• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Advanced Marksmanship Wind read- More important at gun or target?

Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

Yes bring that range in, 600m or closer and Max Ordinate is a non-issue even with most poorly designed bullets.

The bullet is simply not going high enough or sticking around long enough to be influenced by the "slow down" which, at these medium ranges is even shorter, so it's impossible to say it is going to have a greater effect, then it is more an accumulation of the entire flight with no one section being weighted, except for the fact you can actually "read the wind at the shooter to within 1 MPH" no where else in the bullet's flight can you do this...

Can I ask why were are even entertaining this anymore all we are doing is repeating ourselves for the fools who can't understand the most basic of wind principles as they apply to shooting.

Are we on the set of BIG with Tom Hanks repeating, "I don't get it" over and over... time to end this farce.

I shot yesterday on the High Power range, a front was coming through and it was really blowing... 15-18 MPH especially as the day progressed and the front moved closer.
<object width="400" height="224" ><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="movie" value="http://www.facebook.com/v/406815242675338" /><embed src="http://www.facebook.com/v/406815242675338" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="400" height="224"></embed></object>

We are much better served going out an shooting then answering the same thing over and over again to people who simply don't get it.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

Just to illustrate the MO, for my 175gr 308 load at Metro Std

500y max ord 21" at 271y
1000y max ord 134" 572y

Note that this is height above line of sight. If the terrain dips between you and the target, the height above ground level may be greatly increased. What wind indicators can you see at that point?

This can be handy info for obstacle clearance and spotting trace. In the 1000 yard example, the max ord is 6.6 mils, so if I look at that area on the reticle in the spotter, that's where I'll see the top of the arc to the target.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CoryT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LL, Why? Nothing on TV. </div></div>

I had to get outta the house, the girl was working, painting stuff, landscaping, I didn't want any part of working so I went to range to hide. Since I was there, I decided to shoot at stuff.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes bring that range in, 600m or closer and Max Ordinate is a non-issue even with most poorly designed bullets.

The bullet is simply not going high enough or sticking around long enough to be influenced by the "slow down" which, at these medium ranges is even shorter, so it's impossible to say it is going to have a greater effect, then it is more an accumulation of the entire flight with no one section being weighted, except for the fact you can actually "read the wind at the shooter to within 1 MPH" no where else in the bullet's flight can you do this...

Can I ask why were are even entertaining this anymore all we are doing is repeating ourselves for the fools who can't understand the most basic of wind principles as they apply to shooting.

Are we on the set of BIG with Tom Hanks repeating, "I don't get it" over and over... time to end this farce.

I shot yesterday on the High Power range, a front was coming through and it was really blowing... 15-18 MPH especially as the day progressed and the front moved closer.
<object width="400" height="224" ><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="movie" value="http://www.facebook.com/v/406815242675338" /><embed src="http://www.facebook.com/v/406815242675338" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="400" height="224"></embed></object>

We are much better served going out an shooting then answering the same thing over and over again to people who simply don't get it.
</div></div>

So, the folks who do not accept your theory as fact are fools; and, those who do not understand have I.Q.'s under 60. Yet, with all your words, graphs, and charts you have yet to present any evidence that wind which is always first read at the shooter will always have the best result, you can't. Also, as this thread has progressed you have had to qualify most everything you've said once you realized there are highly skilled shooters such as those shooting for the USAMU who state they read wind at mid range and in fact read it out a little further for LR. That seems to be at odds with everything you've said. Seems too that since they are as successful as any in NRA LR what they do is ample evidence to their theory being right some of the time. I think the only fools here are those who accept any-one's notions on the matter without getting out there and trying out these concepts.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

Frank , Cory ,

Idea for the Oct match.....
We can have Frank call mid wind . Strike that.

Cory call mid wind. Crap strike that.

We all call mid wind , and Corky call near wind . Then see what works best.

We might even get 3 shooters with "0" deviation!

Well, maybe not . I'm pretty devious . I think your trying to teach a pig to sing here.

G
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

If you want to do a VALID comparison, you have to put some wind meters across the trajectory, at the correct height. Then, with real time readings choose which reading(s) you use for that shot.

Asking several people what the wind is doing downrange will get all sort of answers, most of them not very accurate compared to reality. Everyone "reads" it differently. Normally the only wind you can be sure of is at the firing point, where you can use your trusty windmeter. Everything else is a guess.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

The Stegosaurus method of wind reading, endorsed by the AMU

finger+wind.jpg
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

I cannot see how one can read middrange without taking into account wind at shooter first or aswell -perhaps Sterling does this but has not said it and gives more head to middrange.
Without flags or a decent mirage it is but a guess.
If you just took middrange wind which is say quite different than the start range wind you have a sure miss!!!
Are we just arguing about the recipe and if we should put the butter or flour in first-but ultimatley use both --Sterling I hope you can clarify this
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ch'e</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
If you just took middrange wind which is say quite different than the start range wind you have a sure miss!!! </div></div>

