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
Canting - the right answer
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="Brown Dog" data-source="post: 109771" data-attributes="member: 1622"><p>JBM, </p><p>I've been puzzling over this; I have to say, my brain has just gone "tilt".</p><p></p><p>I understand where you're going with trying to calculate the changes to Az and El caused by rotating the elevated bore around the LOS. ...I've just tried doing this several times and have come up with junk each time (and can't track down my error -hence my brain frazzle!)</p><p></p><p>(I'm assuming the statement QE =TE + AS [Quadrant Elevation = Tangent Elevation + Angle of Sight] is in use on your side of the pond):</p><p></p><p>[apologies, but here I hit full mumbo jumbo! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif]</p><p></p><p>It strikes me that even once the Az change is identified; it will be impossible to calculate what portion of the newly calculated QE is AS and how much is TE. ...and thus you'll have to run an iterative 'reduction' process to work out what portion of the QE is TE, and what portion is AS. As with artillery reduction routines, this would involve plotting and replotting the fall of shot until the shot to shot change to the postulated AS reaches an acceptably small value between 'shots'. </p><p></p><p>....but where to start? I suspect the 'simple' method in my pics is 'close enough for government work' but when I try to model it at the gun end I, like you, am getting wildly small values.</p><p></p><p>(interestingly, on your linked program, setting zero distance as 1000, cant 10 deg and ticking 'el corrn for zero range' 'az corrn for zero range' and 'drop and windage rel to tgt' .....the windage value it gives is 57" !! (same as my 'clockwork' calculation on your data earlier)</p><p></p><p></p><p>Right, I'm off to wrap my head in a cold towel /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Brown Dog, post: 109771, member: 1622"] JBM, I've been puzzling over this; I have to say, my brain has just gone "tilt". I understand where you're going with trying to calculate the changes to Az and El caused by rotating the elevated bore around the LOS. ...I've just tried doing this several times and have come up with junk each time (and can't track down my error -hence my brain frazzle!) (I'm assuming the statement QE =TE + AS [Quadrant Elevation = Tangent Elevation + Angle of Sight] is in use on your side of the pond): [apologies, but here I hit full mumbo jumbo! [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]] It strikes me that even once the Az change is identified; it will be impossible to calculate what portion of the newly calculated QE is AS and how much is TE. ...and thus you'll have to run an iterative 'reduction' process to work out what portion of the QE is TE, and what portion is AS. As with artillery reduction routines, this would involve plotting and replotting the fall of shot until the shot to shot change to the postulated AS reaches an acceptably small value between 'shots'. ....but where to start? I suspect the 'simple' method in my pics is 'close enough for government work' but when I try to model it at the gun end I, like you, am getting wildly small values. (interestingly, on your linked program, setting zero distance as 1000, cant 10 deg and ticking 'el corrn for zero range' 'az corrn for zero range' and 'drop and windage rel to tgt' .....the windage value it gives is 57" !! (same as my 'clockwork' calculation on your data earlier) Right, I'm off to wrap my head in a cold towel [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Canting - the right answer
Top