How to get into competition with Aerospikes?

[Dave M.]

That is not how research works in academia. Researchers show each other data all the time and I would never consider taking and presenting it without their approval. I know that y'all aren't academics (there may be a few hiding out there) but I don't see why I shouldn't treat y'all with the same respect.

Continue insulting your potential target audience, I heard it’s great for business.
Dave

 

[Dave M.]

Don't I know it! Ballistics is odd in that it is the only field of research where there is a giant gap between the people doing the research and the users of that research. That gap leads to distrust and misunderstanding. If I use big words I'm talking down to the shooter. If I simplify it I'm an idiot for not knowing the correct terminology. Did you know there is only about 10 PhD level external ballistics researchers in the country? The anti-academic shooters are one of the reasons for that. I can't find PhD students who stay in the field when I take them to the range and they get chewed out by paw-paw for not knowing the number of clicks to zero at 100 yards while trying to solve a non-linear partial differential equation to estimate bullet stability.

To get this thing off the ground I need people who know how to shoot and reload to try them and give me practical feedback. This seems like the place to find people like that. I just have to dredge through the ignorant haters to find the few that are willing to help me out.

Several have offered and you haven’t signed up any shooters yet. I had to PURCHASE your bullets just so I can test them next month and supply data to the good members of this site. Perhaps you are waiting for a National Championship shooter to volunteer. I don’t have one of those but I figure a few state championships would qualify as a good enough shooter to test your pellets.

 

[TylerFromMS]

What cartridge is in your plan ??

6.5x47

Good for you, Mr. HH. Tyler will give them a fair evaluation.

ill try my best. Sometimes maybe good, sometimes maybe shit.

 

[6.5 forever]

I'm sorry that my "claimed" degrees hurt your delicate sensibilities. Maybe you should start a petition to get me kicked off the forum for discussing my research into external ballistics? OR maybe you should stop being an ignorant simpleton and kindly ignore my posts if they hurt your feelings?

It has been my life's work to develop aerospike bullet theory and I have reached a point where I need others to begin shooting them to find any issues that I have missed. If you want to be a part of this then feel free to join in. If not then kindly piss off.

Ignore key is easy to do. Just push it if you don't like their posts.

 

[dellet]

That is not how research works in academia. Researchers show each other data all the time and I would never consider taking and presenting it without their approval. I know that y'all aren't academics (there may be a few hiding out there) but I don't see why I shouldn't treat y'all with the same respect.

No one is really asking for any meaningful data.
If you consider muzzle velocity, group size, distance to target, and twist rate data that needs protecting or approval to share, when trying to pimp a new bullet design, frankly, that is just plain stupid. Completely outside “industry standard”.

More like industry minimum.

I’m not sure how many long range shooters there are in academia, and how many of those, that don’t want the minimum of information needed to make an informed purchase. But you might want to adopt the standards of your target sales group, instead of your research support group.

Not to beat a dead horse too badly, but just another example of why people see you as out of touch with your intended market.

You keep referencing your bullet and testing is optimum for 300 Blackout because of the 1/8 twist. The 1/8 twist was an admitted mistake by those who brought the cartridge to SAAMI. AAC changed the preferred twist to 1/7 between the time that submissions were made to SAAMI, and their rifles and barrels hit the market. 1/8 is probably less than 25% of the market. 1/7 is considered the norm, and 1/5 is considered fast.

It’s the little things like that, that cause credibility issues.
How does your bullet do spinning at 200,000 rpm’s at 1750 fps, or 230,000 at 1600 fps? How about over 250,000 rpm’s?

What’s the double digit expansion velocity threshold?(expands to .600” down to what velocity)
Very few people shoot the blackout in any serious target competitions, they want terminal results.
You brag about 600 pounds of energy at 200 yards. Pretty average actually. But if that bullet does not expand and passes through at 500 fps, you’ve only dumped 500 pounds of energy, well below even some of the worst performing bullets in the same weight class.

Not really trying to grind on the subject, but there really is some very big holes in your understanding of your target market.

This is why you’re getting the push back, then the snarky responses, if there is a response at all to a serious question that poke holes in your theories (and they are still theories due to lack of real world testing) is why responses have turned rabid.

