Coriolis Effect

'm back, with a other question, and this is the Q and A section. So... Coriolis Effect, and the way it pertains to artillery. When firing a round over 1000 yards (915metres), one must take into account the Coriolis Effect. The effect is at it's strongest near the poles, and less so, near the equator. When a shell is fired, the firing computer must take into account the spin of the Earth. If the Earth was flat, wouldn't they just pick a spot, say, B-5, and fire? No special math would be involved for the curvature, and spin of the Earth.

Sirwulfe, I would like to start by saying that the coriolis effect has been debunked numerous times, as even I myself have done so. Everyone I believe has seen equator video where a guy pours in water and adds leaves at two spots, one above and the other below the equator. I suggest you do research on anti-cyclonic" rotations as these are impossible if the coriolis effect was true. I would also have to argue why don't long range snipers account for the curve of the earth? Just fruit for thought. 

Sirwulfe, I would like to start by saying that the coriolis effect has been debunked numerous times, as even I myself have done so. Everyone I believe has seen equator video where a guy pours in water and adds leaves at two spots, one above and the other below the equator. I suggest you do research on anti-cyclonic" rotations as these are impossible if the coriolis effect was true. I would also have to argue why don't long range snipers account for the curve of the earth? Just fruit for thought.

I will start with your second point, if I may. Snipers firing over 1000 yards, would, and do, have to account for the effect, however, I used artillery as my example, because the shell is larger, and less effected by variables such as wind, and gravity. Between the two, artillery is more relient in the calculations of the Coriolis Effect, over sniping. A quick check of the Army manual of Sniping will tell you all this. You can find a copy on Kindle.

As for the Coriolis Effect, and the anti-cyclonic effects, it is -because- of the Coriolis Effect, and other variables, that cyclones exist. The reason they rotate opposite each other, is easily seen looking at the poles of the globe. Looking ,down" from the north pole, and it earth appears to rotate counter clock wise. If seem from the South pole looking "up" the earth rotates clock wise. For a bit more information, I have a link you can visit, but I'm not sure if it's allowed

Sirwulfe, I would like to start by saying that the coriolis effect has been debunked numerous times, as even I myself have done so. Everyone I believe has seen equator video where a guy pours in water and adds leaves at two spots, one above and the other below the equator.

That isn't debunking the Coriolis effect.
That is debunking a pathetic strawman of it.
Small containers are typically far too small and have far too many irregularities for the Coriolis effect to determine which way water flows, especially at the equator where the magnitude of the effect parallel to the surface of Earth is the smallest.

I am yet to see any disproof of it.

Meanwhile there is plenty of proof of it in the form of large scale weather systems including cyclones, as well as Foucault's pendulum and better, controlled experiments with large bodies of water.

I suggest you do research on anti-cyclonic" rotations as these are impossible if the coriolis effect was true.

And what do you mean by "anti-cyclonic rotations"?
So you mean the opposite of cyclones, where it is a high pressure system?
Or do you mean when you have a large weather system, with a smaller system nearby which is affected by the large system, where the large system forces the smaller system to rotate in a direction opposite to itself due to various factors?

If you wish to assert they are impossible if the Coriolis effect is true, you will need a justification.

I would also have to argue why don't long range snipers account for the curve of the earth? Just fruit for thought.

Long range snipers work on line of sight.
They don't work based upon altitude and distance.
They already need to compensate for the distance to the target, which they typically learn how to do by practice, or by using marks on the scope.
That would already include the curve of Earth.

Quote from: THEREALDILL23 on June 18, 2018, 07:56:07 AM

Sirwulfe, I would like to start by saying that the coriolis effect has been debunked numerous times, as even I myself have done so. Everyone I believe has seen equator video where a guy pours in water and adds leaves at two spots, one above and the other below the equator.

That isn't debunking the Coriolis effect.
That is debunking a pathetic strawman of it.
Small containers are typically far too small and have far too many irregularities for the Coriolis effect to determine which way water flows, especially at the equator where the magnitude of the effect parallel to the surface of Earth is the smallest.

I am yet to see any disproof of it.

Meanwhile there is plenty of proof of it in the form of large scale weather systems including cyclones, as well as Foucault's pendulum and better, controlled experiments with large bodies of water.

Quote from: THEREALDILL23 on June 18, 2018, 07:56:07 AM

I suggest you do research on anti-cyclonic" rotations as these are impossible if the coriolis effect was true.

And what do you mean by "anti-cyclonic rotations"?
So you mean the opposite of cyclones, where it is a high pressure system?
Or do you mean when you have a large weather system, with a smaller system nearby which is affected by the large system, where the large system forces the smaller system to rotate in a direction opposite to itself due to various factors?

If you wish to assert they are impossible if the Coriolis effect is true, you will need a justification.

Quote from: THEREALDILL23 on June 18, 2018, 07:56:07 AM

I would also have to argue why don't long range snipers account for the curve of the earth? Just fruit for thought.

Long range snipers work on line of sight.
They don't work based upon altitude and distance.
They already need to compensate for the distance to the target, which they typically learn how to do by practice, or by using marks on the scope.
That would already include the curve of Earth.

Anti-cyclonic movement, is the term given to cyclones of the southern hemisphere. Storms get progressively worse towards the poles, and weaken towards the equator, due to the Coriolis Effect. Even small containers are effected. Think toilets. They have no natural spin on the equator, but spin clockwise, or counter-clockwise, in their respectivr hemispheres.

