Re: Spindrift Calculation??
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Triggerfifty</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Fer crying out loud guys, THE FORMULA IS THERE. What you probably can't find is some of the specifics like "K" Factor, and S (v) and S (V) and some other keys. SD is not a simple multiple entry formula, known data is required. </div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Brown Dog</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Stability calculations require data gathered from firings (such as the dreaded Doppler!)....and they will only apply to that proj at that mv at that spin rate.
</div></div>
Hmm, seems some of us are saying the same things
Good to see one or two posts from others who understand the topic too (I know there are several more of you out there -although, more sensibly than me, choosing not to get involved in this train crash!).
Particularly impressed by Tactical's astute interpretation of his range records data set.
Also, Lindy, notwithstanding your stance on 'noise', delighted to see this from you (the bold emphasis is mine):
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...shouldn't it not only mess with no wind situations but with wind tables in general, leaving the shooter long or short depending on the wind direction.</div></div>
No - because no one and no system can measure the wind over the course of the bullet flight to a resolution of 1 mph, unless he's got a pure headwind or tailwind. <span style="font-weight: bold">When a guy misses, he just figures he blew the wind call <span style="font-style: italic">a little</span>, and corrects it on the next shot.</span> </div></div>
Other than that, my main learning from the 'naysayers' on the thread thus far amounts to the following:
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-size: 14pt">Anyone who understands ballistics is a book-nerd who clearly shoots far less than the people who have no understanding</span>.</span> Or something along those lines
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-size: 14pt">Tube launched spin-stabilised projectiles fly differently when called 'bullet' than when called 'shell'</span></span>.
<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-size: 14pt">Infantry texts on ballistics are authoritative</span></span> (such as the take on humidity posted earlier)
Trigger,
Before posting more formulae (I posted some on page 8).......there's a yawning conceptual gap between the 'understanders' and the 'non-understanders'.......
I think a bit of 'Janet and John' text and pictures explaining the Yaw of Repose etc would be prudent!