I've done what you say will produce a sure miss and have had good results, that's to say, I've hit where aimed, with absolutely no accounting for wind at the shooter. In fact, mid range wind is what I go to and use in my formula exclusively most of the time. Sure, I can not read it exactly but it does not appear to matter much. I've mentioned this here before, as well as that this mid range technique is not of my own making, just something I thought I'd try out after learning about it from shooters clearly better than me. At that time I was reading wind as advocated by some here, but after it was suggested to me by some very successful LR shooters saying "ya might want to try reading the mid range wind", I thought why not, and I've never gone back. Now, what do I do when I have absolutely no idea for what the wind at mid range is doing? I begin with anything I know including wind at my firing point. Thing is, before I even fire a shot, I know if indeed the mid range wind is not complementary of the wind at the firing point then I will very likely not get a good hit. That's just the way it is. Knowing what the wind is at the shooter just does not serve as a substitute for not understanding mid range; and, if you do understand mid range decently, knowing wind at the shooter appears to be moot.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

Stegosaurus clearly doesn't understand one's own senses, as well along with his current medical issues has not way of demonstrating his Mid Range Only reading prowess, and still hasn't explain how to get a new shooter to the point of being experienced enough to actually call it down range with any degree of accuracy without years of experience.

Not to mention, he is shooting on a square range with sighters, in a competition only format, he gets to shoot first, and adjust later. He is not looking to hit a target cold, with no chance for follow up, he is basically reading mid range only to "hover" within the 10 ring after establishing a call based on a spotter placed in the target by the guy in the pits.

Still even further, he probably has never used a wind meter, so all of his work up to this point has been trial and error, and while that works, it takes time to gain experience. So if you have been shooting the same competitive circuit for 10 or more years you can probably head right to mid range based on format. On the other hand, anyone who hasn't will find themselves suffering, as well anyone who shoots in the field, or at an unknown location looking to get a first round hit better establish a base line first before running right to mid range otherwise the terrain will certainly bit them in the ass.

What is "understanding" mid range wind, how is different from any other wind aside from Max Ordinate and understanding the wind gradient.. I am sure everyone would like the nugget that makes mid range so different especially at ranges like 300, or even 600 yards, when you look at the science of the trajectory, and TOF... so please enlighten the group on Understanding of Mid Range and how it is so different from wind anywhere else blowing across a square range irrelevant of terrain ?

Personally I don't think you understand it, however time in service doing it has created ability to work around your deficiency like a guy who can shoot a 1/4 minute group yet never follow through on the trigger, or a guy who can hit a deer every year despite never having to adjust his scope off 100 yards. Lots of people learn to make do without any real knowledge of the subject, doesn't mean what they are doing is transferable or correct.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TiroFijo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you want to do a VALID comparison, you have to put some wind meters across the trajectory, at the correct height. Then, with real time readings choose which reading(s) you use for that shot.

Asking several people what the wind is doing downrange will get all sort of answers, most of them not very accurate compared to reality. Everyone "reads" it differently. Normally the only wind you can be sure of is at the firing point, where you can use your trusty windmeter. Everything else is a guess.</div></div>

You could indeed do what you suggest. Your second observation is also true from any perspective. In fact, to some degree, understanding any wind but that at the shooter is a guess. It's too bad however that this knowledge does not serve as an indicator for what the wind is doing way out there because its the wind way out there (mid range) which is going to have the greatest effect on the bullet. This is why it's important for a new shooter to learn mid range wind reading techniques even though such learning may be perceived to be difficult. It's really not difficult for most new shooters I've trained; but, at any rate, knowing the wind at the shooter is simply not a substitute for when reading wind at mid range is not possible. When you can't appraise the mid range wind and instead appraise the wind at the shooter you are still effectively just guessing. If this was not true everybody could hit where aimed at LR with nothing more than a wind meter, and we all know that's not true.

LL says I don't understand. He's right, I don't understand why anyone would want to accept his technique or for that matter mine without experimentation. I've used all sorts of strategies and tactics in my quest to hit where aimed in many wind and weather conditions. Eventually, I learned enough about wind to get a High Master classification in NRA LR competition, which incidentally was accomplished exclusively with iron sights. I also earned my Distinguished Rifleman recognition in EIC after learning about wind. And unlike LL stated, there are no sighters in EIC. My point is I've won enough competitions to have an informed opinion on this matter. I believe my wins demonstrate that. Nevertheless, I am not pushing my way of doing it, I'm just suggesting shooter's might want to try it out. What confuses me is why LL appears to be telling folks to not try it out.

Why is mid range important? The bullet slows down. With reduced velocity the time the bullet is exposed to the wind at mid range is greater than its exposure to wind at the shooter.

In reading this thread I perceive that many here will never understand wind. These folks want an answer which requires no time in the field or practice with the concept. These folks will take their hodgepodge of information along with a wind meter out to the range and try to put something together. They have no reference for whether what they are doing is getting them the best result. Their results will be questionable. For these folks I'd suggest participating in some sort of competitions where a indication for how well you are doing it can be discerned by a comparison of scores.

 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

EIC.......where the rubber meets the road. NO Sighters.

A bit different now days, when I started my run, you had to shoot issue ammo from (Then) DCM, no mats, you had to load from the person.

Most people were using M1's, M1A's were just starting to show up.

