Theory: Bullet drop

[NapalmEnima]

IIRC, the devs have mentioned that bullets will drop a la the PS1 wall turrets. This dash of added realism is great.

(No kids. Real Life Bullets do not travel in a straight line. If it has mass, it it affected by gravity. Period. Fucking. Dot.)

However, I suspect the Vanu-specific weapons will be free of such petty constraints. Gravity? Bah... a minor inconvenience.

The tank weapons already demonstrated this in PS1. The VS came out on the bottom of the DPS list on that one, but VS tanks' main gun makes for decent AA, so I'm certainly not complaining.

Pretty much the opposite of the man-portable AV weapons. I suspect this was not a coincidence. The lancer's DPS is king, but it's pretty much awful at AA. It's amazing what that little charge time at the beginning does to your aim.

[Ridill]

IIRC, the devs have mentioned that bullets will drop a la the PS1 wall turrets. This dash of added realism is great.

(No kids. Real Life Bullets do not travel in a straight line. If it has mass, it it affected by gravity. Period. Fucking. Dot.)

However, I suspect the Vanu-specific weapons will be free of such petty constraints. Gravity? Bah... a minor inconvenience.


No kids. Light does not travel in a straight line. It is affected by the curvature of space and time. Ever heard of Einstein??? Period. Fucking. Dot.

:rolleyes:

[Sirisian]

I too am excited for the bullet drop. Gunning wall turrets felt awesome when you had to compensate for gravity.

However, I hope that the VS energy weapons are affected by it just like every other weapon in the game. Even the magrider cannon should drop a little bit, just not as much as a tank shell.

Pretty much the opposite of the man-portable AV weapons. I suspect this was not a coincidence. The lancer's DPS is king, but it's pretty much awful at AA. It's amazing what that little charge time at the beginning does to your aim.
I find it really easy to hit a plane with the lancer. I usually land every shot. It's designed perfectly so it takes like 1 extra round forcing you to reload.

[FriendlyFire]

Make VS bullets drop and put their damage on par with the other Empires... or keep it how it is with no bullet drop. Either way NC and TR would cry if it is similar to the way it is now. /crossingfingers for some type of equally balanced system.

[Quovatis]

I want the Coriolis force implemented too. Of course it would be different depending on each planet you are on, assuming they have different rotation rates. /nerd

[NewSith]

Wind and atmospheric pressure and grass that affects trajectory... How could you forget that.






tl;dr: I'm sceptic.

[Sovereign]

I want the Coriolis force implemented too. Of course it would be different depending on each planet you are on, assuming they have different rotation rates. /nerd

You do realize that its caused by the rotation of the planet and the inertia of the mass experiencing the effect?

Thus it can only come into play if it were in fact calculating the trajectories of very long-range shots like artillery if such artillery will even exist in the game that would mirror that of real life parallels such as the Paris gun. So in order to even layout a proper trajectory the person using the long range gun that will be effected will have to employ imprinting this into their mind: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/62/Target_on_turntable.PNG

Not sure they will have such in depth weaponry that could potentially be fired at bases in other neighboring continents. Would be an interesting point of development in game and could prove to be a neat feature but I doubt it. :)

[Rbstr]

Bullet drop is fine, as long as they don't over do it. If we've got to aim above heads at 50m, we've got problems.
And VS weapons being immune is fine too, none of them should be at such a long range it matters terribly much, except something like a lancer. And it's not like other AV weapons won't have tracking of some sort.
A deci equivelent should have BC2 rpg/gustav like drop IMO.

The place drop should really matter is sniper at longer ranges and tank shells.
But tank shells should be faster than they were so the arc is a bit less prominent than it was.

[Sirisian]

Wind and atmospheric pressure and grass that affects trajectory... How could you forget that.

That would be interesting if the grass reflected the wind direction and strength for a long range shots. I might actually like that. then for places without grass you could offer an implant that displayed visually the direction and wind speed. :)

I personally love slow moving rounds where you feel the distance every round travels and are forced to lead targets. This is in stark contrast to people that prefer raycasted bullets with no travel time. Not to mention with slow rounds from a distance people see bullets whizzing around them as shots miss.

[NapalmEnima]

No kids. Light does not travel in a straight line. It is affected by the curvature of space and time. Ever heard of Einstein??? Period. Fucking. Dot.

:rolleyes:

Who said anything about light, Luddite? The weaponry of the Vanu are far beyond your ken.

PS: I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be able to measure the deflection caused by gravity across the effective range using a micrometer.

Oh hell, lets do some math.
1) The speed of light is 3,000,000 miles per second (give or take). Three Million miles per second.

2) The effective range of weaponry in PS2 is likely to be similar to PS1. Lets assume 200 yards.

So it takes light... 3.8 x 10-8 seconds to travel that far.

At 32ft/sec/sec (also ass-u-me-ing that gravity on Auraxis is similar to Earth's):
Light will drop...
1.22 x 10-6 feet
or
0.014... THOUSANDTHS of an inch. (and that number's way too big, it assumes a constant velocity of 32 feet per second, which would clearly not be the case. It takes a full second to reach 32 ft/sec. Light will have only had 3.8 x 10-8 (0.000000038 seconds) to fall. Sadly, I don't recall that particular equation from physics class All Those Years Ago.)

Nope, can't measure that with a micrometer. Micrometers are capable of measuring 1/1000 of an inch. You'd need a device that was over 60 times more accurate to measure 1/60,000 of an inch.

PPS: I'm pretty sure you were kidding. Sadly your post lacked humor and needed to be curb-stomped.


PPPS: Unless PS2's engagement range is Vastly Expanded, Real World bullet drop won't matter all that much either.

A modern assault rifle could reasonably expect a muzzle velocity in excess of 2000ft/sec. Given that same 200 yard range, it'll take a bullet... 3/10 of a second to cross that distance. Given our 32ft/sec/sec, the bullet will have accelerated to around 10 feet/sec in that time. Cheating the math again, that put the total distance traveled at... 3 feet. Yep, you'd notice that, big time. "Big head" shot turns into "little head" shot. OUCH.

[Peacemaker]

Aiming at center mast with most modern rifle rounds will hit center mast out to 300 yards. Most rounds start to drop off rapidly after 500 but you do have to aim a little high at 400 yards to keep that center mast shot. A .30-06 round needs about a foot and a half of lift to strike a target at 400 yards for example. Depending on what kind of average engagement ranges we will see in this game it should be acceptable.

If however the norm of engagement is > 200 meters perhaps the drop rate SHOULD be increased. Make it a direct correlation to what I have just said, so for example at 200 yards you would have to hold a little high.

[NapalmEnima]

Bullet drop is fine, as long as they don't over do it. If we've got to aim above heads at 50m, we've got problems.

Err. You and physics don't get along, do you?

When siting in a scope, you site it in for a particular range. 50 yards, 100 yards, 500 yards, whatever. You aim the scope for where the bullet will hit at that distance.

Sites intended for use at Long Range also tend to have distances marked on them. That's where the bullet will hit at those ranges. Aim with the correct cross-hair, and you're golden.

[Sirisian]

Aiming at center mast with most modern rifle rounds will hit center mast out to 300 yards. Most rounds start to drop off rapidly after 500 but you do have to aim a little high at 400 yards to keep that center mast shot. A .30-06 round needs about a foot and a half of lift to strike a target at 400 yards for example. Depending on what kind of average engagement ranges we will see in this game it should be acceptable.

If however the norm of engagement is > 200 meters perhaps the drop rate SHOULD be increased. Make it a direct correlation to what I have just said, so for example at 200 yards you would have to hold a little high.
Auraxis has thick air and more gravity than Earth. :lol: Use your imagination. Dropping similar to the wall turrets would be fine by me.