Just some thoughts.

 

[6.5 forever]

No one is really asking for any meaningful data.
If you consider muzzle velocity, group size, distance to target, and twist rate data that needs protecting or approval to share, when trying to pimp a new bullet design, frankly, that is just plain stupid. Completely outside “industry standard”.

More like industry minimum.

I’m not sure how many long range shooters there are in academia, and how many of those, that don’t want the minimum of information needed to make an informed purchase. But you might want to adopt the standards of your target sales group, instead of your research support group.

Not to beat a dead horse too badly, but just another example of why people see you as out of touch with your intended market.

You keep referencing your bullet and testing is optimum for 300 Blackout because of the 1/8 twist. The 1/8 twist was an admitted mistake by those who brought the cartridge to SAAMI. AAC changed the preferred twist to 1/7 between the time that submissions were made to SAAMI, and their rifles and barrels hit the market. 1/8 is probably less than 25% of the market. 1/7 is considered the norm, and 1/5 is considered fast.

It’s the little things like that, that cause credibility issues.
How does your bullet do spinning at 200,000 rpm’s at 1750 fps, or 230,000 at 1600 fps? How about over 250,000 rpm’s?

What’s the double digit expansion velocity threshold?(expands to .600” down to what velocity)
Very few people shoot the blackout in any serious target competitions, they want terminal results.
You brag about 600 pounds of energy at 200 yards. Pretty average actually. But if that bullet does not expand and passes through at 500 fps, you’ve only dumped 500 pounds of energy, well below even some of the worst performing bullets in the same weight class.

Not really trying to grind on the subject, but there really is some very big holes in your understanding of your target market.

This is why you’re getting the push back, then the snarky responses, if there is a response at all to a serious question that poke holes in your theories (and they are still theories due to lack of real world testing) is why responses have turned rabid.

Just some thoughts.

Exactly!

 

[DirtySteve]

I suggest contacting gunsmiths that build ELR rifles. Send the a few bullets to examine and test. Omar Alonzo, Speedy Gonzales and maybe a shooter like Eric Cortina that would give you plenty of publicity.

 

[Big_Daddy]

For live fire I'm doing bullet characterization and short range accuracy (100 yards). Bullet characterization is using a short range doppler radar to measure the drag coefficient. I load up about 100 at a time and vary the powder to get the desired Mach number. Accuracy is just 5 shot groups at 100 yards.

I don't do the long range accuracy testing that is popular on this site. I don't have the equipment or facilities for it.

Send me 200 for the 6.5 Creedmoor and I will test them in very short order and post the results with no bias.
I am not a match shooter but am into accuracy at 500 yards, which we shoot every Wednesday at our club.
We utilize the ShotMarker system so screen shoots should supply the needed info for a solid review.

I will do both 100 and 500 yard tests.

Figure it this way, if a "non high end" match shooter can make them work, then the "pros" should have no issues.

Your call!

 

[LVLAaron]

Following.

 

[LVLAaron]

Perhaps, a defined testing budget and a communications person would be helpful.

(I'm just a knuckle dragger in the tech industry)

 

[wwbrown]

I'm sorry that my "claimed" degrees hurt your delicate sensibilities. Maybe you should start a petition to get me kicked off the forum for discussing my research into external ballistics? OR maybe you should stop being an ignorant simpleton and kindly ignore my posts if they hurt your feelings?

It has been my life's work to develop aerospike bullet theory and I have reached a point where I need others to begin shooting them to find any issues that I have missed. If you want to be a part of this then feel free to join in. If not then kindly piss off.

This response kind of reinforces comments previously made re: your personality with potential customers and those who you are asking to help you develop your product with free labor. Other words, you are asking people who are clearly exceptional in their field to supply some labor for free.

When folks come to you asking you to help out with a pressing technical issue that will take you tens of hours I imagine your response is to write up a statement of work with the estimate for your time. I imagine someone with your credentials would not have been very excited to spend significant time helping another company out without renumeration. When working as an engineer this was my approach as it is standard operation procedure in the discipline.