Any way, its simple to check, if you can't get smoke, get some sticks with engineer tape and place them from the firing point to the target. Watch which way the tape is blowing.

Friday I went to town to work on some target frames for our club range. From the range you can see the refinery. As you know there are a lot of smoke/steam pipes or chimneys at a refinery.

I got to thinking about this tread when I stopped for a smoke break. Looking at the chimneys you had smoke and steam blowing in every which direction.

Looking across the range many would say it was a "no wind" day. Looking at the refinery you'll understand there is no such thing as a "no wind" day.

I didn't have my spotting scope, (wasn't shooting) but I bet if I did, I'd seen some boiling mirage, drifting left and right.

My point, instead of drifting toward name calling, how about just taking some stakes and flags and see for your self if the wind is the same at the firing line and target and points in between.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

Being fairly new to long range shooting, I have a couple of questions.

1) In regards to shooting over a valley, or having a fairly high max ordinate. How does one determine how much faster the wind (less affected by ground friction) is blowing higher and higher above the deck? How do you make a wind call over a valley?

2) Is there a good reference for more in-depth information on the wethervane/drag function Corey talked about that pulls a bullet off course. Or if someone has the time and is kind enough, give a thorough explanation. I can visualize the weathervaning, but the drag is not coming so easily.

The bullet turns to the right but gets pulled to the left in a right-left wind. Where does the drag come from that pulls it left?
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ledzep</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Being fairly new to long range shooting, I have a couple of questions.

1) In regards to shooting over a valley, or having a fairly high max ordinate. How does one determine how much faster the wind (less affected by ground friction) is blowing higher and higher above the deck? How do you make a wind call over a valley?

2) Is there a good reference for more in-depth information on the wethervane/drag function Corey talked about that pulls a bullet off course. Or if someone has the time and is kind enough, give a thorough explanation. I can visualize the weathervaning, but the drag is not coming so easily.

The bullet turns to the right but gets pulled to the left in a right-left wind. Where does the drag come from that pulls it left?</div></div>

Addressing the first part of your question, you may not be able to appraise wind velocity.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

Stegosaurus can't even understand english and certainly nothing about velocity, BCs, TOF etc.

Maybe I need to speak Latin and not English cause he still hasn't figured out we have progressed since 1978.

The bullet is slowing down at mid range, ok, what about at the target ? Bullet is even slower there... for a 1000 yard shot instead of reading the wind mid range you should be reading it at 800 yards because the bullet has really slowed down then ? Why 600 yards and not 800 yards ? Or are you with your AMU 1/4 turn on the spotter and just confusing mid range for at the target ?

Clearly I have stated, over, and over, and over again, that wind at the shooter is the Science Dept because you can read it to within 1 MPH, and everything beyond is the Art Dept because of the subjective nature of the calls. You do not ignore anything downrange, specifically Terrain because it effects the changes in the wind patterns that may cause differences between downrange readings and readings at the shooter.

Wind does not flow in a constant fashion, so you have to analyze the gusts and patterns but it does flow in a prevailing fashion. So, you're whole, left - right- left is beyond ridiculous...

This is why I post videos, so you don't have to read, you can just looking at the moving pictures on the screen. I get it the guy with the piano is not around to play you music but trust us the sound is there.

Nobody is saying anything about practice methods, we are saying how to get proficient in your calls is by establishing a base line... how they record and reference the data is up the individual if they want to shoot a group on paper, hit a piece of steel 5 out of 5, whatever they want doesn't' really matter, what matters, is, they are not just guessing and using a trial by fire method, but actually following a program that works. Recording and reference is a giving.

Guess the wind, verify it with a meter so your guess means something, shoot it and note any discrepancies so you can modify your method and reading.
However, flopping down on a line and looking 600 yards away and guess is the worst method imaginable for a new shooter. They have no foundation, they might as well not do anything but shoot and see what it takes to hit the targets.


Hate to say it, computers and Kestrels do make a difference, like chronographs, knowing what a muzzle velocity is and what is means along with information about the BC matters. This way you don't make stupid comments like the "bullet is slowing down" you actually know how the bullet is drifting not making ancient blanket statements.

Kraig, what you saw with the smoke is a result of the wind gradient, the higher off the ground the more value the wind will have. Which is why Max Ord comes into play. Wind gradients are experienced about every 10 to 15ft off the ground you have another layer to deal with. Hence knowing the height of the bullet above the line of sight matters... which is why a 300 yard shot is not effected like a 1000 yard shot is.

Funny thing, we have yet to see anyone defend your position... must be strange to you.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sterling Shooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ledzep</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Being fairly new to long range shooting, I have a couple of questions.

1) In regards to shooting over a valley, or having a fairly high max ordinate. How does one determine how much faster the wind (less affected by ground friction) is blowing higher and higher above the deck? How do you make a wind call over a valley?

2) Is there a good reference for more in-depth information on the wethervane/drag function Corey talked about that pulls a bullet off course. Or if someone has the time and is kind enough, give a thorough explanation. I can visualize the weathervaning, but the drag is not coming so easily.

