375 caliber, BAT EX (.50 BMG-class action) - objective: 5500 yards in Spring 2018
http://hillcountryrifles.com/hcr/new...ong-range-shot
http://hillcountryrifles.com/hcr/new...ong-range-shot
Last edited:
HCR - Next Long Range Shot
- Thread starter ELR researcher
- Start date
Link doesn't work for me. With that said, I just see it as wasting more ammo. I don't find these distances or the previous distances impressive, they are laughable at best. Shooting 20 plus rounds to make a single hit and to not be able to repeat it is just pure luck. I'm no genius and am far from being a great shot but just looking at what a low extreme spread or 1-2 mph wind does at those distances makes repeatable shots seem slim.
After the last time , they might be better served with an accurised
MA2 with a few belts of solid topped handloads .... Or at least drop
a couple of 100 K and hire the AB team .
MA2 with a few belts of solid topped handloads .... Or at least drop
a couple of 100 K and hire the AB team .
"While pushing the targets farther and farther out is alot of fun, we are also looking for ways to get repeatability in the 2 mile range." Snicker
"While pushing the targets farther and farther out is alot of fun, we are also looking for ways to get repeatability in the 2 mile range." Snicker
Jesus Christ here we go again. Rap battle rematch!!!
Yeah!
no need to behave like a sore looser bro! go and tell HRC guys what repeatability is...by the way, Bryan "Rocket Man" himself spoke up about repeatability so many times...and never about a "standard" that never existed...because it doesn't exist. Go figure. SnickerYeah!
Do you really want to debate the technical definition of "repeatability"?
You might want to think about that before you reply. Bro.
Dude, no, I don't. But I'd like to see you debating it with The Rocket Man and HCR. Don't forget I cannot read. Keep me posted.
Dude, no, I don't. But I'd like to see you debating it with The Rocket Man and HCR. Don't forget I cannot read. Keep me posted.
But wait, mate... On a different ELR thread, namely this one:
https://www.snipershide.com/shootin...s/6723943-applied-ballistics-weapons-division
Remember that? You repeatedly (snicker) tried to lecture me on repeatability, stats and your interpretation of "simple math".
Remember? I can pull up specific quotes if you can't remember....
Now in this thread, you pull up repeatability again (snicker) and then you tuck your tiny, tiny tail and crawl away.
Good decision, because, when it comes to repeatabiltiy coupled to statistics, you don't know what you are talking about.
Now if you want to redeem yourself, tell everyone how the first statistician defined repeatability. And tell us the context - what was the science involved? What were the authors trying to repeat and what was the standard they chose to qualify something as repeatable? Where did they draw the line in the sand? How does it apply to ELR and Ko2M?
If you can't, you've been spraying bullshit all along. Keep me posted. Snicker.
Bro, don't take me wrong...not that fast. Honestly, I appreciate your sense oh humor, but you know squat about this topic. Instead of your usual bla bla bla...go ask HRC and Rocket Man what the hell they were speaking about...like you said before I cannot read, so I guess you should argue with the top experts and report back. I'm dying of boredom. Sorry man. End of Comms.
Bro, don't take me wrong...not that fast. Honestly, I appreciate your sense oh humor, but you know squat about this topic. Instead of your usual bla bla bla...go ask HRC and Rocket Man what the hell they were speaking about...like you said before I cannot read, so I guess you should argue with the top experts and report back. I'm dying of boredom. Sorry man. End of Comms.
So for a second time you are claiming you will quit yapping your bullshit? Good.
Anyone that wants to know how repeatability was defined in terms of statistics, go look at this:
http://www-users.york.ac.uk/~mb55/meas/ba.htm
Bland and Altman are credited with the definition of repeatability as a scientific and statistical tool. By "credited" I mean by experts at ASTM over the last 30 years. Does LastShot know more about stats than the experts at ASTM? I doubt it. Bland and Altman wanted to know if one analytical method had bias compared to another method. For example, if you'd used a mercury thermometer to measure the temperature, then wanted to switch to a thermocouple. Paired studies of measurement methods: that was the context for the definition of repeatability. The thing is, people like LastShot want to talk about an intuitive definition of repeatability, and that's fine. I let this fester a while so he could dig himself into a pit of ignorance as he claimed I didn't know stats. But as soon as you mention repeatability in the context to statistics, all points back to Bland and Altman's publications in the 80's and clearly, LastShot, you are not qualified.
Similar threads
