i have been trying to find more info on spindrift. Is there any way to predict it or figure it out
huhh?For traditionally stabilized bullets at 30 calibers per turn or more, I use 2% of drop. For faster twists of 28 calibers and less, I use 1% of drop.
Is spin drift and coriolis the same thing? I'm guessing one is caused by the earth spin and the other by rifling.
Advice, For us old folk that can't remember, would it be better to put the spin drift into our zero, another words our 1000 wind zero is including the calculated spin drift. Thanks
I don't figure drop, my ballistics program tells me, or I shoot it to find out, you know, 3.1 mils at 500 yards....10.1 mils at 1000yards etc..huhh?
Please a'splain......... you're saying the angle of the yaw of repose of a faster rpm bullet is LESS than that of a bullet spun more slowly?
And how does a normal person figure "drop?"
I don't agree with Boatwright much, since he disagrees with Vaughn, Rinker, McCoy et al. Especially on things like coning angle, nutation and yaw of repose. Heck, even the "Sierra Techs" useta' disagree with the real ballisticians but they rewrote their books a couple yrs ago because of controversy (and the fact that they were wrong lol...) Boatwright still tries to "prove" everybody else is wrong.......I don't figure drop, my ballistics program tells me, or I shoot it to find out, you know, 3.1 mils at 500 yards....10.1 mils at 1000yards etc..
As for the rest, you can read the paper on coning theory by Jim Boatwright yourself.
You just gotta be THAT GUY huh?I don't agree with Boatwright much, since he disagrees with Vaughn, Rinker, McCoy et al. Especially on things like coning angle, nutation and yaw of repose. Heck, even the "Sierra Techs" useta' disagree with the real ballisticians but they rewrote their books a couple yrs ago because of controversy (and the fact that they were wrong lol...) Boatwright still tries to "prove" everybody else is wrong.......
Regarding your first part about "I don't figure drop"...... that's just meaningless unless you actually DEFINE something as datum. Boreline? LOS? 100yd zero? 1000yd zero???
"3.1 mils"
"10.1 mils"
From WHAT??
From what reference?
I get to paraphrase FGuffeY here...... "numbers are meaningless without a reference"
Coriolis is from the earth spinning..... picture yourself standing on a big record player turntable and rolling a ball. Coriolis drives the bullet path to the RIGHT in the northern hemisphere. Always. But only 2-3 inches at 1000yds (and actually, it's the earth moving out from under...)Is spin drift and coriolis the same thing? I'm guessing one is caused by the earth spin and the other by rifling.
not sure what that means but I do enjoy factsYou just gotta be THAT GUY huh?
Geez, I enjoyed the explanation. I too love facts, having been in Law Enforcement for 37 years I lived with facts. You didn't step on any toes at all, and as I am the OP here, I get to decide who can stay.not sure what that means but I do enjoy facts
opinions, not so much
but I will shut up now....... it took me a while to work up the seeds to post this on this pertickler forum, I shall now withdraw forthwith
sorry to have stepped into your room
So you bust into a thread...stomping dicks....and I'm the asshole?not sure what that means but I do enjoy facts opinions, not so much, sorry to have stepped into your room
When can we expect your peer reviewed papers on this matter?I don't agree with Boatwright much, since he disagrees with Vaughn, Rinker, McCoy et al. Especially on things like coning angle, nutation and yaw of repose. Heck, even the "Sierra Techs" useta' disagree with the real ballisticians but they rewrote their books a couple yrs ago because of controversy (and the fact that they were wrong lol...) Boatwright still tries to "prove" everybody else is wrong.......
So you bust into a thread...stomping dicks....and I'm the asshole?
When can we expect your peer reviewed papers on this matter?![]()