The bullet turns to the right but gets pulled to the left in a right-left wind. Where does the drag come from that pulls it left?</div></div>

Addressing the first part of your question, you may not be able to appraise wind velocity.</div></div>

But you understand wind and we don't

I have a method and have employed it many times ...

I thought you knew this stuff, why not admit you have never shot in this fashion.

here more moving pictures...

<iframe width="480" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/A-E9bs65kOY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

What it means is sometimes reading wind is indeed more or less a guess. Yet, once again you are changing the discussion. Now, its "I understand and you don't". That's one you have not pulled out of your bag of tricks for awhile. I thought you were heading in the direction of just qualifing all of your theorys to death to the extent of making them factual where they are now not factual.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

Ledzep, for question 1, the gradient values are estimated by experiance over varying terrain. Large open flat area, like square ranges with little surrounding terrain have a very small wind gradient, rough terrain has a larger value and cities or mountainous areas have a large gradient value, perhaps 50-60% faster at 400m above ground level.

For question 2, Bryan's book, Applied Ballistics and McCoy's Modern Exterior Ballistics ate fine texts on the science of bullet flight. I think the best visual example is that of the boat on flowing water. Without propulsion, the boat turns into the current, and the drag of the water on the boat hull pulls the boat downstream. When you give the boat a push across the current, it still turns, but the turn is a smaller angle, because of the forward motion. The boat turns into the RELATIVE CURRENT, and as drag moves it downstream it also slows down, making it turn more and deflect more from the starting course. This is the same as the bullet, excepting much higher velocites of the projectile and much lower velocity and drag of air. The wind correction angle is very small, mostly under .5 degrees, but it is there.

Sterling, you've been shown how the mid range wind is in fact NOT the wind that has the most effect, all else being equal, yet you persist in holding onto this myth.

Now, it is certainly possible that a mid range value COULD produce more actual deflection on a give shot. If the first 300 yard of flight had 3 MPH, the next 300 had 10 MPH and the last 300 dropped back to 3 mph, then the mid range wind would be producing the most actual deflection. However, if you failed to account for the near and far value, you'd still miss. Should we change that to 10, 3 and 10, the mid range wind would have the LEAST deflection, but if you fail to account for it, you STILL miss.

Now, how you go about determining the crosswind component of the shot is one thing. LL and I have our opinions on that matter and you have yours. Our method certainly appears to be more 'teachable', as opposed to yours which seems to boil down to 'shoot until you figure it out'. If you are hitting, and it would seem that your are, you ARE accounting for the wind over the whole of the path, even if it's not deliberate. You shoot on the same ranges, get used to seeing a condition and therefore 'know' what to hold. So now you look at mid range, and when prevailing conditions give you a certain look, your estimate works just fine.

Snipers don't get that condition. They must shoot over unknown terrain, at imprecise ranges, with less than optimum positions at uncooperative targets. When you don't see the same 'range' twice, you can't go with a logbook and mid range read. It simply will not work.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

Wouldn't it be eally cool if Stegosaurus were come out in Oct and show us all how the AMU would shoot steel at the train tracks . Pleanty of TOF to prove theory. I'll supply the new Ash .338 or the .375 Cyclops . Then he will not have to haul all the gear out here.

Greg
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

Awesome, thanks for the info. I ordered Litz's book a couple days ago. Can't wait to get it.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sterling Shooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The USAMU says wind has the greatest effect at mid range, I think I'll trust them on that one.
</div></div>

It's always stupid not to question authorities.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sterling Shooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Why is mid range important? The bullet slows down. With reduced velocity the time the bullet is exposed to the wind at mid range is greater than its exposure to wind at the shooter.
</div></div>

Citing Pejsa's "New exact small arms ballistics"

"The most damaging but pervasive myth is that of predicting the effect of down range cross-winds. Over the years I've read countless erroneous articles;..... In particular, I recently read one who wrote, 'Pay most attention to the flag nearest the target because the bullet is going slowest there'. This is utter hogwash! The opposite is true....."

Whom do you believe? Prof. Pejsa or the USAMU?
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CoryT</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I think the best visual example is that of the boat on flowing water. </div></div>

I think it's not a good example for the boat isn't spin stabilized. Therefore you can't explain why the bullet/boat turns into the wind/water.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

Spin has nothing to do with drag. The boat/bullet turns because of it's shape/form factor, in the same fashion as a weathervane. Bacause of the streamlined shape, the pointy end turns into the area of least resistance, the relative motion of the surrounding fluid therfore becomming equalized on all sides.

This is basic physics, but the details are sometimes lost in casual observation.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

If wind doesnt push the bullet as is accepted at super sonic speeds but friction between between the air layer and the vacum around the bullet slows the projo down what happens in a subsonic situation - is there still a vacum type situation around the projectile as it flies -and is there a time when wind does have a direct push against the projo
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

There is no 'vacuum' around the bullet, that's more nonsense. There is a boundary layer of much slower moving air around the bullet, but no vacuum. There is a PARTIAL vacuum, an area of greatly reduced pressure at the base of the bullet, due to the compression of teh air directly in front of the bullet. The air coming off the bullet and trying to fill that space results in 'base drag'. Subsonic flow does not have the Mach wave and the base drag is reduced, but it is otherwise the same and wind is still working the same way.

