Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.

  • 135 Replies
  • 53416 Views
*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #90 on: October 13, 2015, 07:04:54 AM »
Then why are you people even bringing up artillery in a thread about snipers?  You people seem like you are dodging and evading because you can't come up with proof of your Round Earth Theory.  It is sad, sometimes.

Just because you can't account for everything, doesn't mean you don't account for anything.  As stated earlier, the Coriolis effect would affect the location of impact by nearly a mile.  If I can account for it, I will.

For all you know, the calculation is what made the round be so far off, and the forward observer/spotter is cancelling this by giving corrections.  I do not see how this is proof about anything. 

Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #91 on: October 13, 2015, 07:19:30 AM »
Then why are you people even bringing up artillery in a thread about snipers?  You people seem like you are dodging and evading because you can't come up with proof of your Round Earth Theory.  It is sad, sometimes.

Just because you can't account for everything, doesn't mean you don't account for anything.  As stated earlier, the Coriolis effect would affect the location of impact by nearly a mile.  If I can account for it, I will.

For all you know, the calculation is what made the round be so far off, and the forward observer/spotter is cancelling this by giving corrections.  I do not see how this is proof about anything.

I am not seeing where it was stated on how far the target was missed and in what direction.  Did the initial impacts after the adjustment miss their targets by nearly a mile in the direction the adjustment was made?

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #92 on: October 13, 2015, 07:30:36 AM »
Then why are you people even bringing up artillery in a thread about snipers?  You people seem like you are dodging and evading because you can't come up with proof of your Round Earth Theory.  It is sad, sometimes.

Just because you can't account for everything, doesn't mean you don't account for anything.  As stated earlier, the Coriolis effect would affect the location of impact by nearly a mile.  If I can account for it, I will.

For all you know, the calculation is what made the round be so far off, and the forward observer/spotter is cancelling this by giving corrections.  I do not see how this is proof about anything.

I am not seeing where it was stated on how far the target was missed and in what direction.  Did the initial impacts after the adjustment miss their targets by nearly a mile in the direction the adjustment was made?

I used to be a forward observer in the Marine Corps, and I can assure you that sometimes Artillery would be a kilometer or more off target, even when they have exact coordinates.  Once again, I ask how this information is in any way relevant to the shape of the Earth?
« Last Edit: October 13, 2015, 07:34:07 AM by jroa »

Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #93 on: October 13, 2015, 08:12:21 AM »
Then why are you people even bringing up artillery in a thread about snipers?  You people seem like you are dodging and evading because you can't come up with proof of your Round Earth Theory.  It is sad, sometimes.

Just because you can't account for everything, doesn't mean you don't account for anything.  As stated earlier, the Coriolis effect would affect the location of impact by nearly a mile.  If I can account for it, I will.

For all you know, the calculation is what made the round be so far off, and the forward observer/spotter is cancelling this by giving corrections.  I do not see how this is proof about anything.

I am not seeing where it was stated on how far the target was missed and in what direction.  Did the initial impacts after the adjustment miss their targets by nearly a mile in the direction the adjustment was made?

I used to be a forward observer in the Marine Corps, and I can assure you that sometimes Artillery would be a kilometer or more off target, even when they have exact coordinates.  Once again, I ask how this information is in any way relevant to the shape of the Earth?

I am aware of the inaccuracies of artillery.  I even stated this earlier.  I don't see the point of restating what we have both agreed on.  There are many factors that affect the trajectory, wind speed and direction, air density, etc...  If we don't need to take Coriolis Effect into account as you suppose, why has it been adjusted for for 70+ years?  At some point, the guys that are making the calculations are going to notice that the rounds are landing in a location that is off by the amount they adjusted for and realize the adjustment isn't necessary.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #94 on: October 13, 2015, 08:30:29 AM »
Then why are you people even bringing up artillery in a thread about snipers?  You people seem like you are dodging and evading because you can't come up with proof of your Round Earth Theory.  It is sad, sometimes.

Just because you can't account for everything, doesn't mean you don't account for anything.  As stated earlier, the Coriolis effect would affect the location of impact by nearly a mile.  If I can account for it, I will.

For all you know, the calculation is what made the round be so far off, and the forward observer/spotter is cancelling this by giving corrections.  I do not see how this is proof about anything.

I am not seeing where it was stated on how far the target was missed and in what direction.  Did the initial impacts after the adjustment miss their targets by nearly a mile in the direction the adjustment was made?