Keep in mind you are asking for help and maybe that will help "soften" your personality it will be good practice as you may gain valuable customer service skills that are absolutely necessary for your commercial endeavor to be successful. The concerns raised here are trivial to those that will be raised by those that are paying for your bullets should they make production.

 

[TTE]

Dr. John,

What are the testing shooters gaining by testing your bullets ?

What are you gaining by the testing shooters testing your bullets ?
- - - - - -
in the end -

If your design is super beneficial to shooting and takes off like a house on fire ..... you stand to make lots of money.

What is the benefit to the testing shooters ?

Are you offering them a % in sales ?
- - - - -

You are looking for results, but seem to be unwilling to provide enough of your product to test by 'known' shooters here.

And in the overall picture of things, bullets are looking to be the cheapest part of reloading. Primers, powder, reloading time, case use, barrel time, range time not to mention the coast of the equipment on hand. With the exception of the equipment, all of those other things are regular 'consumables' and need to be replaced or eventually replaced (including the equipment).
- - - - - - - -
True enough, it looks like you are going to supply 200 bullets to a member here. Cool.
However, you need to take a step back and look at things here.
Most of the accuracy shooters buy bullets by the thousand(s) to shoot and test.
I do and I'm just a shooter guy.

IMO ... look at what you stand to gain and what the testers stand to gain.
Quite different things.

 

[Coyotefurharvester]

"You've never been out of college! You don't know what it's like out there! I've worked in the private sector. They expect RESULTS". Dr. Raymond Stantz(Dan Aykroyd Ghostbusters).

 

[Webster]

Statements like this are not going to help you.

You also need to clarify what the actual advantages should be. To me, it's not clear if there are any. You need to at least show what the calculated drift and drop would be using a sight that is above the centerline of the bore by a couple inches and assume the rifle has been zeroed at 100 yards.

He said he has several years of testing these bullets, yet he wants us to spend our time and money to verify his bullet. He said he has shot the bullets at many targets??? Without looking at all the post I believe he said the twist in most rifles is wrong for a long copper bullet. I think he also said his actual shootiing at targets was with the wrong twist believe he didn't want to buy a new barrel.

 

[Bill Norris]

He said he has several years of testing these bullets, yet he wants us to spend our time and money to verify his bullet. He said he has shot the bullets at many targets??? Without looking at all the post I believe he said the twist in most rifles is wrong for a long copper bullet. I think he also said his actual shootiing at targets was with the wrong twist believe he didn't want to buy a new barrel.

Yea, all this mentioned makes one feel he wants to gain a mountain and only invest a mole hill. Personally, I would not spend one red cent in his bullets.

 

[Kracken McGraw]

Yea, all this mentioned makes one feel he wants to gain a mountain and only invest a mole hill. Personally, I would not spend one red cent in his bullets.

The whole deal does raise a eyebrow!

 

[Big_Daddy]

I extended an offer for real world testing in post #68.....

And crickets.....

 

[Will Henry]

I read through this thread, and I have never felt more like I stepped into the twilight zone. I was expecting a post from Rod Sterling at any moment (an old pop-culture reference for you youngsters). Other times, I felt like had stumbled onto the set of SNL. Pure comedy. In another thread regarding these bullets, I wondered if Jaques P. Herter was involved. I'm still wondering. I'm anxiously awaiting some test results. WH

 

[boltfluter]

This thread, and all the others like it, just need to go quietly away. Kind of just like this business plan, if you can call it one! Lol! So long.
Paul

 

[Dave M.]

I suggest contacting gunsmiths that build ELR rifles. Send the a few bullets to examine and test. Omar Alonzo, Speedy Gonzales and maybe a shooter like Eric Cortina that would give you plenty of publicity.

I would love to see how Dr John would talk to Speedy or Omar, both of whom built two of the rifles I shoot often (both rifles fired TODAY at 600 yards in Midland, MI). I defy Dr. John to try to hold a 10 minute conversation with Speedy without him laughing and hanging up. Seriously, Speedy doesn’t have time to waste. And as soon as he is talked to by someone that starts telling him how to do his life’s work, that conversation is over.
Dave