These are links to a shadowgraphs of bullets in flight. Note the shock waves while at supersonic speed and the last photo, which is subsonic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Supersonic_Bullet_Shadowgraph.jpg

http://www.nennstiel-ruprecht.de/bullfly/fig2.htm

http://www.nennstiel-ruprecht.de/bullfly/fig4.htm
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

Apprentice "Windtalker" here. I find this entire thread educational. As I start my second read through of Bryan Litz's ABFLRS (1st ed), I will refer to this thread as a compendium.

Observing the magic fluid we call Wind at the TOF = 0s position (ie. Shooter), seems to be the most logical and pragmatic approach. Trying to understand a situation that dictates one to OVERRIDE the observed Wind present at the shooter in favor of an alternate down-range position.

Seems I still have a ton to learn about earth, Wind, and fire as they relate to long range precision shooting.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It's always stupid not to question authorities</div></div>

But it's wise to listen to experence and success.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

Not so much easy, the wind is definitely blowing, but all the flags are pretty much equal in their value, that is the point.

It clearly shows the value of the flag here at the camera is blowing the same value as the flags down the line, you have bit of droop with one, but overall they are the in fact the same.

Terrain as illustrated in one of my earlier posted images shows how that can change depending on the range design, but overall square ranges if anything have an advantage of better than equal wind more times than not. individual ranges vary of course, but this one shows, why you can easily begin at the shooter.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CoryT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The boat/bullet turns because of it's shape/form factor, in the same fashion as a weathervane.</div></div>

No, that's wrong. The torque due to the wind leads to a change in angular momentum that is responsible for the turning.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CoryT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Bacause of the streamlined shape, the pointy end turns into the area of least resistance, the relative motion of the surrounding fluid therfore becomming equalized on all sides.
</div></div>

That's wrong. The occurance of the yaw of repose is a clear contradiction to your statement.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CoryT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
This is basic physics, but the details are sometimes lost in casual observation.
</div></div>

Nothing in real life is basic physics.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tob</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sterling Shooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The USAMU says wind has the greatest effect at mid range, I think I'll trust them on that one.
</div></div>

It's always stupid not to question authorities.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sterling Shooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Why is mid range important? The bullet slows down. With reduced velocity the time the bullet is exposed to the wind at mid range is greater than its exposure to wind at the shooter.
</div></div>

Citing Pejsa's "New exact small arms ballistics"

"The most damaging but pervasive myth is that of predicting the effect of down range cross-winds. Over the years I've read countless erroneous articles;..... In particular, I recently read one who wrote, 'Pay most attention to the flag nearest the target because the bullet is going slowest there'. This is utter hogwash! The opposite is true....."

Whom do you believe? Prof. Pejsa or the USAMU? </div></div>

Your quote is not in context to my statement; yet, it actually supports my argument that you cannot predict anything. Making an adjustment for wind beginning at the shooter, which might not at all relate to what's going on down range has rarely gotten me the results desired. It seems going straight for what's happening at mid range has been a more effective technique. Learning to read mid range wind is not as difficult as LL has alluded to.

On the matter of who I'm going to believe, I trust the AMU can show me how to do it since they have proven they can do it. Perhaps, the professor can do it too. But since you think it is stupid not to question authorities, what questions do you have for the professor? I have a few, what has he won lately? Does he have a wind formula that you can go to? How's it workin' out for ya? Has he shown you how to do it?

In this discussion I appear to have a view which is contested by some. I'm O.K. with that and I am going to experiment, that's to say, re-visit the concept of beginning with wind at the shooter; but, so far, reading wind at mid range has gotten me better results than other techniques that have been suggested to me. BTW, I sometimes enjoy the views of CoryT since I know he is sincere. I also understand that he knows what he is doing so when he says something I'll listen and even entertain the opposing idea. It's all good. We are all learning. I think that pure marksmanship is settled science but pretty much everything else is still theory.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sterling Shooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
On the matter of who I'm going to believe, I'll take advice from anyone who can show me how to do it. I trust the AMU can show me how to do since they have proven they can do it. Perhaps the professor can do it too. But since you think it is stupid not to question authorities what questions do you have for the professor?
</div></div>
Of course I question Mr. Pejsa. And sometimes I think he's wrong, but I perfectly agree with him on this one.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sterling Shooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have one, what has he won lately? Does he have a wind formula that you go to? How's it workin; out for ya? Has he shown you how to do it?
</div></div>
The question wasn't who has won anything, but "where the wind has the most effect on the bullet, at the gun or target." And physics tells you the answer not trophies. There is no discussion about that.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tob</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sterling Shooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
On the matter of who I'm going to believe, I'll take advice from anyone who can show me how to do it. I trust the AMU can show me how to do since they have proven they can do it. Perhaps the professor can do it too. But since you think it is stupid not to question authorities what questions do you have for the professor?
</div></div>
Of course I question Mr. Pejsa. And sometimes I think he's wrong, but I perfectly agree with him on this one.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sterling Shooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have one, what has he won lately? Does he have a wind formula that you go to? How's it workin; out for ya? Has he shown you how to do it?
</div></div>
The question wasn't who has won anything, but "where the wind has the most effect on the bullet, at the gun or target." And physics tells you the answer not trophies. There is no discussion about that.
</div></div>