I used to be a forward observer in the Marine Corps, and I can assure you that sometimes Artillery would be a kilometer or more off target, even when they have exact coordinates.  Once again, I ask how this information is in any way relevant to the shape of the Earth?

I am aware of the inaccuracies of artillery.  I even stated this earlier.  I don't see the point of restating what we have both agreed on.  There are many factors that affect the trajectory, wind speed and direction, air density, etc...  If we don't need to take Coriolis Effect into account as you suppose, why has it been adjusted for for 70+ years?  At some point, the guys that are making the calculations are going to notice that the rounds are landing in a location that is off by the amount they adjusted for and realize the adjustment isn't necessary.

70+ years and they still can't hit the target on the first shot.  And this proves the Earth is round how? 

Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #95 on: October 13, 2015, 09:00:58 AM »
Then why are you people even bringing up artillery in a thread about snipers?  You people seem like you are dodging and evading because you can't come up with proof of your Round Earth Theory.  It is sad, sometimes.

Just because you can't account for everything, doesn't mean you don't account for anything.  As stated earlier, the Coriolis effect would affect the location of impact by nearly a mile.  If I can account for it, I will.

For all you know, the calculation is what made the round be so far off, and the forward observer/spotter is cancelling this by giving corrections.  I do not see how this is proof about anything.

I am not seeing where it was stated on how far the target was missed and in what direction.  Did the initial impacts after the adjustment miss their targets by nearly a mile in the direction the adjustment was made?

I used to be a forward observer in the Marine Corps, and I can assure you that sometimes Artillery would be a kilometer or more off target, even when they have exact coordinates.  Once again, I ask how this information is in any way relevant to the shape of the Earth?

I am aware of the inaccuracies of artillery.  I even stated this earlier.  I don't see the point of restating what we have both agreed on.  There are many factors that affect the trajectory, wind speed and direction, air density, etc...  If we don't need to take Coriolis Effect into account as you suppose, why has it been adjusted for for 70+ years?  At some point, the guys that are making the calculations are going to notice that the rounds are landing in a location that is off by the amount they adjusted for and realize the adjustment isn't necessary.

70+ years and they still can't hit the target on the first shot.  And this proves the Earth is round how?

...and they never will.  That is why other weapon systems were developed that do hit the target on the first shot. 

The Coriolis Effect is real and measurable.  The Coriolis Effect proves the Earth is rotating/spinning.  The fact that the Coriolis Effect is the opposite on the other side of the equator proves the Earth is a rotating sphere.  The only way we would see this effect on a flat Earth is if the areas on each side of the equator were spinning in opposite directions.  This is obviously not occurring.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #96 on: October 13, 2015, 09:20:11 AM »
Well, I guess this is the wrong thread to talk about this with you people since you have already admitted that they are not very accurate. 

Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #97 on: October 13, 2015, 09:32:52 AM »
Well, I guess this is the wrong thread to talk about this with you people since you have already admitted that they are not very accurate.

The thread is about long-range snipers and they are pretty accurate. 

I wasn't the one that derailed this on to artillery.  However, are you familiar at all with statistical models?  They are used to explain the variability in a set of data.  You add items to the model to help explain some of the variability.  With any real-world data, there will always be variability.  You would never dismiss something in the model that is explaining some of the variability just because it doesn't explain all of the variability.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #98 on: October 13, 2015, 09:40:27 AM »
I see that now that I have defeated your people, you change the subject.  Typical roundie. 

Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #99 on: October 13, 2015, 10:05:26 AM »
I see that now that I have defeated your people, you change the subject.  Typical roundie.

My entire second paragraph is still on the same subject of artillery.  Please try and keep up.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #100 on: October 15, 2015, 06:07:23 PM »
You got me, burn!  lol.  If you want me to, I could share the story behind me giving myself that title. 

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #101 on: October 16, 2015, 01:36:55 AM »
I guess I was only trying to be "smart", if it's an interesting story and not too personal, why not?

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #102 on: October 16, 2015, 02:49:22 AM »
It's not really interesting or personal.  Before I was a mod here, I was a Flat Earth Curator, which was just a fancy name for a janitor.  I could only move posts when they were posted in the wrong forum and delete spam.  The former name for the Curators was the Flat Earth Custodians and I have an Engineering degree, so I made Custodial Engineer my personal title. 

