Recent content by Eleanor416Rigby

The reason I would argue that which I did is because it is correct. Incorrect, however, is your analogy equating QI with self defense. Self defense is a justification, meaning that the act was not legally wrongful. QI admits that although the act was legally wrongful, the actor is immune from...

I would argue that QI is about determining that even if there was wrongdoing, the wrongdoing was legally acceptable given the specific circumstances related to the actor's official duties. Immunity is exactly about and only about escaping liability for *some* wrongful acts by recognizing the...

I'm glad to get your comment about the pocket lint. After my second range session, I checked the lint collection area, and the lint had apparently been thrown out by firing. I still wonder how much it takes to cause problems. Surely, you must be right that enough of it can cause problems. The...

Thank you all for the positive comments. I was just out in the garage sorting the empty brass from the last range trip. I noticed that several of the empty .380 cases had similar flat spots right at the case mouth. I presume it's happening on extraction/ejection of the empty case. I've had those...

Nice work doing the tests and nice pictures!

Enhanced interrogation = not quite torture, but some may consider it abuse. BACKGROUND: I carried a Springfield XD-9 subcompact for a few years, but it was not a convenient EDC option for me because of the thickness and weight combined with my clothing. Texas summer is long, and in winter I...

Thanks to all for replying. In summary, yes, we can use ballistics calculators and get pretty close after a series of trial and error estimations. That's practical if inefficient. To find out how to figure that constantly-decreasing drag coefficient, I should go to my local physics professor...

Maybe you can't do it by hand, and I currently can't, but the people who program the ballistics calculators can. That's what makes it an interesting question and what requires calculus. Constant forces are relatively easy to figure, but constantly changing ones are tougher.

My claim about the fastest bullet in the books was based on the 220 swift, which does not have a BC anywhere near .5. Most bullets don't have BC of .5, but if you can get one going 3000 fps, it will retain speed a lot better.

The drag on the bullet surface declines (not linearly) as the speed declines (not linearly); therefore the drag force is not constant. The decrease in velocity, likewise, decreases with the decreasing drag that results from the decreasing speed. In other words, we need calculus.

Oh, I see, bikemutt. It "falls to the ground" in that nobody could hear it. I didn't make that connection and thought it was just a funny. That's a good point. Hmmmm, 6 decibel drop for each doubling of distance. That's interesting. I guess I've heard rifle and pistol shots that were in the...

Even the fastest bullet in the record books will be well below the speed of sound at 1000 yards. The "final" bullet velocity is always zero. :neener: Again, pistol cartridges often take off near the speed of sound. (9mm averages MV right around the speed of sound.) The sound can catch up within...

Good man! I like your sense of humor.

You understand the question correctly, but I don't think many bullets travel at 4 times the speed of sound (4444.52 fps at sea level). It's definitely not true that MOST rifle bullets travel at 4-5 times the speed of sound. Also, I didn't have rifle bullets in mind when I thought of the...

Thank you. Actually, I know you can use TOF, which some ballistics programs calculate, and figure it out, but I'm one of those guys who likes to figure out square roots by hand, and make ice cream in a hand-crank bucket. I've taken a few courses in physics, but I don't remember how to set up the...