Actually, controlled experiments tell you the answer, or at least lead to the truth. But certainly in one such controlled experiment, NRA LR, AMU shooters win, it appears, according to you, doing it wrong, since they say wind has the most effect at mid range. This makes me wonder, could your interpretation of physics be suspect, that's to say, could your cause and effect analysis possibly not be accounting for everything which effects the bullet?
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tob</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CoryT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The boat/bullet turns because of it's shape/form factor, in the same fashion as a weathervane.</div></div>

No, that's wrong. The torque due to the wind leads to a change in angular momentum that is responsible for the turning.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CoryT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Bacause of the streamlined shape, the pointy end turns into the area of least resistance, the relative motion of the surrounding fluid therfore becomming equalized on all sides.
</div></div>

That's wrong. The occurance of the yaw of repose is a clear contradiction to your statement.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CoryT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
This is basic physics, but the details are sometimes lost in casual observation.
</div></div>

Nothing in real life is basic physics. </div></div>

Yes, it's torque, but that is due to the shape, which places the CG behind the center of pressure. The yaw of repose is due to spin, and it's relative to the bore line, not the wind. Yes, the pressure is still not actually equal, due in part to the Magnus force, but it's close enough to eplain the process. I am admittedly being over simplistic, which is why I pointed out the texts on the subject, which go into the gory details. This is to avoid non-engineers going cross-eyed looking at something like this.

Forces and Moments
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sterling Shooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tob</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sterling Shooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
On the matter of who I'm going to believe, I'll take advice from anyone who can show me how to do it. I trust the AMU can show me how to do since they have proven they can do it. Perhaps the professor can do it too. But since you think it is stupid not to question authorities what questions do you have for the professor?
</div></div>
Of course I question Mr. Pejsa. And sometimes I think he's wrong, but I perfectly agree with him on this one.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sterling Shooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have one, what has he won lately? Does he have a wind formula that you go to? How's it workin; out for ya? Has he shown you how to do it?
</div></div>
The question wasn't who has won anything, but "where the wind has the most effect on the bullet, at the gun or target." And physics tells you the answer not trophies. There is no discussion about that.
</div></div>

So, how is it that AMU shooters win LR contests doing it wrong? They say wind has the most effect at mid range. I think your interpretation of physics is suspect, that's to say your cause and effect analysis. </div></div>

As I stated above, it works for them because of several factors. They are shooting at the same ranges, which are generally large open spaces with little enough variation over the full range that once the call is established for a given condition at mid-range, when you see that again it's mostly having the same effect.

Winning these comps is far different that field sniping. If you want a comparison, you'd have to score only the first two sighter shots, and we don't put a spotter in and run the target up for you after the first shot either. In the competition, you get to see the results very clearly, adjust, and then time your shots to match the conditions where the call/hold worked. That all has very little to do with field shooting, excepting the actual mechanics of firing the shot.

Check your logs. Plot ONLY your sighter shots for say 60 shots on as many different ranges as you have, at at least 600 yards. I'm willing to bet that the majority of the shots are on the DOWNWIND side of center. I'm also willing to bet that the percentage of X hits with the first shot is not better than 50%.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

CoryT,

An LR shooter has no spotter. He must trust his own ability to appraise things by focusing his spotting scope for mirage at some distance between himself and the target; I think you confirmed with the AMU shooter you inteviewed that this was actually closer to target than at mid range; but, no doubt, no matter where the scope is focused, the wind condition at such distance will be appraised for every shot, and adjustment of sight, or a favor will be made accordingly. Now, if a "begin with wind at the shooter" was known to get a more reliable wind reading, or more accurate indication of a change in wind, from which a more accurate adjustment could be made, don't you think successful LR shooters would abandon their mid range or further technique for a begin with the wind at the shooter technique? It seems reasonable, but clearly these folks continue to win reading at mid range or further. I will give you this, if I feel wind at my position which is not what I have accounted for at mid range I will look through my spotting scope to check if what I put on the gun is still in accordance with what I perceive the mid range wind is doing.

 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CoryT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The yaw of repose is due to spin, and it's relative to the bore line, not the wind.
</div></div>
Yes, no doubt about that. The reason for the yaw of repose is the lift force and the corresponding overturning moment. According to you the bullet should "only" point upwards due to the overturning moment. But you have to consider the spin. The torque M causes a change in angular momentum ( M = delta L / delta t ) therefore the bullet's nose points to the right (for right hand twist).
The same argument holds for the turning of the bullet into the cross wind. Forget the boats, you have to consider the spin.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CoryT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Yes, the pressure is still not actually equal, due in part to the Magnus force, but it's close enough to eplain the process.
</div></div>
It's vice versa. The Magnus force is the result of the disequilibrium of pressure.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CoryT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Forces and Moments </div></div>
Nice. Didn't know that Mr. Nennstiel is known here. I had discussions with him 10 years ago.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

Sterling

AMU Guys, the F CLass Team Shooters, etc, have COACHES, that help them, they stand behind the line and read the wind with a WIND METER.