I told you it was not a very interesting story.   ;D

Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #103 on: May 05, 2016, 03:26:51 AM »
Coriolis and Einstein's theory of relativity contradict each other. Einstein proposed relative motion to account for why the Michelson-Morely experiment failed. This was a major experiment conducted to prove earths rotation. Einstein stated that no optical experiment can be conducted to detect earths movement. So everything you guys are saying contradicts relativity. The Linear Aircraft Model as defined by NASA operates under the "flat, non-rotating earth assumption" because of relative motion, so they claim. An explantion needs to be provided as to why those experiments to detect earths movement failed, yet there is somehow coriolis? It makes no sense.

Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #104 on: May 05, 2016, 09:43:48 AM »
Coriolis and Einstein's theory of relativity contradict each other. Einstein proposed relative motion to account for why the Michelson-Morely experiment failed. This was a major experiment conducted to prove earths rotation. Einstein stated that no optical experiment can be conducted to detect earths movement. So everything you guys are saying contradicts relativity. The Linear Aircraft Model as defined by NASA operates under the "flat, non-rotating earth assumption" because of relative motion, so they claim. An explantion needs to be provided as to why those experiments to detect earths movement failed, yet there is somehow coriolis? It makes no sense.
The Michelson-Morley Experiment was dependent on the existence of an ether as the "material" on and from which everything is built and through which light propagates. The most obvious conclusion to draw from this is that that simply doesn't exist, not that the Earth is not rotating. That's the explanation, and it's been clear as day since the experiment was first performed. Just because one method of determining something fails doesn't mean that the expected result isn't true. For example, I can have a drawer of socks and tell you that because the sock I'm going to draw is blue then the sky is blue, then draw a red sock; that doesn't mean the sky isn't blue. Likewise, just because there's no ether for Earth to move in relation to doesn't mean Earth isn't moving. So Einstein developed his theory of relativity as an alternate explanation of things based on actual mathematics instead of speculation and philosophy.

Now as for the Coriolis Effect, that's not simply an optical test. "Optical tests" are where you look at the sky and see if it's moving; the results are ambiguous, either the sky is moving under you or you are moving under the sky. The Coriolis Effect, however, clearly shows a difference in the motion of the atmosphere at different latitudes. As air move towards or away from the equator it will deflect. A globe Earth's angular momentum and the conservation of the air's momentum explains this perfectly. It has absolutely nothing to do with the physics of light, it's not based on relativity, it's basic mechanical physics, it's not an optical test, it's observation of momentum and location. Just because you have to look up doesn't mean it's in the same boat as the experiments Einstein said can't be used to prove Earth's rotation.
Quote from: jroa
Wow, great non-response
Quote from: disputeone
I don't understand females but am still pretty sure they exist.
Quote from: markjo
Your first mistake was to presume there would be an academic debate anywhere on this forum.

Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #105 on: February 20, 2017, 05:21:49 PM »
Yendor, an insect riding on a bullet wouldn't be able to see the rotation if the Earth.  If you were in a car going 50 miles per hour and you shoot a gun facing backwards then the bullet will be traveling 50 miles per hour slower then normal relative to the ground, and if you shoot it forwards then it will be going 50 miles per hour faster then normal relative to the ground.  Relative to the car though the bullet's speed is normal in both instances  Simelarly, shooting a gun east and west are the same as far as the bullet's speed goes.  It will hit a target to the east with the same speed as a target to the west.

Great point here with the bullet being fired from the car and it's relative speeds going forward and backwards. So, the earth is the car and the plane is the bullet. If the earth is rotating at 1,000mph(just a general number) and a plane is shot out (takes off) in the earth's forward direction(west to east) at 500mph(just a general number), how do pilots land on North/South runways. Based on the car?bullet example above, the plane is moving 1000mph faster than its normal relative speed to the earth(1000 + 500 = 1500mph). In order to match the runway speed of the earth moving at 1000mph from west to east, wouldn't the pilot have to reduce speed to near zero(0)? Based on the same example, if you shot the plane towards the back of the earths directional movement, wouldn't it it travel at -500mph, since the speed would be 1000mph slower than its normal relative speed?

Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #106 on: February 20, 2017, 07:08:59 PM »
Hello ConfusedEarthling, if you want to quote someone, type your response below the [/quote] tag.  Much less confusing that way.