[Furret]

Who said anything about light, Luddite? The weaponry of the Vanu are far beyond your ken.

PS: I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be able to measure the deflection caused by gravity across the effective range using a micrometer.

Oh hell, lets do some math.
1) The speed of light is 3,000,000 miles per second (give or take). Three Million miles per second.

2) The effective range of weaponry in PS2 is likely to be similar to PS1. Lets assume 200 yards.

So it takes light... 3.8 x 10-8 seconds to travel that far.

At 32ft/sec/sec (also ass-u-me-ing that gravity on Auraxis is similar to Earth's):
Light will drop...
1.22 x 10-6 feet
or
0.014... THOUSANDTHS of an inch. (and that number's way too big, it assumes a constant velocity of 32 feet per second, which would clearly not be the case. It takes a full second to reach 32 ft/sec. Light will have only had 3.8 x 10-8 (0.000000038 seconds) to fall. Sadly, I don't recall that particular equation from physics class All Those Years Ago.)

Nope, can't measure that with a micrometer. Micrometers are capable of measuring 1/1000 of an inch. You'd need a device that was over 60 times more accurate to measure 1/60,000 of an inch.

PPS: I'm pretty sure you were kidding. Sadly your post lacked humor and needed to be curb-stomped.


PPPS: Unless PS2's engagement range is Vastly Expanded, Real World bullet drop won't matter all that much either.

A modern assault rifle could reasonably expect a muzzle velocity in excess of 2000ft/sec. Given that same 200 yard range, it'll take a bullet... 3/10 of a second to cross that distance. Given our 32ft/sec/sec, the bullet will have accelerated to around 10 feet/sec in that time. Cheating the math again, that put the total distance traveled at... 3 feet. Yep, you'd notice that, big time. "Big head" shot turns into "little head" shot. OUCH.


Why the hell would you use the American system to calculate all that shit.

Metric would've been a hell of a lot easier.

c = 3x10^8 m/s
g = 9.8 m/s^2
x = 200 m

t = x/c
t = 6.67 x 10^-7 seconds

s = v0t + .5at^2 where s is bullet drop, v0 is initial velocity in the Y axis (0), t is the time allotted, and a is the acceleration. Units are in brackets.

s = 0{m/s}(6.67 x 10^-7){s} + 4.9{m/s^2}(4.44 x 10^-13){s^2}

s = 2.18 x 10^-12 m, or 2.18 picometers

I think it's safe to assume 2.18 picometers will not make the difference between your shot hitting or missing your target.

[NewSith]

Also, in terms of realism... Bullets do not go "((" Boom -------_______"))"

They go "((" Boom _____-----______
____3600 Meters MAXIMUM"))" m16a2

More like ((" Boom __-----___________

To all who doubt it: What we name a recoil is the exact effect of bullet acceleration.

[EASyEightyEight]

Big numbers @_@

We all know they're just going to keep it simple: either everything drops at X distance, or VS weaponry goes straight but phases out abruptly at X range.

As long as my bullets dealing full damage the whole way instead of 50% of their normal damage by 100m, we might actually see them used as a mainstay weapon outside of Oshur for a change. 'Cause right now, it's either the bolt driver or the HA, depending on if you're planning on hanging back or bolting from cover to cover to reach the base wall, which happens to be within spitting distance of the tree line.

[Peacemaker]

What weapon have you seen that produce a bullet's velocity at 2000 feet a fucking second? It takes 1.2 seconds to hit a 300 meter target with an m4.

Also, in terms of realism... Bullets do not go "((" Boom -------_______"))"

They go "((" Boom _____-----______
____3600 Meters MAXIMUM"))" m16a2

I love people who just make shit up. An M4 Assault Rifle uses the Nato 5.56mm x 54mm Full Metal Jacket 63 grain bullet. Average FPS from this round when it leaves the barrel of a carbine is around 3100 FPS. 300 yards = 900 feet give or take. 900 / 3100 = .29 seconds. For an m4 round to take 1.2 seconds to hit (assuming that the round maintains a constant velocity, which it does not it slows considerably after 500 yards) You would have to be shooting at a target in excess of 1250 yards. Well outside the range of the 5.56 round, which is reliable to at max 800 yards. In reality with the bullet slowing down you would probably have a 5.56 round take 1.2 seconds to hit a target at about 900ish.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.56%C3%9745mm_NATO <--- Proof

PLEASE don't try to BS your way through the internet.

Also, NO Bullets do NOT go up and then come back down. Gun sights are zeroed in at ranges other than 0 meters. They are sighted so that anything UNDER the range they are sighted for would result in the bullet striking above the desired inpact point. For example, if you took a scoped rifle sighted for 200 yards and shot at 50 yards aiming dead center, your impact point is going to be an inch or so high. Sights and scopes are pointed down towards the barrel, not parallel. In reality the impact point on a rifle sighted in at 200 yards would also intersect the path of the bullet somewhere else down the line as it starts to drop. For a bullet to go up and then come back down it would need to produce lift. They do not, they fall as soon as they leave the barrel.

Also I have no idea what 3600 meters max M16A2 means, but no M16 fires ANYWHERE near 3200 meters. Thats a 1.5 mile shot. Which is roughly the record for the longest kill ever which was made with a .338 Lapula Magnum round, NOT a 5.56mm Nato.

Redneck Gun Nut Owned.

[Quovatis]

I do know how the coriolis force works. It was a joke mainly. However, slow velocity, high mass shots like a cannon round or shells from a battleship suffer greatly from the coriolis force. A popular story from the Falkland Island war in the 80s between the UK and Argentina goes that the UK didn't calibrate their guns to the southern hemisphere (where the direction of the force is opposite), so the first few shots they fired missed by several ships lengths. They quickly corrected the error, however.

[Goku]

PS: I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be able to measure the deflection caused by gravity across the effective range using a micrometer.

Oh hell, lets do some math.
1) The speed of light is 3,000,000 miles per second (give or take). Three Million miles per second.


I am just going to assume this is sarcasm :D.

[Peacemaker]

I do know how the coriolis force works. It was a joke mainly. However, slow velocity, high mass shots like a cannon round or shells from a battleship suffer greatly from the coriolis force. A popular story from the Falkland Island war in the 80s between the UK and Argentina goes that the UK didn't calibrate their guns to the southern hemisphere (where the direction of the force is opposite), so the first few shots they fired missed by several ships lengths. They quickly corrected the error, however.


Coriolis force isn't a "force" at all. Its just the world turning under the object in question. Low velocity long range projectiles are more affected because there is more time for the earth to move under them.

Seriously if you really wanted to go into details about ballistics of rifle bullets theres a slew of things you need. Spin drift for example, a bullet spins due to rifling, this causes the bullet to carry "up and to the left" in extreme range shots its seen. This doesn't mean that the bullet goes up, its still dropping, but it travels to the left and at the end of the ballistic chart the drop slows down. That's just one example. Humidity, Altitude, Temp, Where you are actually located on earth, curvature of the earth, and Angle of Attack Relative to the target. So PLEASE, unless your a military trained sniper or like me and looked it all up and figured it all out, just get back to the topic at hand :)

[Soothsayer]

You guys are out of control... Higby, we need info or this is gonna get ugly! :lol:

[Quovatis]

So PLEASE, unless your a military trained sniper or like me and looked it all up and figured it all out, just get back to the topic at hand :)

Seriously? I have a degree in physics, so I think I know a thing or two on the subject, so no need to lecture me. It was a joke anyway, so I'll leave it there.

[SKYeXile]

WHY ARE YOU PEOPLE USING IMPERIAL FOR MEASURMENT!?!?!