They feed the shooter the details, at the point at which the competitive shooter is reading downrange is to only to "favor" into the X ring. They are reading it down there because the game they play has other factors to help them.

I have been on the line with the wind coach reading the wind behind the shooter with a kestrel and then helping the shooter. They are called a TEAM for a reason.

Also the AMU has a VIDEO out with w very pretty girl talking about wind. She advocates, focusing at the target and then coming a quarter turn back to focus on the mirage. That is NOT Mid range that is mirage just before the target. So they are not even reading Mid Range and she said nothing about mid range wind reading, this is a recent video on YouTube. She said focus on the target with the spotter and dial back a 1/4 turn.

They are playing a game, one they play over and over and use a skill set they think they like to play the game. It is not gospel. It is different than playing it cold in the field with terrain and unknown conditions. And it is not designed to help new shooters.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

You got it wrong, although there are team matches, most LR events are individual one's that do not allow coaching. Interestingly, you did not hear anything about wind at the shooter did you? Seems to blow, forgive the pun, your argument.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">the AMU has a VIDEO out with w very pretty girl talking about wind. She advocates, focusing at the target and then coming a quarter turn back to focus on the mirage. That is NOT Mid range that is mirage just before the target. So they are not even reading Mid Range and she said nothing about mid range wind reading, this is a recent video on YouTube. She said focus on the target with the spotter and dial back a 1/4 turn.</div></div>

Different Ballgame.

She is not reading mirage at point A or point B. Mirage doesn't measure wind at any ONE point but throughout the specturm of the range.

Basicly it averages it (the wind) out.

The ideal is to find a point (1/3 to 1/4) short of the target to read the mirage. This allows you to see the target and mirage.

Another reason to back off a bit from the target (back toward the firing line) is to prevent the scope from accidently being focused beyond the target, even a short distance past the target.

If you focus your scope on the mirage beyond the target, you reverse the mirage giving you a false reading.

I found that out the hard way when I attended the NGB MTU Coaches Clinic.

The picture of the flags you posted gets away from what we are discussing. They indicate an 18-22 mph wind. Wind at those speeds are constant (direction wise). It's when you get wind below 8 mph or so (5 for less specificly) that you have varying directions. Wind will often be different at the firing line and target as well as points in between.

That is the reason I like mirage.

Its when the wind gets to the point where you loose the mirage (or ablility to use mirage) iw where the AMU says to grab the wind at mid range.

Don't sell "square ranges" short. In reality there are few "square ranges" as being discussed here. The only real one I found was in Hawaii. There I could look at any flag, the revert to my score book for any data I need.

29 Palms in high desert, lots of moutains around screwing up the wind.

Ft Ord had the wind coming off the ocean, depending on the time of day, or the temps you get wierd winds.

Ft Richardson AK has cold wind coming off the mountains and warmer air coming of Knik Arm.

Camp Robinson is like shooting though a swiming pool.

Lander WY is in a canyon, you really get some wierd happenings there.

Gurnsey, well that's just Wyoming.

Thats just a few examples. You guys make it sound like HP ranges are generic, that's a long way from the truth of the matter.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sterling Shooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">CoryT,

An LR shooter has no spotter. He must trust his own ability to appraise things by focusing his spotting scope for mirage at some distance between himself and the target; I think you confirmed with the AMU shooter you inteviewed that this was actually closer to target than at mid range; but, no doubt, no matter where the scope is focused, the wind condition at such distance will be appraised for every shot, and adjustment of sight, or a favor will be made accordingly. Now, if a "begin with wind at the shooter" was known to get a more reliable wind reading, or more accurate indication of a change in wind, from which a more accurate adjustment could be made, don't you think successful LR shooters would abandon their mid range or further technique for a begin with the wind at the shooter technique? It seems reasonable, but clearly these folks continue to win reading at mid range or further. I will give you this, if I feel wind at my position which is not what I have accounted for at mid range I will look through my spotting scope to check if what I put on the gun is still in accordance with what I perceive the mid range wind is doing.

</div></div>

What I was talking about was the disk placed in the target so you can spot your shot. The standard methodolgy seems to be make a wind call, shoot the sighters, adjust the call and then try to shoot under those same conditions. Given the time constraints for the number of shots fired, using the mid range focus to presume the same conditions overall is not at all a bad plan. Once a good call is established, the same visible cues at mid range are likely to result in the same overall conditions, absent gusty or fishtail winds. Most rifle ranges that hold big matches are on large flat open terrain, which makes wind reads like that much more likely to succeed. It's not because the mid range wind has the most effect, because it's a scientific fact that it does not. It's because given the location and methodology, the same visual cues at mid range are mostly repersentative of the same overall conditions, whatever those conditions were at the time. The real issue is you mostly get some shots in to make an adjustment before the shots for score, so what you are really trying to do is shoot in the same conditions under which the sighters were fired. Small adjustments are made, but that's it. EIC is an exception to the rule, but it's not a long shot to expect EIC scores to be overall lower to a comparable match which allows sighters.

