Speedys magnus effect chart

[Milo 2.0]

Yep, with a good rifle, just shoot and trust the sighters - and our judgement! In point-blank BR, we can do that, and see where they hit, at any time during the 7 minutes we have to complete our record target(s)! But, it's nice to understand why they go where they do. In the long run, understanding leads to winning - if one is, "into that". Keep 'em ON the X! RG

I'm as analytical as they come, and over analyze everything too. Just because something happened today, doesn't mean we will see it again in the next 3 yrs. That's where I was going, we're all going to hold our breath and hope on the first shot when we sense things are out of the ordinary.

 

[RGRobinett]

I'm as analytical as they come, and over analyze everything too. Just because something happened today, doesn't mean we will see it again in the next 3 yrs. That's where I was going, we're all going to hold our breath and hope on the first shot when we sense things are out of the ordinary.

Once this knowledge becomes relegated to the auto-pilot, it allows one to, whether the shot is on call, or, not, check the flag angle, velocity (personally, I mostly use mirage for that), confidently hedge the hold-off, and keep 'em ON the X - in point-blank BR, that's 1/16th MOA dot! So it says here - some days, even though we can observe every shot placement, nothing works! During the match, with the clock ticking, if one has to think, he's probably lost . . .
But when the brain is working, with a well tuned rifle, knowing the star can be magic. RG

 

[alinwa]

If I were going to quote a source to support my argument on a set of scientific principles, I probably wouldn't pick one that wasn't published in 1909.....just sayin'.

I'm not sure exactly WHAT you're trying to say here, but it really makes my point.

jus' sayin'

 

[LHSmith]

If I were going to quote a source to support my argument on a set of scientific principles, I probably wouldn't pick one that wasn't published in 1909.....just sayin'.

Funny in that Einstein's "Theory of Relativity" was developed in this exact time period..........and we all know how that works has been widely disputed.

 

[Depart123]

I love that! "just saying" So the date of publishing establishes the veracity of the subject. Gimme a break!

Funny in that Einstein's "Theory of Relativity" was developed in this exact time period..........and we all know how that works has been widely disputed.

I have some of my great grandfathers text books laying around. They are all well over a hundred years old. His math books with algebra and geometry in them, those are still good. I have his bible, I know that is still good. How about his medical books? Should we still be referencing those?

A book on ballistics and aerodynamics written 6 years after the Wright brothers flew at Kittyhawk, NC might be a little dated don't you think? Or are people like Bryan Litz and Dave Emary wasting thier time?

The jacketed bullet was invented in 1882, smokeless powder in 1886, the boattail bullet in 1901 and this book represents state of the art 1909. If you can't see any issues with that, then fine. But don't pile on me for pointing out the obvious.

 

[alinwa]

I have some of my great grandfathers text books laying around. They are all well over a hundred years old. His math books with algebra and geometry in them, those are still good. I have his bible, I know that is still good. How about his medical books? Should we still be referencing those?

A book on ballistics and aerodynamics written 6 years after the Wright brothers flew at Kittyhawk, NC might be a little dated don't you think? Or are people like Bryan Litz and Dave Emary wasting thier time?

The jacketed bullet was invented in 1882, smokeless powder in 1886, the boattail bullet in 1901 and this book represents state of the art 1909. If you can't see any issues with that, then fine. But don't pile on me for pointing out the obvious.

You really don't read so good do ya?

Let me be real simple..... Mann proved that the ideas about "how bullets fly" were all WRONG. He couldn't explain why bullets do what they do. Later experimenters, folks with more education and better resources showed what really goes on. And current 'ballisticians' struggle to understand this work while presenting it to laymen in useful ways.

 

[Depart123]

You really don't read so good do ya?

Let me be real simple..... Mann proved that the ideas about "how bullets fly" were all WRONG. He couldn't explain why bullets do what they do. Later experimenters, folks with more education and better resources showed what really goes on. And current 'ballisticians' struggle to understand this work while presenting it to laymen in useful ways.

Apparently, you are the one not reading so well. The post you quoted above, the one you are taking me to task over (post #45), it wasn't to you and didn't mention you. So, if you have any more raging to do, why don't you wrap it up?