[Peacemaker]

Seriously? I have a degree in physics, so I think I know a thing or two on the subject, so no need to lecture me. It was a joke anyway, so I'll leave it there.

wasnt really talking to you :P Except for the first part. My bad, haha, I was simply still annoyed at that other guy. I really like guns :D

[NapalmEnima]

WHY ARE YOU PEOPLE USING IMPERIAL FOR MEASURMENT!?!?!

Because I live in the USA, and that's what we use here?

Muzzle velocity on some common weapons:
M16A1: 3,110 ft/s
AK-47: 2,400 ft/s
30-06: 2.5k - 2.9k ft/s depending on the round
Styer AUG: 3,182 ft/s

Now all that is MUZZLE velocity, the speed at which the bullet is traveling as it leaves the barrel. That's as fast as it'll ever be. They decelerate. I Promise. By how much really does depend on things like air pressure, wind direction, and so forth.

PS: A tank's APDS round can reach something like 5700 ft/sec.


To hit something at the same altitude as a weapon's muzzle, that weapon must point its barrel up a bit, and lob the round onto its target (even if only by X feet at Y hundred yards). So ___-----___ is accurate.

[CutterJohn]

No kids. Light does not travel in a straight line. It is affected by the curvature of space and time. Ever heard of Einstein??? Period. Fucking. Dot.

:rolleyes:

The state of your education is worrying. Thankfully others have pointed out your errors so I don't have to.


I'm all for bullet drop on all weapons it should not reasonably apply too, along with a more reasonable damage degradation with range. Make compensating for the drop what is necessary to be effective at those long ranges, not a magical lessening of energy.

As for vanu weapons: They should not have no bullet drop. They are still shooting matter, and that would still suffer from the effects of gravity. Shot speed is what you want to flatten out the arc. A lashers orbs would should have lobbed like softballs. A lancer and mag railgun should have had a noticeable arc, though being fast projectiles it would not have been much.

If its not a laser, or perhaps a railgun with hypersonic bullets, there must be arc.



WHY ARE YOU PEOPLE USING IMPERIAL FOR MEASURMENT!?!?!

People from other countries oft give those in the US shit for not knowing other languages. Learn to use more than one measuring system. The simple conversions are easy, and you can derive the rest.

[Baneblade]

Bullet drop is just the new cof.

[Sirisian]

Bullet drop is just the new cof.
I want both. :)

[cashfoyogash]

bullets dont just go out the barrel then start going down... it actually dips down as soon as it leaves the barrel then it starts to climb up and then falls down.... no bs

[Baneblade]