To answer your question, the plane is flying through the air, which is also moving roughly the same speed as the ground.  The plane already has the same speed as the ground when it takes off.

Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #107 on: February 20, 2017, 07:16:57 PM »
They might need to factor in wind speed and distance. Bullets shoot in a straight line so there is no curvature to factor unless you are confusing fiction with reality as seen in the movie Wanted.


Uhh no. Bullets follow a ballistic path, which is in no way a straight line. Bullets have to travel up from the barrel to meet the scopes point of aim at a set distance. So the bullet leaves the barrel traveling on a slightly upwards trajectory, passes the imaginary line the extends from the scope, continues to travel upwards until it loses upwards momentum and starts falling back to earth on a curved trajectory.

Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #108 on: February 20, 2017, 07:25:48 PM »
The point is that snipers are not the magically accurate super computing shooters that the OP makes them out to be.  Otherwise, they would not need to make adjustments for followup shots.

It is astounding the amount of evidence you all just disregard. Corialis Effect is set. It doesn't change depending on anything other then where in the world you are in the world and can be predicted easily and accurately. On the other hand, and why snipers need spotters, the wind (which can change from where the shooter is to where the target is), humidity (which again can change between the shorter and target),air density (again same thing) and even the fact that the shooter could be in shade while the target and bullet path are in direct sunlight or vise versa, are variables that are not easily predicted or accounted for and at extreme distances it helps to have a spotter redirect your point of aim based on the not easily observed variables. Yet even with all that, tons of snipers are able to hit the target on the first shot.

Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #109 on: February 20, 2017, 07:50:13 PM »

So are Flat Earthers saying that military snipers and gun manufactures are in on the "conspiracy" too?

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

If you watch the video you referenced above, starting at 0:44 second, The guy say that when the bullet leaves the barrel of the gun it is actually leaving the surface of the Earth. He goes on to say when the bullet leaves the barrel, the Earth is still rotating and the bullet is not rotating with the Earth. The Earth will actually rotate out from underneath the bullet as it is in flight.

How can this be true? The bullet has to rotate with the Earth because the atmosphere rotates with the Earth and it will carry the bullet along with it. At least that's what I've been told. If you can believe that a bullet doesn't have to rotate with the Earth, then why does an airplane have to rotate with the Earth and a bullet doesn't. Seriously, what is the difference? Following this logic, a plane should be able to take off and head north and the pilot should be able to watch the Earth rotate under him. Could you please explain this to me?

Planes are not bullets. They travel much slower, and also can change trajectory mid flight. A bullet travels much faster and cannot change its trajectory. Further, planes do not take off and keep flying straight to the destination. The follow either an air route, which by the way also rotates with the earth since it is "fixed", or a magnetic compass heading, again which also rotates with the earth. If you watched a plane fly over the surface of the earth from a reference point outside the rotation of earth you would see the plane is also moving sideways with the earth.

The coriolis effect is very slight over short distances and even slighter at low speeds.  So even though the correction is necessary in principle, it tends to get lost in all of the other corrections that pilots make during a flight.  The most important influence of Coriolis on aircraft is the effect it has on wind direction.  Pilots account for winds and make periodic corrections for changing winds, the Coriolis effect is not even felt — even on long-range flights.    So, in effect, by the time the pilot has made corrections for the  winds, he has  also automatically corrected for the Coriolis effect without even  thinking or knowing about it.

Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #110 on: February 20, 2017, 07:55:25 PM »
If you watch the video you referenced above, starting at 0:44 second, The guy say that when the bullet leaves the barrel of the gun it is actually leaving the surface of the Earth. He goes on to say when the bullet leaves the barrel, the Earth is still rotating and the bullet is not rotating with the Earth. The Earth will actually rotate out from underneath the bullet as it is in flight.

How can this be true? The bullet has to rotate with the Earth because the atmosphere rotates with the Earth and it will carry the bullet along with it. At least that's what I've been told. If you can believe that a bullet doesn't have to rotate with the Earth, then why does an airplane have to rotate with the Earth and a bullet doesn't. Seriously, what is the difference? Following this logic, a plane should be able to take off and head north and the pilot should be able to watch the Earth rotate under him. Could you please explain this to me?

