, at Bisley at least.

The fact that this information seems to have had to have been dragged out of the organisation, perhaps with the leverage of a public forum does seem to me that the members are a little way down the down the priority list.

Please don't tell me to give it time any more, I've given the NRA the past 20 years and I'm still waiting.

Re: Short Siberia - reply from Mercer

Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 3:07 pm
by alexham
Gaz wrote:Alexham reminds me of stories I've been told of people who, in ye olde paper-and-ink days, would write multi-page rants to newspapers' letters pages. In green ink, and on hand-ruled paper, just to be sure someone noticed.
Gaz, Interesting comments for which I thank you.
The easiest thing is to do nothing and just let incompetent council ruin it all! Did you know that in just one weekend meeting (England Live) NRA (that is us) lost £130,000? Did that justify a letter from you with any colour ink? Or are you content to wait until one day you are greeted by the Liquidator at the gate and told to find another place to shoot because the NRA had gone!

If you are young enough you could take up tennis, cricket or rugby, but for me shooting is my life and I would find chess boring.

Howzat?

Alex