Cartridge (Wb@MV) Bullet BC 100 yds. 200 yds. MRT@yds. MPBR (yds.)
.17 HMR (17 SP at 2550) .123 +1.5" -5.5" 1.5"@100 165
.17 Rem. (20 V-MAX at 4200) .185 +1.1" +1.0" 1.5"@150 275
.204 Ruger (33 BT at 4225) .185 +1.1" +1.0" 1.5"@150 275
.218 Bee (45 SP at 2800) .202 +1.6" -1.5" 1.5"@125 200
.22 LR (40 HP at 1255) .100 -3.0" -40.9" 1.5"@45 90
.22 WMR (40 HP at 1910) .100 +0.5" -19.0" 1.5"@65 123
.222 Rem. (50 Sp at 3140) .220 +1.4" -0.4" 1.5"@118 222
.223 Rem. (45 Sp at 3550) .167 +1.4" +0.2" 1.5"@130 235
.223 Rem. (55 SP at 3240) .235 +1.4" +/- 0" 1.5"@120 230
.22-250 Rem. (50 V-MAX at 3700) .242 +1.3" +0.8" 1.5"@140 260
.22-250 Rem. (55 SP at 3600) .235 +1.3" +0.6" 1.5"@135 254
.220 Swift (50 V-MAX at 3800) .242 +1.2" +0.8" 1.5"@140 265
.220 Swift (55 SP at 3800) .235 +1.2" +0.9" 1.5"@140 264
.223 WSSM (55 SP at 3800) .235 +1.2" +0.9" 1.5"@140 264
.243 Win. (80 Sp at 3350) .255 +1.3" +0.2" 1.5"@125 237
.243 Win. (95 BT at 3100)* .379 +2.5" +2.3" 3"@150 300
.243 Win. (100 Sp at 2960) .351 +2.6" +1.9" 3"@140 283
6mm Rem. (100 Sp at 3100) .351 +2.5" +2.2" 3"@150 296
.243 WSSM (100 Sp at 3100) .351 +2.5" +2.2" 3"@150 296
6x62mm Freres (100 Sp at 3300) .351 +2.4" +2.5" 3"@150 312
.240 Wby. Mag. (100 Sp at 3400) .351 +2.4" +2.6" 3"@160 322
.25-20 Win. (86 FP at 1460) .190 +1.7" -19.1" 3"@65 139
.25-35 Win. (117 RN at 2300) .238 +2.9" -1.7" 3"@108 212
.250 Sav. (100 Sp at 2820) .336 +2.7" +1.6" 3"@125 270
.257 Roberts (100 Sp at 3000) .336 +2.6" +2.0" 3"@150 286
.257 Roberts (120 Sp at 2780) .391 +2.7" +1.6" 3"@125 271
.25 WSSM (120 Sp at 2990) .391 +2.5" +2.0" 3"@145 291
.25-06 Rem. (100 Sp at 3210) .336 +2.5" +2.4" 3"@150 305
.25-06 Rem. (120 Sp at 2990) .391 +2.5" +2.0" 3"@145 291
.257 Wby. Mag. (100 Sp at 3600) .336 +2.2" +2.8" 3"@175 337
.257 Wby. Mag. (120 Sp at 3305) .391 +2.4" +2.5" 3"@155 317
6.5x55 (125 NP at 2875) .449 +2.6" +1.9" 3"@135 284
6.5x55 (140 Sp at 2645) .435 +2.7" +1.2" 3"@125 260
.260 Rem. (120 Sp at 2890) .433 +2.6" +1.9" 3"@135 284
.260 Rem. (140 Sp at 2750) .435 +2.7" +1.6" 3"@125 271
6.5-284 Norma (140 PSP at 2900) .435 +2.6" +2.0" 3"@140 286
6.5mm Rem. Mag. (120 Sp at 3210) .433 +2.4" +2.5" 3"@150 312
6.5mm Rem. Mag. (140 PSP at 2900) .435 +2.6" +2.0" 3"@140 286
6.5x68 S (140 Sp at 2990) .435 +2.6" +2.1" 3"@150 294
.264 Win. Mag. (120 Sp at 3300) .433 +2.4" +2.6" 3"@160 321
.264 Win. Mag. (140 Sp at 3100) .435 +2.5" +2.3" 3"@150 303
6.8mm Rem. SPC (110 BTSP at 2500) .360 +2.9" +0.5" 3"@125 243
6.8mm Rem. SPC (115 Sp at 2800) .325 +2.6" +1.3" 3"@130 267
.270 Win. (130 Sp at 3140) .416 +2.5" +2.4" 3"@150 305
.270 Win. (140 AB at 2950) .496 +2.6" +2.1" 3"@140 293
.270 Win. (150 Sp at 2900) .481 +2.6" +2.0" 3"@138 287
.270 WSM (130 Sp at 3206) .416 +2.4" +2.4" 3"@150 311
.270 WSM (150 Sp at 3150) .481 +2.5" +2.4" 3"@150 311
.270 Wby. Mag. (130 Sp at 3375) .416 +2.3" +2.6" 3"@150 326
.270 Wby. Mag. (150 Sp at 3245) .481 +2.4" +2.6" 3"@160 320
7x57 (140 BT at 2660) .485 +2.7" +1.3" 3"@125 264
7x57 (175 Sp at 2540) .519 +2.8" +1.0" 3"@125 256
7mm-08 Rem. (120 Sp at 3000) .343 +2.6" +2.0" 3"@140 287
7mm-08 Rem. (140 BT at 2860) .485 +2.6" +1.9" 3"@140 285
7x64 (140 BT at 3000) .485 +2.6" +2.2" 3"@150 298
.280 Rem. (140 BT at 3000) .485 +2.6" +2.2" 3"@150 298
.280 Rem. (160 Sp at 2890) .475 +2.6" +1.9" 3"@140 287
7mm SAUM (150 Sp at 3110) .456 +2.5" +2.3" 3"@150 305
7mm WSM (150 Sp at 3200) .456 +2.4" +2.5" 3"@150 314
7mm Rem. Mag. (140 BT at 3150) .485 +2.5" +2.4" 3"@150 310
7mm Rem. Mag. (150 Sp at 3110) .456 +2.5" +2.3" 3"@150 305
7mm Rem. Mag. (160 Sp at 2950) .475 +2.6" +2.1" 3"@140 292
7mm Wby. Mag. (154 SP at 3260) .433 +2.4" +2.5" 3"@150 317
7mm Wby. Mag. (160 Sp at 3200) .475 +2.4" +2.5" 3"@150 314
7mm STW (160 Sp at 3185) .475 +2.4" +2.5" 3"@150 313
7mm Ultra Mag (160 Sp at 3200) .475 +2.4" +2.5" 3"@150 314
.30 Carbine (110 RN at 1990) .144 +2.8" -8.2" 3"@85 171
.30-30 Win. (150 FP at 2390) .268 +2.9" -0.6" 3"@110 225
.30-30 Win. (160 Evo at 2400) .330 +2.9" -0.2" 3"@110 232
.30-30 Win. (170 FP at 2200) .304 +2.9" -1.8" 3"@105 211
.300 Sav. (150 BT at 2630) .435 +2.8" +1.2" 3"@125 259
.307 Win. (150 FP at 2600) .268 +2.8" +0.5" 3"@120 243
.308 Marlin (160 EVO at 2660)* .400 +2.8" +1.2" 3"@130 261
.308 Win. (150 BT at 2800) .435 +2.7" +1.7" 3"@135 275
.308 Win. (165 Sp at 2700) .410 +2.7" +1.3" 3"@130 264
.308 Win. (180 Sp at 2610) .483 +2.8" +1.2" 3"@125 259
.30-06 (150 BT at 2910) .435 +2.6" +2.0" 3"@145 287
.30-06 (165 Sp at 2800) .410 +2.7" +1.7" 3"@135 273
.30-06 (180 Sp at 2700) .483 +2.7" +1.5" 3"@125 269
.300 SAUM (165 Sp at 3075) .410 +2.5" +2.3" 3"@145 300
.300 WSM (150 BT at 3300) .435 +2.4" +2.6" 3"@150 321
.300 WSM (180 Sp at 2970) .483 +2.6" +2.2" 3"@150 294
.300 Win. Mag. (150 BT at 3300) .435 +2.4" +2.6" 3"@150 321
.300 Win. Mag. (165 Sp at 3120) .410 +2.5" +2.3" 3"@145 303
.300 Win. Mag. (180 Sp at 3070) .483 +2.5" +2.3" 3"@150 303
.300 H&H Mag. (180 Sp at 2880) .483 +2.6" +2.0" 3"@140 286
.300 Wby. Mag. (150 BT at 3540) .435 +2.2" +2.8" 3"@170 343
.300 Wby. Mag. (180 Sp at 3250) .483 +2.4" +2.6" 3"@155 320
.300 Ultra Mag (180 Sp at 3250) .483 +2.4" +2.6" 3"@155 320
.30-378 Wby. Mag. (180 Sp at 3420) .483 +2.3" +2.7" 3"@160 336
7.62x39 (123 Sp at 2365) .292 +2.9" -0.5" 3"@110 225
.303 British (150 Sp at 2723) .411 +2.8" +1.5" 3"@130 267
.303 British (180 RN at 2460) .328 +2.9" +0.1" 3"@115 237
7.65x53 (180 RN at 2400) .328 +2.9" +0.4" 3"@115 241
.32 Spec. (170 FP at 2250) .297 +3.0" -1.3" 3"@105 215
8x57JS (150 Sp at 2900) .369 +2.6" +1.9" 3"@135 280
8x57JS (200 Sp at 2650) .426 +2.8" +1.2" 3"@125 260
.325 WSM (180 Sp at 2975) .394 +2.6" +2.0" 3"@140 289
.325 WSM (220 Sp at 2840) .383 +2.7" +1.7" 3"@130 276
8x68 S (150 Sp at 3300) .369 +2.4" +2.5" 3"@150 316
8x68S (220 Sp at 2800) .448 +2.7" +1.7" 3"@135 277
8mm Rem. Mag. (200 Sp at 2900) .426 +2.6" +2.0" 3"@138 284
.338 Marlin Express (200 FTX at 2565)* .430 +2.8" +0.9" 3"@125 254
.338 Federal (180 BT at 2830) .372 +2.7" +1.6" 3"@135 274
.338 Federal (200 Sp at 2400) .448 +2.9" +0.3" 3"@115 240
.338 Federal (210 Sp at 2630) .400 +2.8" +1.1" 3"@120 258
.338-06 (200 BT at 2800) .414 +2.7" +1.7" 3"@135 274
.338 Win. Mag. (200 BT at 2960) .414 +2.6" +2.1" 3"@150 289
.338 Win. Mag. (225 Sp at 2780)* .454 +2.7" +1.8" 3"@138 274
.338 Win. Mag. (250 Sp at 2700) .473 +2.7" +1.4" 3"@126 268
.338 Ultra Mag (250 Sp at 2860) .473 +2.7" +1.9" 3"@140 285
.338 Lapua Mag. (225 Sp at 3000) .454 +2.6" +2.2" 3"@150 296
.338-378 Wby. Mag. (250 Sp at 3000) .473 +2.6" +2.2" 3"@150 297
.340 Wby. Mag. (250 Sp at 2941) .473 +2.6" +2.1" 3"@150 291
.348 Win (200 FP at 2520) .246 +2.9" -0.1" 3"@115 233
.357 Mag. (158 FP at 1830) .158 +2.7" -10.5" 3"@85 163
.35 Rem. (200 RN at 2080) .180 +2.9" -5.1" 3"@93 186
.356 Win. (200 RN at 2400) .180 +2.9" -1.8" 3"@108 211
.358 Win. (200 Sp at 2520) .295 +2.9" +0.3" 3"@115 239
.35 Whelen (200 Sp at 2700) .295 +2.8" +1.0" 3"@125 254
.350 Rem. Mag. (200 Sp at 2775) .295 +2.7" +1.3" 3"@125 260
.350 Rem. Mag. (225 NP at 2550) .430 +2.8" +0.8" 3"@120 253
.350 Rem. Mag. (250 SP at 2500) .409 +2.8" +0.5" 3"@120 246
9.3x62 (270 SSp at 2550) .361 +2.8" +0.7" 3"@125 247
9.3x62 (286 SP-RP at 2360) .410 +3.0" +/- 0" 3"@110 234
9.3x74R (286 SP-RP at 2360) .410 +3.0" +/- 0" 3"@110 234
.375 Win. (220 FP at 2012) .231 +2.9" -4.7" 3"@91 187
.375 H&H Mag. (270 SP at 2690) .380 +2.7" +1.3" 3"@130 260
.375 H&H Mag. (300 Sp at 2550) .398 +2.8" +0.8" 3"@125 250
.375 Wby. Mag. (300 Sp at 2800) .398 +2.7" +1.7" 3"@125 273
.375 Ultra Mag (300 SP at 2800) .398 +2.7" +1.7" 3"@125 273
.376 Steyr (270 SP at 2550) .380 +2.8" +0.7" 3"@115 248
.378 Wby. Mag. (300 Sp at 2935) .398 +2.6" +2.0" 3"@140 285
.404 Jeffery (400 RN at 2150) .322 +3.0" -2.1" 3"@100 207
.405 Win. (300 FP at 2200) .225 +2.9" -2.8" 3"@100 203
.416 Rigby (400 RN at 2400) .316 +2.9" -0.1" 3"@115 231
.416 Rem. Mag. (400 RN at 2400) .316 +2.9" -0.1" 3"@115 231
.416 Wby. Mag. (400 RN at 2650) .316 +2.8" +0.9" 3"@125 253
.44 Rem. Mag. (240 FP at 1760) .165 +2.6" -11.6" 3"@75 159
.44 Rem. Mag. (275 FP at 1580) .199 +2.2" -14.7" 3"@75 149
.444 Marlin (240 FP at 2350) .165 +3.0" -2.6" 3"@100 203
.444 Marlin (265 RN at 2200) .191 +3.0" -3.3" 3"@100 197
.45-70 (300 HP at 1800) .197 +2.7" -9.2" 3"@85 166
.45-70 (350 RN at 1900) .189 +2.9" -7.6" 3"@85 174
.45-70 (405 FP at 1330) .214 +1.3" -22.9" 3"@65 131
.450 Marlin (350 RN at 2100) .189 +3.0" -4.5" 3"@100 189
.458 Win. Mag. (350 RN at 2100) .189 +3.0" -4.5" 3"@100 189
.458 Win. Mag. (500 RN at 2100) .295 +3.0" -2.9" 3"@100 200
.458 Lott (500 RN at 2300) .295 +2.9" -1.0" 3"@110 219
.460 Wby. Mag. (500 RN at 2600) .295 +2.8" +0.6" 3"@116 246
.470 N.E. (500 RN at 2150) .321 +3.0" -2.1" 3"@100 207
.480 Ruger (325 FN at 1450) .150 +1.5" -22.1" 3"@68 134
.50 BMG (750 Sp at 2700) 1.07 +2.6" +1.8" 3"@135 281