The guy in the video didn't really explain it very well and you are right in assuming that the bullet moves with the atmosphere and stays in motion just as it did before it left the barrel, the Coriolis effect is apparent strange motion of an object from a rotating frame of reference.  If you and a friend sit on a spinning platform and you try to throw a ball to him then common experience states that you should throw the ball towards him but because the platform is spinning from your frame of reference the ball will appear to swerve in it's trajectory and your friend wouldn't catch the ball.  If you want him to catch it then you have to aim to the side of your friend and the ball will swerve and he will catch it.  The same thimg happens on Earth, but it's not as extreme because Earth has a rotation period of 24 hours which means that the effect rarely pronounces it's self, but it's noticeable for things like bullets and hurricanes that move rather fast relative to Earth's surface.

"The guy on the video didn't really explain it very well"...have you looked on the internet, it is full of the same kind of BS exactly the way he describes it. The Coriolis effect is not real or we could see the Earth moving under an airplane. The Earth is not rotating at all, it is stationary. The coriolis effect is an imaginary fairy tale science has invented to try and fool us again. Don't buy into this nonsense.

Have you ever been on a plane? Does the ground move when you fly over it? Ok now do you know what General Relativity is. Do you know that motion is relative? If you are in a plane traveling due east you are moving faster then the earth rotates. From an outside reference the plane would be moving at its ground speed plus the rotation of the earth at its latitude. If it was traveling west it would be traveling its ground speed subtracted from the earths rotation. Again this is from an outside reference. From the reference of the earth which you are rotating along with, it is just the ground speed of the airplane that you see. In other words if you were in a geosynchronous orbit, the plane would look as if the earth and you were rotating independent of the plane.

Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #111 on: February 20, 2017, 08:01:00 PM »
If you can believe that a bullet doesn't have to rotate with the Earth, then why does an airplane have to rotate with the Earth and a bullet doesn't. Seriously, what is the difference?
If you understood the differences between a bullet and an airplane, then it would all be much less confusing for you.

Tell me funny guy, what is it about substituting a plane for the bullet that confuses you? In this discussion, they both can fly over the Earth at certain altitudes. They both can fly straight north, they both can fly at certain speeds and the both can hit a target straight away. If the fairyfly can see the Earth rotate under him while he rides on the bullet, why can't a pilot see the Earth rotate while he flies the plane? I'll await your answer.

Maybe it's the whole, planes and bullets are similiar thing that confuses most people with a brain.

Planes do not follow a ballistic path, they are not tied to the variables that were in effect when they left the ground. A bullet has no way to correct its trajectory, it is not powered, it is moving way faster then a plane. Seriously to think a plane and an object that is strictly bound to a ballistic path are similiar is dumb.

Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #112 on: February 21, 2017, 12:08:48 AM »

So are Flat Earthers saying that military snipers and gun manufactures are in on the "conspiracy" too?

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

Yeah, the Coriolis effect didn't affect the snipers the week before, but they come back a week later and all of the sudden the Coriolis effect bothers them? If the Coriolis is so huge, you'd think it would be an automatic adjustment. That it would be taken into account without question, without thought. by snipers. But this guy says it is always forgotten by snipers. This is nothing but a propaganda film. 

Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #113 on: February 21, 2017, 12:11:04 AM »

So are Flat Earthers saying that military snipers and gun manufactures are in on the "conspiracy" too?

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

Besides, there is but a dite of curvature at 1,000 yards, hardly needing consideration by a speeding bullet.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #114 on: February 21, 2017, 03:30:59 AM »

So are Flat Earthers saying that military snipers and gun manufactures are in on the "conspiracy" too?

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

Yeah, the Coriolis effect didn't affect the snipers the week before, but they come back a week later and all of the sudden the Coriolis effect bothers them? If the Coriolis is so huge, you'd think it would be an automatic adjustment. That it would be taken into account without question, without thought. by snipers. But this guy says it is always forgotten by snipers. This is nothing but a propaganda film.
Yes, the Coriolis effect has only a very slight effect at 1000 yds, but make that over 67 miles and it's a different story. The Germans in the First World seemed to think it was important enough to consider in long range artillery calculations.

Quote
The "Paris Gun"
With all the scientific calculations and engineering problems engendered by this project, the research of Coriolis was reviewed by Professor von Eberhardt, and an additional adjustment made. Having been advised that the projected firing site was in the forest of Crépy-en-Laonnois, near Laon, and the target Paris, he calculated the distance between the two as 67.6 miles. The firing vector was close enough to a north-south axis, bringing the Coriolis Effect into play. Coriolis and von Eberhardt knew that Laon and Paris were traveling at different speeds. Although each rotated once in 24 hours, Laon was farther from the equator than Paris and thus moving somewhat slower in miles per hour. A point on the equator travels at 1041.66 mph.