 

[LHSmith]

Apparently, you are the one not reading so well. The post you quoted above, the one you are taking me to task over (post #45), it wasn't to you and didn't mention you. So, if you have any more raging to do, why don't you wrap it up?

Well, you did quote me. Perhaps you fail to accept the fact that the world has been fortunate enough to have a few brilliant minds before our time who for unknown reasons possessed the uncanny ability to grasp concepts others could not and many of those concepts have since been proven to be correct.

 

[alinwa]

OOOPs - from L to R, or, traveling to the right. Bad on me for having to edit this response - you see how easily confused old age is making me? RG

P.S. L to R drags the bullet to the right . . . for yours truly, that's the most difficult concept to grasp.

Thank You Randy

 

[alinwa]

Apparently, you are the one not reading so well. The post you quoted above, the one you are taking me to task over (post #45), it wasn't to you and didn't mention you. So, if you have any more raging to do, why don't you wrap it up?

But your first post was....... thereby establishing from whence ye came....

 

[beemanjohn]

Boy, this thread sure got out of hand!

 

[Mozella]

OK boys...... how about continuing your little hissy-fit in a private conversation. Thanks.

 

[memilanuk]

...and now you know why the Benchrest Central forums are a relative ghost town.

 

[beemanjohn]

Yup, this kind of "stuff" is the reason I do not post a whole lot. It get old real fast.

 

[alinwa]

Yup, this kind of "stuff" is the reason I do not post a whole lot. It get old real fast.

Sorry, won't happen again.....

"Back to your regularly scheduled programming"

 

[Milo 2.0]

Sorry, won't happen again.....

"Back to your regularly scheduled programming"

I wouldn't worry about it, this happens on topics no one understands, even if the topic may not actually exist. Not remotely saying it happened here, but people w/o a clue need to interject their opinions. The chart I posted in post #2 is now referred to as Aerodynamic jump, and it gets the mileage, there are kids that have taken 1K-1500 long ranges shots who know more about where a bullet will land than anyone on this forum

 

[avidflyer]

ai

I wouldn't worry about it, this happens on topics no one understands, even if the topic may not actually exist. Not remotely saying it happened here, but people w/o a clue need to interject their opinions. The chart I posted in post #2 is now referred to as Aerodynamic jump, and it gets the mileage, there are kids that have taken 1K-1500 long ranges shots who know more about where a bullet will land than anyone on this forum

I wouldn't go that far...

 

[butchlambert]

I wouldn't worry about it, this happens on topics no one understands, even if the topic may not actually exist. Not remotely saying it happened here, but people w/o a clue need to interject their opinions. The chart I posted in post #2 is now referred to as Aerodynamic jump, and it gets the mileage, there are kids that have taken 1K-1500 long ranges shots who know more about where a bullet will land than anyone on this forum

Chuckle, chuckle, chuckle

 

[Milo 2.0]

ai


I wouldn't go that far...

That last part was sarcasm. A lot of truth in the first part, was not singling anyone out.

 

[alinwa]

OOOPs - from L to R, or, traveling to the right. Bad on me for having to edit this response - you see how easily confused old age is making me? RG

P.S. L to R drags the bullet to the right . . . for yours truly, that's the most difficult concept to grasp.

Hey Randy.......just for you (and against my better judgement LOL) I'ma share something that's worked for me......



You say " for yours truly, that's the most difficult concept to grasp....."

Now I know that you DO grasp it, so I think what you may actually be saying ( because you are a NICE man, unlike me) is, " this is the most difficult concept for me to explain".....

This has worked for me....

Remember Gene Beggs' airplane analogies???

Well here's my version.

An airplane is flying due north in no wind. A wind comes out of the west, from the LEFT, and the plane starts heading to the right.......so the pilot turns the plane into the wind to stay stable and ADDS POWER to keep going straight......it PUSHES a little to make up for the new force.....

A bullet is also launched due north....encounters the same wind, it also has to adjust it's nose into the wind to stay stable BUT IT CAN'T ADD POWER........so it gets sucked ( dragged) downwind.