The Coriolis effect and snipers.

Anybody what?

Anybody want to try to refute my still standing claims?

Ok, I will give it a go. No.

How sweet, you surrender...

Anyone else?

I declare this a win for Round earth.

Even though I brought this exact subject up here many years ago, and was left standing like this.

Actually, there were no claims made by the ForgedInStone user. Also, you admit you are an alt.

I am not an "alt", Bridget. The moderation team may check my IP address, even call my ISP. I never been on here, as far as I remember. Also, it would be nice to know how I "admitted" to be an "alt".

...that is of course if "alt" means alternative account. I prefer the term "sock puppet", but "alt" seems good too.

Now will you please explain how the Coriolis effect fits with the stationary flat earth?

Win for RE again.

Quote from: bridget on June 02, 2009, 03:58:04 PM

Where did you come up with these figures? And 'massive' is such a quantitative term.

The table in Wikipedia.

So your argument is based on your faith in the accuracy of reported statistics from the US government's military divisions? Obviously, there are many factors that offset the long range accuracy of a projectile, and until we can eliminate the influences of all but one we can't scientifically determine causation.

Win for RE again.

Are you always this arrogant and premature?

As everyone here knows i was a sniper on the ice wall and never once did i adjust for this effect.

As everyone here knows i was a sniper on the ice wall and never once did i adjust for this effect.

So your argument is based on your faith in the accuracy of reported statistics from the US government's military divisions? Obviously, there are many factors that offset the long range accuracy of a projectile, and until we can eliminate the influences of all but one we can't scientifically determine causation.

How about the ex Soviet and Chinese government? Are they in cahoots with NASA as well?   What about the Democratic People's Republic of Korea? They all compensate for this effect.

And, of course, you are involved in the ICMB programs of these military and work out the flight details.

Of course.

The Soviet tactics plans are all in the local library. I live in an ex-Socialist republic.

The Coriolis effect is in wiki. If you trust wiki on Angular momentum, or drift or w/e, you must trust it on Coriolis.

I'm not talking about the effects seen on the path of a projectile, I'm sure they exist. I'm talking about scientifically determining causality.
Snipers have to compensate for it, but they don't have to actually know the mechanisms behind it in order to adjust their aim. Why would they?

Also, read my mechanism for deflecting.

I'm not talking about the effects seen on the path of a projectile, I'm sure they exist. I'm talking about scientifically determining causality.
Snipers have to compensate for it, but they don't have to actually know the mechanisms behind it in order to adjust their aim. Why would they?

Why should they? They know the earth is rotating to the east, that means they need to compensate for it, because once their bullet leaves the barrel, it no longer rotates along with the earth. Since your "reference frame" is rotating the bullet path seems curved.

bridget, I'm done with you. You haven't said anything of any effect. The so called "Gyroscopic drift" is different from the Coriolis effect, and for long range artillery it has no significant effect. (2 inches lol)

The Coriolis effect causes drift related to the spin of the Earth, known as Coriolis drift. Coriolis drift can be up, down, left or right. Coriolis drift is not an aerodynamic effect. It is a result of flying from one point to another across the surface of a rotating sphere (Earth). For small arms, this effect is generally insignificant, but for ballistic projectiles with long flight times, such as extreme long-range rifle projectiles, artillery and intercontinental ballistic missiles, it is a significant factor in calculating the trajectory.

The coordinate system that is used to specify the location of the point of firing and the location of the target is the system of latitudes and longitudes, which is in fact a rotating coordinate system, since the Earth is a rotating sphere. During its flight, the projectile moves in a straight line (not counting gravitation and air resistance for now). Since the target is co-rotating with the Earth, it is in fact a moving target, relative to the projectile, so in order to hit it the gun must be aimed to the point where the projectile and the target will arrive simultaneously. When the straight path of the projectile is plotted in the rotating coordinate system that is used, then this path appears as curvilinear. The fact that the coordinate system is rotating must be taken into account, and this is achieved by adding terms for a "centrifugal force" and a "Coriolis effect" to the equations of motion. When the appropriate Coriolis term is added to the equation of motion the predicted path with respect to the rotating coordinate system is curvilinear, corresponding to the actual straight line motion of the projectile. For an observer with his frame of reference in the northern hemisphere Coriolis makes the projectile appear to curve over to the right. Actually it is not the projectile swinging to the right but the earth (frame of reference) rotating to the left which produces this result. The opposite will seem to happen in the southern hemisphere.

The direction of Coriolis drift depends on the firer's location or latitude on the sphere, and the azimuth of firing. The magnitude of the drift depends on the location, azimuth, and time of flight. The Coriolis effect is at its maximum at the poles and negligible at the equator of the Earth. The reason for this is that the Coriolis effect depends on the vector of the angular velocity of the Earth's rotation with respect to xyz - coordinate system (frame of reference).

The rotating heavens induce a Coriolis-like gravitomagnetic force.

It doesn't add up.

It doesn't add up.

Why not?

This so called gravitomagnetic force is therefore measureable? What gravimetric or magnetic? Can we quantify the field strength by induced current?

bridget, I'm done with you. You haven't said anything of any effect. The so called "Gyroscopic drift" is different from the Coriolis effect, and for long range artillery it has no significant effect. (2 inches lol)

You forgot to mention that the spin drift is 23.00 in on every 1000 yards for US standard M193 ammo. 23 inches for a sniper is pretty much.

Quote from: ForgedInStone on June 07, 2009, 03:33:54 AM

bridget, I'm done with you. You haven't said anything of any effect. The so called "Gyroscopic drift" is different from the Coriolis effect, and for long range artillery it has no significant effect. (2 inches lol)

You forgot to mention that the spin drift is 23.00 in on every 1000 yards for US standard M193 ammo. 23 inches for a sniper is pretty much.

Then it's a good thing that most snipers don't use M193 ammo (5.56mm is usually good to about 600 meters tops).  Usually snipers will more likely use .30 cal (7.62mm) or even .50 cal.

I'm a long time shooter and know many others that are. The Coriolis Effect is real but doesn't always need to be compensated for because of the insignificant difference that it makes. However when one is on or nearing the equator the need to adjust accordingly is greater.