Source (http://www.chuckhawks.com/rifle_trajectory_table.htm)

[CutterJohn]

bullets dont just go out the barrel then start going down... it actually dips down as soon as it leaves the barrel then it starts to climb up and then falls down.... no bs

:bang:

The bullet has a downward acceleration of 9.8m/s the moment it leaves the barrel. If it goes up first its because the barrel is pointing up. Bullets don't have any magical lift. A bullet fired from a barrel parallel to the ground will instantly begin falling the very instant it leaves the barrel.

[cashfoyogash]

:bang:

The bullet has a downward acceleration of 9.8m/s the moment it leaves the barrel. If it goes up first its because the barrel is pointing up. Bullets don't have any magical lift. A bullet fired from a barrel parallel to the ground will instantly begin falling the very instant it leaves the barrel.

Im telling you there is a small dip when it first leaves the barrel.... how could the us army be wrong? it is who taught me how to shoot and it has a very slight dip when it first leaves the barrel to which it then elevates up to the line of sight to whatever range your zeroed in at then it starts to fall. It is why when we aimed at the closest target we aimed in the dirt.

[NewSith]

Im telling you there is a small dip when it first leaves the barrel.... how could the us army be wrong? it is who taught me how to shoot and it has a very slight dip when it first leaves the barrel to which it then elevates up to the line of sight to whatever range your zeroed in at then it starts to fall. It is why when we aimed at the closest target we aimed in the dirt.

What John says is true. What you're saying is not what he says and IS also true. Depending on weapon's design or gunner's will, sights can be altered to either be parallel to a weapon or adapted to firing distance. The second means you're not pointing your gun the direction you're aiming at. This + recoil creates this magic effect.

EDIT: It doesn't come to mind unless you have free time to think about it.

[Sirisian]

bullets dont just go out the barrel then start going down... it actually dips down as soon as it leaves the barrel then it starts to climb up and then falls down.... no bs
You've been playing too much airsoft man. A hop-up mechanism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hop-Up_%28Airsoft%29) doesn't exist for a real gun...

[SKYeXile]

People from other countries oft give those in the US shit for not knowing other languages. Learn to use more than one measuring system. The simple conversions are easy, and you can derive the rest.

im not giving you shit because i cant convert imperial to metric...which it obvious i can..since I dont live in the US... I'm simply giving you shit for using an inferior system of measurment.

[cashfoyogash]

You've been playing too much airsoft man. A hop-up mechanism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hop-Up_%28Airsoft%29) doesn't exist for a real gun...

No, I trained with a M16A4 and also the M4 variant. I also shot for my worst ever 35 out of 40 and my best was 38 out of 40 from 50 meters out to 300 meters. I do have a bit of understanding in how a rifle works and also what the path of a bullet is. Im telling you it dips as soon as it leaves the barrel then it elevates to its peak and then descends again. This is also because of rifling in the barrel it has nothing to do with anything else. Bullets do not come out the barrel in a straight line slowly falling.... Now it is a very small dip and you wouldnt really notice it even firing at a target that is a foot in front of you.

We almost always had our rifles zeroed in for 175 meters for qualifying. The area you aimed for is called center mass which is basically the upper part of your sternum. So at a 175 meters your red dot for a CCO (close combat optic) is right on the chest or center mass area. When firing at the 300 meter target the dot would be a little above the head so the bullet will strike center mass. At the 50 meter target you would put your red dot right on the bottom of the silhouette. I wasnt saying the bullet climbs above the barrel, I said it arcs back up to whatever your zeroed in at.

[Bags]

Going to weigh in here and say I live in the USA and I really wish we used the metric system because ours sucks.

[Sirisian]

Im telling you it dips as soon as it leaves the barrel then it elevates to its peak and then descends again.
And this isn't caused by any upward recoil of the rifle that would give the impression of the bullet dropping then coming back up as you quickly adjusted? From a physics standpoint there's nothing to explain such action and I can't find anything online to support that idea.

[cashfoyogash]

And this isn't caused by any upward recoil of the rifle that would give the impression of the bullet dropping then coming back up as you quickly adjusted?

Umm no because you dont actually see the bullet anyways? What causes the bullet to go in this path is the rifling that is in a barrel.... You do know that rifling in a barrel is what makes a rifle able to be accurate right? A smoothbore musket back in the civil war days had no accuracy at all. Shortly after the start of the war rifling came into barrels and accuracy increased tremendously. See the smoothbore a round would just circle around in there any which way and come out any which way. With the introduction of rifling the round now had a path which it was sent out in. This is why when the bullet leaves the barrel it slightly dips and arcs up then down basically. All this is not noticeable to the human eye while firing....

[Rbstr]

Err. You and physics don't get along, do you?

When siting in a scope, you site it in for a particular range. 50 yards, 100 yards, 500 yards, whatever. You aim the scope for where the bullet will hit at that distance.


You don't like paying attention to the context of posts do you?
You should note I made no claims about realistic bullet drop, simply that they could add too much. That makes aiming a chore beyond usual and kind of silly from a game play standpoint.
I've taught physics labs for several years and I'm a phd engineering student. But that doesn't mean I give a shit about physics in a game acting exactly like it does in real life.

Coriolis force isn't a "force" at all. Its just the world turning under the object in question.
That all depends on your frame of reference.


