Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Applied Ballistics Mobile App
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TexSavage" data-source="post: 1104738" data-attributes="member: 6245"><p>Ok, spent time last night reviewing and brushing up on the WeatherHawk 350 and re-reading the instructions. I compared it to the instructions for the Kestrel 4500 regarding the pressure and altitude instructions and they seem almost identical except for some wording. The 350 says to 1st enter the barometric pressure and then the altitude for base settings and then the unit can respond with the proper density altitudes. It also will read and give you station pressure. Should you change altitudes, it says to enter the altitude or the barometric pressure so that density altitude will be correct. The Kestrel says the same thing, change altitude, you got to enter the new altitude or a new barometric pressure.</p><p></p><p>So what I need to make sure of rock solid wise is that within the Applied Ballistics app, which way is the best way to set it up for field use, should I use density altitude, temp and make what other changes you recommend or should I enter the atmospheric particulars and not use density altitude. Which would be the more accurate if there is one and which would provide faster use. I am more than willing to do which ever, I just would like some help to make sure I am shooting as accurately as I can and can make changes in the field as quick as possible.</p><p></p><p>I absolutely am a number one fan of the Applied Ballistics app and all of yours and Brian's work, effort, expertise, etc. Please understand I am not by any means unhappy, just a little confused on which methodology I should use and which inputs I need to make in the Applied Ballistics app to make sure I'm getting the correct results. I appreciate your responses and being in the software and software support business I know it can be a bit challenging when dealing with users that don't understand or that get things mixed up. As I said before, I am here to learn and you folks are the best teachers out there. You're the experts. Thanks again!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TexSavage, post: 1104738, member: 6245"] Ok, spent time last night reviewing and brushing up on the WeatherHawk 350 and re-reading the instructions. I compared it to the instructions for the Kestrel 4500 regarding the pressure and altitude instructions and they seem almost identical except for some wording. The 350 says to 1st enter the barometric pressure and then the altitude for base settings and then the unit can respond with the proper density altitudes. It also will read and give you station pressure. Should you change altitudes, it says to enter the altitude or the barometric pressure so that density altitude will be correct. The Kestrel says the same thing, change altitude, you got to enter the new altitude or a new barometric pressure. So what I need to make sure of rock solid wise is that within the Applied Ballistics app, which way is the best way to set it up for field use, should I use density altitude, temp and make what other changes you recommend or should I enter the atmospheric particulars and not use density altitude. Which would be the more accurate if there is one and which would provide faster use. I am more than willing to do which ever, I just would like some help to make sure I am shooting as accurately as I can and can make changes in the field as quick as possible. I absolutely am a number one fan of the Applied Ballistics app and all of yours and Brian's work, effort, expertise, etc. Please understand I am not by any means unhappy, just a little confused on which methodology I should use and which inputs I need to make in the Applied Ballistics app to make sure I'm getting the correct results. I appreciate your responses and being in the software and software support business I know it can be a bit challenging when dealing with users that don't understand or that get things mixed up. As I said before, I am here to learn and you folks are the best teachers out there. You're the experts. Thanks again! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Applied Ballistics Mobile App
Top