Eberhardt estimated a rotational speed of 567.126 mph at Paris on the 49th parallel, and 555.55 mph at Laon on the 48th parallel. An adjustment of 11.576 mph, or .003215 miles per second, had to be provided for in the laying of the gun.

The final calculations were assembled. To achieve the required muzzle velocity, a chamber pressure of 59,000 pounds per square inch had to be reached. Flight time was predicted at 176 seconds. This called for an easterly correction of 0.5659 miles or roughly 995.984 yards to compensate for the differing rotational speeds of gun and target. On March 23, 1918 everything was ready to go.

From Military History, World War I Weapons: Germany’s Big Guns

Still, I don't suppose you'll take any notice!

Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #115 on: February 21, 2017, 07:09:15 PM »

So are Flat Earthers saying that military snipers and gun manufactures are in on the "conspiracy" too?

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

Yeah, the Coriolis effect didn't affect the snipers the week before, but they come back a week later and all of the sudden the Coriolis effect bothers them? If the Coriolis is so huge, you'd think it would be an automatic adjustment. That it would be taken into account without question, without thought. by snipers. But this guy says it is always forgotten by snipers. This is nothing but a propaganda film.
Depends on latitude, range, and direction fired.

Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #116 on: February 22, 2017, 05:04:51 AM »

So are Flat Earthers saying that military snipers and gun manufactures are in on the "conspiracy" too?

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

Yeah, the Coriolis effect didn't affect the snipers the week before, but they come back a week later and all of the sudden the Coriolis effect bothers them? If the Coriolis is so huge, you'd think it would be an automatic adjustment. That it would be taken into account without question, without thought. by snipers. But this guy says it is always forgotten by snipers. This is nothing but a propaganda film.
Yes, the Coriolis effect has only a very slight effect at 1000 yds, but make that over 67 miles and it's a different story. The Germans in the First World seemed to think it was important enough to consider in long range artillery calculations.

Quote
The "Paris Gun"
With all the scientific calculations and engineering problems engendered by this project, the research of Coriolis was reviewed by Professor von Eberhardt, and an additional adjustment made. Having been advised that the projected firing site was in the forest of Crépy-en-Laonnois, near Laon, and the target Paris, he calculated the distance between the two as 67.6 miles. The firing vector was close enough to a north-south axis, bringing the Coriolis Effect into play. Coriolis and von Eberhardt knew that Laon and Paris were traveling at different speeds. Although each rotated once in 24 hours, Laon was farther from the equator than Paris and thus moving somewhat slower in miles per hour. A point on the equator travels at 1041.66 mph.

Eberhardt estimated a rotational speed of 567.126 mph at Paris on the 49th parallel, and 555.55 mph at Laon on the 48th parallel. An adjustment of 11.576 mph, or .003215 miles per second, had to be provided for in the laying of the gun.

The final calculations were assembled. To achieve the required muzzle velocity, a chamber pressure of 59,000 pounds per square inch had to be reached. Flight time was predicted at 176 seconds. This called for an easterly correction of 0.5659 miles or roughly 995.984 yards to compensate for the differing rotational speeds of gun and target. On March 23, 1918 everything was ready to go.

From Military History, World War I Weapons: Germany’s Big Guns

Still, I don't suppose you'll take any notice!

The article: "The firing vector was close enough to a north-south axis, bringing the Coriolis Effect into play."

It has been proven with scientific observations, the Coriolis effect does not exist. Water flows in both directions north and south of the equator. It all depends on which side of the sink you pour the water, and how you face the water outlets in a toilet. I have done the experiment in my own kitchen sink! Your article is just propaganda BS to save the dying spherical earth claims. I have taken shooting lessons from several Marine sniper friends, and they NEVER have mentioned the Coriolis effect when setting up for a kill. Believe me, the Marines are not going to leave out a critical step in training their snipers! And how is it, your article states the shooters had no issue one week, then come back the following week all bothered by the Coriolis effect? Where was the Coriolis effect the week before?