And yeah, the imperial measurement system sucks. It gets even worse than simple conversion when you have to deal with temperature or mass/force (pound mass, pound force, fuck you). Or when you work in a lab and half the shit is German or Japanese and the other half is American (and some of that is made by scientists that use metric and some is made by engineers so it's imperial)so everything is a hodge-podged quagmire of metric and imperial nut and bolt sizes.
I will admit it's fairly good for eyeballing things, though. A foot is...your foot-ish. A yard is about a stride.
But those powers of ten and no-nonsence conversions are so nice.

[Rbstr]

Umm no because you dont actually see the bullet anyways? What causes the bullet to go in this path is the rifling that is in a barrel.... You do know that rifling in a barrel is what makes a rifle able to be accurate right? A smoothbore musket back in the civil war days had no accuracy at all. Shortly after the start of the war rifling came into barrels and accuracy increased tremendously. See the smoothbore a round would just circle around in there any which way and come out any which way. With the introduction of rifling the round now had a path which it was sent out in. This is why when the bullet leaves the barrel it slightly dips and arcs up then down basically. All this is not noticeable to the human eye while firing....

This is not why or how rifling works (though you're partly right about smoothbore guns, those can also impart spin at odd angles that cause bullets to deflect like a baseball pitch[though that has lots to do with the laminar/turbulent transition] or paintball). Rifling imparts angular momentum which stabilizes a bullet like a gyroscope.

[cashfoyogash]

This is not why or how rifling works (though you're partly right about smoothbore guns, those can also impart spin at odd angles that cause bullets to deflect like a baseball pitch or paintball). Rifling imparts angular momentum which stabilizes a bullet like a gyroscope.

I could of swore thats what I was saying? Regardless rifling is why the bullet dips when it leaves the barrel.

[Sirisian]

I could of swore thats what I was saying? Regardless rifling is why the bullet dips when it leaves the barrel.
That doesn't make sense. Rifling stabilizes the bullets straight flight. There is no force that would cause the bullet to go down then come back up. I've taken a few physics courses and know a bit about guns. The rotation is only for stability. It doesn't spin fast enough to actually impart any force like a hop-up would. Thus there's no force acting on the bullet when it leaves the gun that would cause it to dip down or raise up against gravity. It's just not possible.

[Captain1nsaneo]

And now for something completely different.

Thus it can only come into play if it were in fact calculating the trajectories of very long-range shots like artillery if such artillery will even exist in the game that would mirror that of real life parallels such as the Paris gun. So in order to even layout a proper trajectory the person using the long range gun that will be effected will have to employ imprinting this into their mind:

Not sure they will have such in depth weaponry that could potentially be fired at bases in other neighboring continents.

artillery


fired at bases in other neighboring continents


DO. WANT.
I don't care how much math I have to do and how slow it's rate of fire is. Heck it could even be an upgrade for a player owned base that requires a cert to use. DO. NOT CARE. I want to fire this bad boy. Minimum range, rate of fire, and complexity of aiming could be easily combined to make an awesome weapon. Replace that radar disk with an artillery emplacement. Heck you could make it so it had to be manually reloaded after each shot. Have a round the size of an FDU you have to put into a trunk. Later there could be different round types. Like giant flares to aid in night fights or EMP charges to clear CE.

Now slightly back on topic.
Bullet drop is fun, makes those long range shots more satisfying when pulled off correctly.

[Peacemaker]

Rob, I assume what you ment on my comment about coriolis force was in refrence to weather. Yea I get that.

And to the other guy who the hell told you that bullets go down then up after leaving a rifled barrel. WTF are you talking about? Bullets follow newtons laws. Bullets don't have lift, once leaving the barrel they fall. The only way they can go up is an updraft or a deflection via impact.

[exLupo]

That doesn't make sense. Rifling stabilizes the bullets straight flight. There is no force that would cause the bullet to go down then come back up. I've taken a few physics courses and know a bit about guns. The rotation is only for stability. It doesn't spin fast enough to actually impart any force like a hop-up would. Thus there's no force acting on the bullet when it leaves the gun that would cause it to dip down or raise up against gravity. It's just not possible.

To back up this post, I'll take a quote from the same page with the stats link earlier.

Starting with:
One of the more pervasive myths associated with bullet trajectory is that "bullets always rise right after they leave the barrel." In general, bullets do rise after leaving the barrel, and they immediately begin to drop. This is not a contradiction, and the explanation is not difficult to understand.
Source (http://www.chuckhawks.com/bullet_trajectory.htm)

The gyrojets mentioned in a previous thread could possibly exhibit a wave but that's because they accelerate after firing so, in theory, could propel themselves above the exit tube's axis. However, that's additional propulsion and projectile angle. Missiles, jets off a carrier, etc. The only time you get dip and rise is with a self propelled article.

[cashfoyogash]

That doesn't make sense. Rifling stabilizes the bullets straight flight. There is no force that would cause the bullet to go down then come back up. I've taken a few physics courses and know a bit about guns. The rotation is only for stability. It doesn't spin fast enough to actually impart any force like a hop-up would. Thus there's no force acting on the bullet when it leaves the gun that would cause it to dip down or raise up against gravity. It's just not possible.

Ok you took a few physic courses and that just counters the few years of experience I have in the actual infantry training with this casualty producing weapon. If it were to be put into a degree I would have a bachelors degree in putting ass to foot with the assault rifle. Not to mention the men who told me that the bullet has a slight dip when it leaves the barrel would have a masters degree in putting foot to ass with the rifle. Physics may make you smart but it dont make you an expert in anything to do with the assault rifle.

[CutterJohn]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a8/TargetShooting3.gif

There is no dip. You may have experience with the rifles, but your understanding of bullet trajectories is flawed. They follow a simple arc, nothing more. The bullet starts below the line of sight, travels up because the barrel is pointed slightly up, then falls back. M16s have to aim quite low at close targets because the sights are unusually high.

[cashfoyogash]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a8/TargetShooting3.gif

There is no dip. You may have experience with the rifles, but your understanding of bullet trajectories is flawed. They follow a simple arc, nothing more.

I highly doubt that my drill sgts were flawed when they were explaining this to us...

[CutterJohn]

I highly doubt that my drill sgts were flawed when they were explaining this to us...

I think they were confused, or you were. Believe what you will though.

http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS369US369&q=bullet+trajectory&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1130&bih=971

Or here (http://ballisticscalculator.winchester.com/). You think your instructors were more versed in bullet trajectories than engineers at winchester?

[basti]

Wow, this thread really derailed in a direction no one would have guessed. :D

[Ridill]

The state of your education is worrying. Thankfully others have pointed out your errors so I don't have to.


I'm all for bullet drop on all weapons it should not reasonably apply too, along with a more reasonable damage degradation with range. Make compensating for the drop what is necessary to be effective at those long ranges, not a magical lessening of energy.

As for vanu weapons: They should not have no bullet drop. They are still shooting matter, and that would still suffer from the effects of gravity. Shot speed is what you want to flatten out the arc. A lashers orbs would should have lobbed like softballs. A lancer and mag railgun should have had a noticeable arc, though being fast projectiles it would not have been much.

If its not a laser, or perhaps a railgun with hypersonic bullets, there must be arc.

People from other countries oft give those in the US shit for not knowing other languages. Learn to use more than one measuring system. The simple conversions are easy, and you can derive the rest.

Ok I'll bite. Tell me how my education is worrying as nothing I said was incorrect? Was I totally owned when that guy did those fancy calculations using the speed of light as a constant of 3,000,000 miles/sec? MY EDUCATION IS WORRYING?