Snipers do most certainly work off of altitude, as well as distance. They need to take into effect everything. A few examples:
Ex. 1: A flat plain. Both sniper, and an unmoving target, are at the same altitude 1000 yards apart. They would need to figure distance, bullet drop (as effected by gravity, and air density), wind direction, air temperature, and the curvature, AND movement of the Earth.
Ex. 2: Firing from an elevated position, to a target below, still 1000 yards away. Now, with all of the factors listed above, the sniper also has to figure in the adjusted bullet drop. Gravity works in their favor here. The bullet drop isn't as much. The opposite would be true, if the shooter, and target, were to switch positions, with the shooter firing up. Now, the bullet drop is magnified. Add in calculations if the target is moving for all situations.
So yes, altitude is figured in, when sniping, among with the Coriolis Effect. Again, check the Army sniper manuals.

Anti-cyclonic movement, is the term given to cyclones of the southern hemisphere.

As far as I could tell, that is not the case.
The 2 main uses I could find would indicate that cyclones in the southern hemisphere are still cyclonic.

Storms get progressively worse towards the poles, and weaken towards the equator, due to the Coriolis Effect.

More contributes to storms than simply the rotation of Earth. Most severe storms are quite distant from the poles.

Even small containers are effected. Think toilets. They have no natural spin on the equator, but spin clockwise, or counter-clockwise, in their respectivr hemispheres.

Yes, they are effected, but to a negligible extent, with other factors being a much larger influence meaning in small containers you typically do not see rotation induced by the Coriolis effect.

Snipers do most certainly work off of altitude, as well as distance.

What I meant is they don't try and calculate based upon altitude alone. Instead they can see their targets and aimed based upon that.
They also typically don't do a bunch of math and instead aim and shoot.

Again, check the Army sniper manuals.

You mean like this one:
http://pdf.textfiles.com/manuals/MILITARY/united_states_army_fm_23-10%20-%2017_august_1994.pdf
Which includes refraction but not the curvature of Earth?
It also indicates they learn with practice, rather than trying to do any math to specifically account for several things.

Quote from: SirWulfe on June 18, 2018, 04:45:32 PM

Anti-cyclonic movement, is the term given to cyclones of the southern hemisphere.

As far as I could tell, that is not the case.
The 2 main uses I could find would indicate that cyclones in the southern hemisphere are still cyclonic.

Quote from: SirWulfe on June 18, 2018, 04:45:32 PM

Storms get progressively worse towards the poles, and weaken towards the equator, due to the Coriolis Effect.

More contributes to storms than simply the rotation of Earth. Most severe storms are quite distant from the poles.

Quote from: SirWulfe on June 18, 2018, 04:45:32 PM

Even small containers are effected. Think toilets. They have no natural spin on the equator, but spin clockwise, or counter-clockwise, in their respectivr hemispheres.

Yes, they are effected, but to a negligible extent, with other factors being a much larger influence meaning in small containers you typically do not see rotation induced by the Coriolis effect.

Quote from: SirWulfe on June 18, 2018, 04:45:32 PM

Snipers do most certainly work off of altitude, as well as distance.

What I meant is they don't try and calculate based upon altitude alone. Instead they can see their targets and aimed based upon that.
They also typically don't do a bunch of math and instead aim and shoot.

Quote from: SirWulfe on June 18, 2018, 04:45:32 PM

Again, check the Army sniper manuals.

You mean like this one:
http://pdf.textfiles.com/manuals/MILITARY/united_states_army_fm_23-10%20-%2017_august_1994.pdf
Which includes refraction but not the curvature of Earth?
It also indicates they learn with practice, rather than trying to do any math to specifically account for several things.

They are cyclones, they just spin in the opposite direction from the northern hemisphere.
Why are toilets effected, but nothing else? I would say, the fact they spin is negligable enough.
Sniper do, in fact, do quite a bit of math. If you -read- the book, you would see: temp of air, temp.of bullet, coriolis effect (at extreme ranges), air density, wind, clouds, light.... The list goes on. All are factors that have to be calculated. Yes, it requires training, and time om the range, but there are many factors that need to be figured into a long range shot. When youre shooting at long distance, unless you are practicing, you tend to figure in everytbing you can from a "Shoot Book," to hit that first shot. When sniping in the military, its very likely the -only- shot you will get.

Why are toilets effected, but nothing else? I would say, the fact they spin is negligable enough.

Toilets aren't effected. The shape of the bowl and how the water is directed in effects the spin far more than the coriolis effect.

If you -read- the book, you would see: temp of air, temp.of bullet, coriolis effect (at extreme ranges), air density, wind, clouds, light.... The list goes on.

Then you should be able to provide page numbers for all those points, including where it says to do all the math when you go to set up your shot. Especially considering when you are shooting in the military you won't always have time to sit down and do some math before setting up your shot.

I also notice how you have now left out the curvature of Earth.

This video is 15 minutes long but gives a fairly good description of the Coriolis and Eötvös effects:

Sirwulfe, I would like to start by saying that the coriolis effect has been debunked numerous times, as even I myself have done so.

What am I seeing here then?



I'm curious as to how you've debunked the effect yourself; I know the one done at the Equator is just for show. (if this is what you're referring to)