?

frenat

  • 3560
Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #117 on: February 22, 2017, 05:30:37 AM »

So are Flat Earthers saying that military snipers and gun manufactures are in on the "conspiracy" too?

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

Yeah, the Coriolis effect didn't affect the snipers the week before, but they come back a week later and all of the sudden the Coriolis effect bothers them? If the Coriolis is so huge, you'd think it would be an automatic adjustment. That it would be taken into account without question, without thought. by snipers. But this guy says it is always forgotten by snipers. This is nothing but a propaganda film.
Yes, the Coriolis effect has only a very slight effect at 1000 yds, but make that over 67 miles and it's a different story. The Germans in the First World seemed to think it was important enough to consider in long range artillery calculations.

Quote
The "Paris Gun"
With all the scientific calculations and engineering problems engendered by this project, the research of Coriolis was reviewed by Professor von Eberhardt, and an additional adjustment made. Having been advised that the projected firing site was in the forest of Crépy-en-Laonnois, near Laon, and the target Paris, he calculated the distance between the two as 67.6 miles. The firing vector was close enough to a north-south axis, bringing the Coriolis Effect into play. Coriolis and von Eberhardt knew that Laon and Paris were traveling at different speeds. Although each rotated once in 24 hours, Laon was farther from the equator than Paris and thus moving somewhat slower in miles per hour. A point on the equator travels at 1041.66 mph.

Eberhardt estimated a rotational speed of 567.126 mph at Paris on the 49th parallel, and 555.55 mph at Laon on the 48th parallel. An adjustment of 11.576 mph, or .003215 miles per second, had to be provided for in the laying of the gun.

The final calculations were assembled. To achieve the required muzzle velocity, a chamber pressure of 59,000 pounds per square inch had to be reached. Flight time was predicted at 176 seconds. This called for an easterly correction of 0.5659 miles or roughly 995.984 yards to compensate for the differing rotational speeds of gun and target. On March 23, 1918 everything was ready to go.

From Military History, World War I Weapons: Germany’s Big Guns

Still, I don't suppose you'll take any notice!

The article: "The firing vector was close enough to a north-south axis, bringing the Coriolis Effect into play."

It has been proven with scientific observations, the Coriolis effect does not exist.
No, it has not.

Water flows in both directions north and south of the equator. It all depends on which side of the sink you pour the water, and how you face the water outlets in a toilet.
Nobody who actually knows what the coriolis effect is claims it is big enough to be seen in a sink or toilet.  Thank you for proving your ignorance.

 I have done the experiment in my own kitchen sink!
further proof of your ignorance.

Your article is just propaganda BS to save the dying spherical earth claims. I have taken shooting lessons from several Marine sniper friends, and they NEVER have mentioned the Coriolis effect when setting up for a kill.
Sure you have.  ::) 


Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #118 on: February 22, 2017, 07:13:25 AM »
It has been proven with scientific observations, the Coriolis effect does not exist. Water flows in both directions north and south of the equator. It all depends on which side of the sink you pour the water, and how you face the water outlets in a toilet. I have done the experiment in my own kitchen sink!
This nonsense again?  We all know the sink/toilet/bathtub "swirling water" demo of Coriolis Effect is bunk!  You've proven NOTHING.  These guys, on the other hand, set up a more controlled experiment, you should check it out.

Re: Long Range Snipers & the Coriolis Effect.
« Reply #119 on: February 22, 2017, 01:22:44 PM »
It has been proven with scientific observations, the Coriolis effect does not exist. Water flows in both directions north and south of the equator. It all depends on which side of the sink you pour the water, and how you face the water outlets in a toilet. I have done the experiment in my own kitchen sink!
This nonsense again?  We all know the sink/toilet/bathtub "swirling water" demo of Coriolis Effect is bunk!  You've proven NOTHING.  These guys, on the other hand, set up a more controlled experiment, you should check it out.


When I can, I go a step further and test the idea myself. I live in the northeast, and I got the water in my kitchen sink to flow both ways. The Coriolis effect is a crock of feces!

Hurricane over New Zealand: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/imageo/files/2014/03/Screenshot_3_5_14_10_28_AM.jpg

Hurricane over Fuji Islands: https://phys.org/newman/gfx/news/hires/2012/nasaseesdang.jpg

One area is south of the equator, the other north of the equator, but both spin in same direction. Tell me, a storm that started south of the equator and moves north of the equator, does it suddenly change spin direction?