I thought I was being clear in my intention, but it seems there was some ambiguity here as people seem to be under the impression i'm asking for light drop to be included in the game. I was merely making a play at realism in a game like planetside while taking a jab at the OP. Something just stood out as ridiculous for me with his in regards to "kids" and the way things should be. Where do you draw the line on importance in things like bullet drop. With weapons named "beamer" one can only assume it is lasers they are shooting even they though no resemblence of that in physics. :rolleyes:

Edit: Oh and yes, using anything other than metric for unit based calculations and conversions is stupid. Yes I am American.

[NapalmEnima]

And this isn't caused by any upward recoil of the rifle that would give the impression of the bullet dropping then coming back up as you quickly adjusted? From a physics standpoint there's nothing to explain such action and I can't find anything online to support that idea.

I must agree with Sirisian on this one. OTOH, I'm open minded.

Lets go have a look at some high-speed "bullet leaving the barrel" videos on youtube, eh?

Nothing magical here, but that's a Very Short slice of time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otpFNL3yem4

The first 15 seconds or so of this video give a better view of the round as it travels a bit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lL0-SpI2u4U

Nothing magical there either.

Now if you look at something like a paintball gun where the projectile is spinning on a different axis, you can get some Strange Things (like the tippman flatline, or a little water/paint in your barrel).

Oh, and here's one that simply demonstrates how epic slo mo can really be:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kag4tU6B3yc


So no. The training cited is probably dumbing down What Actually Happens so your well below average Derp-a-Derp bullet catcher has something they can work with.

[cashfoyogash]

I think they were confused, or you were. Believe what you will though.

http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS369US369&q=bullet+trajectory&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1130&bih=971

Or here (http://ballisticscalculator.winchester.com/). You think your instructors were more versed in bullet trajectories than engineers at winchester?

Ok that was suppose to show me what exactly? I told you there is a slight dip coming out the barrel. Find yourself a soldiers handbook the diagram is in there for it. I dont see how anyone can argue against people that actually do this for a living. The bullet dips get over it.

[Surge72]

I dont see how anyone can argue against people that actually do this for a living. The bullet dips get over it.

Probably because there is no explanation given for why it would do that? Until you explain why it follows this behaviour, people are just going to assume you are misinterpreting what is happening when see it yourself.

[EASyEightyEight]

Wow, this thread really derailed in a direction no one would have guessed. :D

Smart people trying to outsmart other smart people. And I'm so dumb :doh: I just simply realize SOE isn't going to be using real world physics on their weaponry in game. At least, I don't think they will. They'll more than likely follow the KISS example: bullet goes to where cross-hair is, generally, until a certain point them simply drop severly.

And for the record: I don't think SOE intends for Vanu plasma fire to move at the speed of light.

[Furret]

Ok that was suppose to show me what exactly? I told you there is a slight dip coming out the barrel. Find yourself a soldiers handbook the diagram is in there for it. I dont see how anyone can argue against people that actually do this for a living. The bullet dips get over it.

Your point is exactly valid. You can't argue with people who actually do this for a living. Though you're wrong on who has the most expertise.

You just shoot the gun for a living, other people STUDY WHY AND HOW IT WORKS for a living.

[Timmy]

Im telling you there is a small dip when it first leaves the barrel.... how could the us army be wrong? it is who taught me how to shoot and it has a very slight dip when it first leaves the barrel to which it then elevates up to the line of sight to whatever range your zeroed in at then it starts to fall. It is why when we aimed at the closest target we aimed in the dirt.


I think your only excuse at this point is if your instructor was Lee Harvey Oswald because your describing a Magic Bullet that defies the laws of physics.

Ok that was suppose to show me what exactly? I told you there is a slight dip coming out the barrel. Find yourself a soldiers handbook the diagram is in there for it. I dont see how anyone can argue against people that actually do this for a living. The bullet dips get over it.

By your own reasoning, the Winchester link was made by people who do this for a living and there's no dip - so why don't you believe them?

http://8reg.txsg.state.tx.us/Manuals8reg/FM3_22x9_Rifle_Marksmanship_Chan_4.9412913.pdf

Here's one and the only Dip I see is you. You said your self that your sights are set for 175m distance. That's what you call "Zeroing" them in. Because if your barrel is at "zero" and your sights are a few centimeters above "zero" it will make you point the gun at the right angle so that when the bullet travels 175m it will drift/drop back to "Zero." You aim "low" at a close target because your sights, being a few centimeters above the barrel, are still at the proper angle (relative to the muzzle) to make you hit a target at 175m.

I know you don't want to hear all the fancy-talk from the learned-folk that know physics, so let me give you as foot-to-ass example you and Sarge can wrap your brain around.

When Bo and Luke jump the General Lee, have you ever seen it dip first then go up?

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. :confused:

And why has everyone in this thread been so nice to the guy that thinks light moves at 3,000,000 miles per second? He even typed it out in case we thought he couldn't be that stupid and made a typo...


1) The speed of light is 3,000,000 miles per second (give or take). Three Million miles per second.


3,000,000 (give or take 2,800,000)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light

299,792,458 m / s means "Meters per Second" or 186,000 Miles per Second

[Furret]

We gave him a break because he was doing calculations with the Imperial system, and only mentally challenged people do that if they don't have to. Just tryna give him the benefit of the doubt.

[Rbstr]

Your point is exactly valid. You can't argue with people who actually do this for a living. Though you're wrong on who has the most expertise.

You just shoot the gun for a living, other people STUDY WHY AND HOW IT WORKS for a living.

This. Technicians (in this case soldiers) often have a wonderful understanding of how to use equipment but often have little idea of how the equipment actually functions. Turn this dial this much and get this result...but no real idea what the dial does.

A pitcher knows what to do to get a ball to curve, and even that it's based on spin. But no idea that a baseball is an amazing coincidence of fluid dynamic phenomenon.

A bullet that shows some kind of lift (beyond the barrel angle effects) wouldn't be impossible, it could exchange velocity or angular momentum for height...but they don't because they aren't designed that way.

Rob, I assume what you ment on my comment about coriolis force was in refrence to weather. Yea I get that.
Not quite...you said it wasn't a force, but it is...if you look at an object in a rotating frame the coriolis effect manifests itself as a force. When this kind of thing happens they're called fictitious forces. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fictitious_force

[SKYeXile]

3,000,000 (give or take 2,800,000)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light

299,792,458 m / s means "Meters per Second" or 186,000 Miles per Second
lol reminds me of those people who still use M as an abreviation for thousand...yea muppets..nobody uses roman nuemerals for that shit anymore.

[Ridill]

lol reminds me of those people who still use M as an abreviation for thousand...yea muppets..nobody uses roman nuemerals for that shit anymore.

You actually would not believe how many people, high up people infact... use that in a certain industry. When I was asked to look over their numbers, I had to ask what the fuck the double M's meant.

[Hamma]

Great discussions in this thread :D

[Rbstr]

EDIT: It occurs to me I may have confused your posts with some from that cash guy, my bad, but I'm not deleting this because it still applies.

Peace BSing or whatever. You don't really seem to understand what's going on here. Functional knowledge is, again, different from the actual physics of the situation.
You do realize you're proving our point with that graph right?

The bullet starts low and goes up, it does not dip or go strait and then go down or up. There's a data point right there at 0 meters. It behaves in a manner completely consistent with what we've we've described: The barrel is located some distance below the sight and is angled upwards to some extent. The sight must be adjusted depending on the range you wish to aim to.
If you want to go more into math, the bullet follows a nearly perfect parabolic trajectory. Almost exactly as the idealized equations would have it behave. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trajectory_of_a_projectile do you need a detailed derivation?)
Furthermore, the sight can be adjusted many ways that will have the sight not only be dead on at a long distance but at a close distance as well, because that's how parabolas and strait lines work (note the intersections of the 0 line at ~25m and 300/350m).

