Originally Posted by jmason
This is a good
thing for Henson bullets!
Yes, we basically have a phenomenon that cannot currently be explained by standard G profile and their associated calculations. There are not really any standard G profiles that fit the HAT bullets and that makes it both difficult to believe and hard to explain.
Believe me there is not anyone more skeptical of testing results than me. During my down time, we went out and got some additional instruments for checking bullets and one of them is the Starrett 673 micrometer that is very accurate (check the starrett website)..... When we started looking at some bullets available over the counter, we found out that they were not round....Some brands were not even close.
Anyway, I knew about the gawdy BC numbers back in December and I thought that it was freakish.... We were actually very leery about putting out those numbers so we waited until the spring testing. Even then(now), I only put out the raw data and let everyone else crunch the numbers using their computers and ballistic programs. That is why we have tested and then tested again. The results are repeatable and predicatble so that indicates that it is not a fluke. Coupled with some reports from shooters seeing very similar results substantiates the trajectory characteristics of the bullets..... Now for the "WHY".
Brian Litz is really interested in the "why" so he is going to buy some just like any other customer does with any other bullet brand and conduct his research to ascertain the "why". Once RG fills his current orders for the 50 BMG Aluminum tipped bullets and the high performace shotgun slugs he will be back in production of 338s and .30s and Brian will get his order when his name comes up on the production list.
On the way to do some spring testing, I broke a bone in the old foot and that delayed things for a while..... It also gave us time to crunch as much data and talk to folks about the bullet flight paths and impact points on the target.
Kirby had some similar experiences with testing he performed on some other branded Aluminum tipped bullets. He even made some posts about them and I believe it was back in 2007. His posts indicate he experienced the similar type of results that we have seen with apparent BC not matching trajectory predictions.....
FWIW, Dr. Ken Oehler knew that we were going to see some interesting results on the target board since the lower profile bullets tend to "sneak" (Dr Ken's term) through the electronic eyes of the chronographs at longer distances.
We know what we have.
We know what they will do.
But, we just don't know why it does it as of yet....
This is sort of like the situation with the engineering predictions for the ability of a bumble-bee to fly or even for the average person to understand how U-235 and some water (moderator) will create a reaction that creates intense kinetic energy and heat that can be harnessed for electric power generation......
Another point that gets over looked by the average citizen..... Does the electron "run" down the copper wire or is it bumped down the copper wire from the generation station to the end user. We certainly use electricity every day, but most cannot explain what creates it or how it gets transmitted to our electrical tools and appliances.....
Sometimes we as laymen can't "see" everything. Even after you have cross checked both the testing and evlauation processes as well as conducting tests over and over again, you just have to hit the "I believe button" when things happen exactly the same way over and over again that you cannot explain..... Then you go out and find the "why" and that is what Brian wants to do.
When you are shooting, do you ever think about how fast the gas has to expand or the pressure required to spit out a bullet from a barrel at 3000 fps.... Remember, you have your eyeball about 6" from the explosion/expansion/burn.....