Theory: Bullet drop

[SKYeXile]

Originally Posted by Timmy

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]

Originally Posted by SKYeXile

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

[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]

Originally Posted by Peacemaker

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]

Originally Posted by 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?

*** 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]

Originally Posted by Peacemaker

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]

Originally Posted by 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!

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