Did I read someone say a bullet droped 9.8 meters a second? R O F L COPTER
Yeah someone misstated that.
However, ALL objects on the surface of the earth are subjected to a force that points strait downward which produces acceleration of 9.8meters per second squared (with minute local variation). That is, in the absence of air resistance all objects, after one second of falling, will have reached a velocity of 9.8 meters per second (and at two seconds 19.6m/s, three 29.4m/s, ect.). This is about as fact as scientific fact gets. (though for very quickly moving objects the curvature of the earth gets involved. When the object is moving fast enough it can remain at the same elevation even as it's "falling" it's one way to conceptualize, and even calculate, an orbit)

[Peacemaker]

Your reply does nothing to discredit my statements. Bullets don't rise then fall. They fall immediatly. The rise in the flight path of a bullet is created by the barrel aiming up. Your scope/ sight aims flat, and meets the bullet where you have the sight calibrated. Notice on the M4, sighted in for 300 yards. You wouldn't have to aim anywhere but center mast at 300 meters, and the bullet would also be spot on at 25 meters. Between 25 and 300 meters you need to aim below the target, and below 25 (though your so close it doesn't matter) and above 300 meters you need to aim above.

Sights and bores (the barrel) are NOT parrallel. If you put the rifle on a stand and made the sight aim perfectly flat, you could see that the barrel actually is pointing up. This is why bullets "rise" and then fall. The barrel shoots up and then the bullet falls into the merg point of the flight path and the sight.

This is why the upper sight mount on an M16 is sloped down in compairson to the barrel. When a ACOG is mounted its pointing down. When you aim the rifle with the scope the barrel is pointing up. IIRC the M16 has a 7.5 MOA scope mount. Long rifles such as the M21, M95, and XM2010 have a 10 MOA mount because they have longer engagment ranges.

Now, Max Range vs Max Effective Range. Max Effective range is the distance a bullet could fly if you aimed the rifle up into the air at a certain angel. This could be between 1d and 45 degrees, it depends on the round and the rifle. This is NOT a measure of range that you could use the rifle to engage a target. You CANNOT reliably hit a target at 3600 meters with an M16. If you aimed at the right angel and ripped out a whole mag at that range there is a CHANCE you could hit, but its very low. That's why they give you Max range on a point (a human for instance) and Max range on an area (an MG nest).

For the love of god, if your going to argue with me, try to understand what your charts and books are telling you before you spout information that just says your wrong. Notice you didn't even touch on the speed of the round when you acted like 2000fps is impossibly fast. Yes you trolled. No your not winning. Logic is winning.

[exLupo]

This is why the upper sight mount on an M16 is sloped down in compairson to the barrel. When a ACOG is mounted its pointing down. When you aim the rifle with the scope the barrel is pointing up.

A more extreme example of this could be illustrated with direct line mortar sights, both black powder and modern. The sight is more or less straight line to your target and it provides the info to determine the angle of the tube. Be the launching device a mortar, a rifle or a softball pitcher, the direction of release needs to be angled upward to compensate for gravity. It's just far easier to see with slower projectiles and longer ranges.

[MorphyNOR]

@Peacemaker - Can you explain to us what you mean by 'center mast' ?

If you are consistently misspelling a word - could you be wrong about other things as well? :)

[exLupo]

@Peacemaker - Can you explain to us what you mean by 'center mast' ?

If you are consistently misspelling a word - could you be wrong about other things as well? :)

*** DEFLECTION ALERT! ***

You incorrectly used a single dash hyphen. It's entirely possible you, too, are wrong about things like right-on-red laws and why you should stop using a banana to cut your hair.

[Peacemaker]

I'm missing something center mast? Is this spelled wrong or am I just tired?

Also: I was wrong about something, afaik the handle on the top of the M16 needs an insert to add a scope. The angle isn't that extreme

[exLupo]

I'm missing something center mast?

He was looking for "center mass". Torso.

[Elude]

Will we have toilets in the game in case we need to pretend take a shit?

On a serious note I'm all for bullet drop so long as it does not hinder the gameplay too much.

[FastAndFree]

While this physics war is somewhat amusing, at the end of the day it won't be real world physics that decide how bullets and projectiles handle because Planetside 2 is a game, not a simulation.

Just look at the tank shell arcs from Planetside 1...

Shell leaves level barrel, hits ground within 150 meters - you can't explain that!

[Peacemaker]

Ahhh I see now. I never noticed that. I've always called it mast. -_- vocabulary correction.

[Rbstr]

Mast vs Mass as a persistent vocabulary screw-up is pretty impressive.

[CutterJohn]

While this physics war is somewhat amusing, at the end of the day it won't be real world physics that decide how bullets and projectiles handle because Planetside 2 is a game, not a simulation.

Just look at the tank shell arcs from Planetside 1...

Shell leaves level barrel, hits ground within 150 meters - you can't explain that!

Their arcs were actually quite realistic. The bullets were absurdly slow is all.

[exLupo]

Mast vs Mass as a persistent vocabulary screw-up is pretty impressive.

Near-homophone transposition isn't really that uncommon in cases like this. English is a patchwork language full of loan-words and jargon, like center mass, is usually experienced in a spoken context.

It's why at least a third of the FPS forums are full of questions about "turrents". One of the few downsides of phonetics as a teaching tool.

[Hamma]

turrents :lol:

A classic.

[Sledgecrushr]

This is an old thread that Im resurrecting here. What I want to know is the bullet drop on a NC Bolt Driver at 200 meters when the muzzle velocity is at 550ms.

[Canaris]

This is an old thread that Im resurrecting here. What I want to know is the bullet drop on a NC Bolt Driver at 200 meters when the muzzle velocity is at 550ms.

magnets..... :rolleyes:

[Rbstr]

200m/550m/s = .363636...s

(.363636....s)^2 *.5*9.8m/s^2 = .64m almost exactly 2 feet.

assuming Earth gravity (duh), a constant bullet velocity AND shooting horizontal. Because it's quite different if you've got non-gravity velocity components in the vertical. (aim correction is much greater if you're shooting up than shooting down)

[maradine]

VILE NECROMANCY.

Also, 550m/s? Really? Or is that just an arbitrary number for the sake of discussion? I'll die a little inside if the railguns of the future barely outpace a 125gr. .357 :)

[Storn]

Sniping takes very little skill in PS2. WWII online did it right with round drop. In order to compensate for round drop you had to set the scope to what range you ascertained the target to be at. After you got the scope ranged in you were golden. I think all the scopes should have this ability to adjust for long range shots.

[Sledgecrushr]

Im getting all of my info from https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0AuOojvNLMApVdEtIU1NKenEzNzZOSWNaanFqSUVxLW c&type=view&gid=12&f=true&colid0=16&filterstr0=NC&colid1=17&filterstr1=SNIPER%2C%20BOLT%20ACTION&sortcolid=-1&sortasc=true&rowsperpage=250

[Juryrig]

Sniping takes very little skill in PS2. WWII online did it right with round drop. In order to compensate for round drop you had to set the scope to what range you ascertained the target to be at. After you got the scope ranged in you were golden. I think all the scopes should have this ability to adjust for long range shots.

Isn't that what we're doing, just without the ability to actually adjust the scope?

Estimate range, use that to estimate drop and then aim that far above the target's head.

I'm not seeing a difference, other than the convenience of being able to dial in a scope for a particular range and then being consistently able to stick the crosshairs on a target at that range and know you'll hit. (I'm thinking of situations like attacking the crown, where you'll often have a lot of targets appearing at a 'set' range - once you'd dialled in, you'd be golden)

[Sledgecrushr]

Finding range to a target is easy as setting up a personal waypoint on your selected killing field. The personal waypoint gives you the distance in meters.