thermal rifle scope

[Blackwood Outdoors]

Ah, yes... but there's a vital difference between assuming, thinking and knowing. Each has its place, but the point along that continuum at which we feel we "know" something always needs to be properly judged. This usually means taking a bit more time, letting patterns of movement supplement shapes, and predicted locations, before formulating a conclusion. I don't think this process is different, thought the potential range and time required may vary, whatever you are using to spot, observe or target your quarry.

The onus, as you say, lies with the user, not just to confirm his/her target, but to familiarise her/himself with his/her equipment before taking it after live quarry. If so, it seems to me that the kit shouldn't be blamed in advance for any user error.

Would you feel 100% shooting a fox at 100 yds with one of these? Never mind any further, in all honesty?

 

[Mr. Gain]

Would you feel 100% shooting a fox at 100 yds with one of these? Never mind any further, in all honesty?

ID: yes - based on HD38S. Shot placement: not sure, but I've not had an Apex out in the field yet. From what I've seen so far, though, I wouldn't be surprised if the answer turned out to be another "yes".

 

[billh]

These seem to me to encourage a big NO NO in night shooting, waving the gun around searching for quarry. I class them in the same group as the currently advertised TV screen mounted on the gun. Both very unsafe.
The equipment should be used only as a search aid off the gun.
They only see heat signatures not the foreground or background detail. They will not see the fence, grass, twigs etc between the gun and quarry with the possible dangers surrounding bullet deflections.
The military use them as they are looking for easy to identify, man shaped targets. Civilian use would extend to animals of which quarry discrimination would be difficult without the contrast provided by light.

 

[Eric the Red]

These seem to me to encourage a big NO NO in night shooting, waving the gun around searching for quarry. I class them in the same group as the currently advertised TV screen mounted on the gun. Both very unsafe.
The equipment should be used only as a search aid off the gun.
They only see heat signatures not the foreground or background detail. They will not see the fence, grass, twigs etc between the gun and quarry with the possible dangers surrounding bullet deflections.
The military use them as they are looking for easy to identify, man shaped targets. Civilian use would extend to animals of which quarry discrimination would be difficult without the contrast provided by light.

Bill I wholeheartedly agree with the first half of your post.
My experience tells me your comments around foreground and background have an element of truth, but with a good TI, much detail can be given - where there are thermal differences to be picked up on - and, most crucially, where the unit has the resolution capability to distinguish fine/small objects with temperature signatures. There are climate conditions where temperatures are normalised making clear distinctions extremely difficult, to the extent I still prefer to shoot using NV over TI, except where conditions warrant it.
With respect to ID, I agree that quarry ID can be challenging - again image resolution and zoom etc make big differences. One also becomes accustomed to animal behaviour and movement and these, for me, are two of the biggest 'tells' of what I am watching through TI. I do agree overall however that better and speedier ID should be achieved through light generated images over thermal ones - but when a fox is moving in a field of sheep, it is plain what it is to a regular user of TI.

 

[Mr. Gain]

These seem to me to encourage a big NO NO in night shooting, waving the gun around searching for quarry. I class them in the same group as the currently advertised TV screen mounted on the gun. Both very unsafe. The equipment should be used only as a search aid off the gun.

How is this different from not using binoculars in tandem with a day scope? It really isn't the fault of the day scope, or the NV scope, or the TI scope if a shooter does this: it's the fault of the shooter.

Any optical device lets you see some things and not others. As I've said before in this thread, familiarising yourself with the operation, capabilities and limitations of your equipment is an essential preparatory step to using them in earnest.

Perhaps your point is based on the assumption that the comparatively high price of TI units, as compared to NV or day optics, means that shooters will only buy one type of device, and that will be a riflescope. I wonder if this is the case. I suspect many potential buyers will already have a TI spotter, and those that don't yet already have a NV riflescope -and limited funds- will realise that a spotter is of greater general use and buy one first, adding a TI riflescope to their options once their budget permits it. Meanwhile, those with more ready access to funds, and/or a more pressing need to extend their predator or pest control capability, will stump up for both.

Additionally, the notion that a piece of kit will make otherwise-responsible people irresponsible just seems to be suspect: perhaps because it's a core argument in the antis' campaign against gun ownership in general, and was a major "justification" for the banning of most pistols in '98 and all centrefire semi-auto rifles in '88.

 

[a6313839]

If I may add my comments here please. I have recently purchased the Optix Identifier. This has 3x optical zoom and 2x and 4 x digital. I agree with your comments (243 hunter) the digital zoom does downgrade the picture but at 2x digital (6x total) zoom you have a very clear image. As 'old keeper' and 'mr gain' have said it is a case of practice. I have not mounted this unit to my gun and have no intention to until I can clearly identify everything without any hesitation. But as previously stated above if I was unsure I would not shoot. The movement of these animals really does give them away and that is what you learn with thermal. The thermal signature tells you the gait of the animal - you can tell a hare from a rabbit no problem at 200 yds. We aren't talking little spots of heat here, we are talking clearly defined outlines.

With regards to the waving your gun around argument - that applies to all optics and I completely agree should never be done. NV, thermal or day scope this is not acceptable and that is why for all 3 we need a complimentary piece of kit. However, the thing that attracted me to the Optix is that you can quickly detach and use as hand held then attach to your gun. If you do this correctly you can maintain guaranteed zero. Alan Rhone do a set up using Ziegler ZP mounts that allow quick detach and thats what I will do with mine.

As 'Mr Gain' has stated if you are a responsible shooter this won't change just because you have thermal. Even once my Optix is mounted on my gun I will spend several trips using it in day time on confirmed quarry at confirmed ranges. Just as you would do with a day scope I hope.

I cannot comment on the Pulsar unit as I have not used it, but the Optix is a great piece of kit.