Note once again we are not adjusting solely for wind at the shooter, but using that wind value, which can be precisly measured, to help get a read on the downrange conditions for the whole path of the shot.

Again, we are not making a good comparison here, shooting multiple shots over a square range at the same known distance and direction is not at all the same thing as shooting over natural terrain, at different ranges and directions where you get one shot, maybe two, and that's it, start the game all over again in a whole new location.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Mirage doesn't measure wind at any ONE point but throughout the specturm of the range.

Basicly it averages it (the wind) out.

The ideal is to find a point (1/3 to 1/4) short of the target to read the mirage. This allows you to see the target and mirage.

Another reason to back off a bit from the target (back toward the firing line) is to prevent the scope from accidently being focused beyond the target, even a short distance past the target.

If you focus your scope on the mirage beyond the target, you reverse the mirage giving you a false reading.

</div></div>

Say what?

The wind is moving air. Diffraction of light in differing air temps produces mirage. The mirage moves becuse the air moves. Whatever the focal point of the scope, it is showing migrage at that point, within the depth of field of the lens. There is no mirror out there that somehow reverses the image because you extended the focal point beyond the target. If that were true, you could only read mirage at one range with your scope, and that's just not true. The scope does not know where the target is, it just has focus at a point.

There's no 'averaging' going on either, it shows the wind at that focal point, nothing more, nothing less. There is some image degradation due to the mirage between you and the focal point, but that's only a loss of sharpness/resolution.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

Maybe I'm missing something. How can you look through a scope at a distance of from 1 to 1000 yards, at mirage and tell what its doing at, lets say 400 or 800 yards.

I've never been able to see mirage at only one point, ignoring mirage at all other points.

If the wind moving the air (mirage) at point A at 5 mph and at point B at 7 mph, then you can be safe assming you can hold for 6 MPH. (Those numbers are just an example. you can say 4 & 8 and get the same 6).

But looking at mirage through the scope at the same time, you cannot say its 4 MPH at X range and 6 MPH at Y range.
 
Re: Wind read- More important at gun or target?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ch'e</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Man , that looks like an easy range from that image </div></div>

Looks can be <span style="font-style: italic">very</span> deceiving. I shoot at Wilcox Range every month for Midrange F-Class, and it's not always such an easy peach to pick. 1st round wind is usually 0-3 mph from 2-3:00. 2nd round will start to pick to around 7-10 mph, but can be a fishtailing wind from 5-7:00, or WSW to W as indicated by the flags in the picture Lowlight posted. 3rd round winds blow in from the ocean at anywhere from 8-15 mph, coming in up a valley/canyon that is out of the view at 7:00 or so.

My guess is that the wind at the moment that picture was taken was probably around 10-12 mph (early afternoon), but it's hard to say without seeing the movement whether they were steady or not. The problem with Wilcox is that the line is quite sheltered by trees and brush, so you often might see 2-4 mph wind at the line when the flags further out are behaving as in the picture. Also, it's not uncommon to have the left side flags as shown in the picture, while the right side flags are doing exactly the opposite, due to the terrain and how the wind can come from the south and wrap around both ends of the line. Depending on which relay you're in, you can have very easy conditions, or very challenging, and scores usually can reflect this. The steady winds are relatively easy to deal with, the rapidly shifting winds are not.

A couple miles to the north is Range 117 (1000 yd), which is oriented in close to the opposite direction (NE to SW). <span style="font-style: italic">Winds at Range 117 are the primary reason for my interest in this thread.</span> Winds shifts at Range 117 usually follow exactly the same pattern as for Wilcox, except opposite in direction due to the orientation of the range. However, Range 117 is much less flat than Wilcox, with a low ridge running down most of the right side. At the last 1000 yd comp, the wind was blowing up the valley relatively steady at 8-10 mph, coming in to the range from 11:30. I had a pretty decent run going, but on my last three shots, the furthest right hand range flag atop the pits all of a sudden shifted to straight from 3:00 at about the same speed. I saw it and adjusted, but not enough...a "7", X-high at 9:00. I held half again as much...another "7", ~1/2 MOA high at 9:00. Held even further on the last shot...another "7" 1/2 MOA high at 9:00. I ended up losing 9 points on three shots to finish with a 569/600-11X. That was good enough for 1st in F-T/R, but still pretty disappointing to give up that many points in the final 3 shots.

To my mind, this scenario fits very well into the wind reading discussion in this thread, and I have attached a topo image showing the range (rectangle), the general wind direction (black arrow), and the wind direction near the target due to the ridgeline (red arrows) below. Every flag along both sides of the range except the last (farthest) was showing 8-10 mph from 11:00-11:30 (same line as black arrow). However, the last flag suddenly shifted to straight from 3:00 at a similar velocity estimate (red arrows). A shooter call would not have been correct, nor would a midrange call. My main frustration is that I saw the shift and made the correct adjustment. It just wasn't nearly enough.

Slide1-11.jpg


So how does one estimate the effect (magnitude) of a wind like that over the final 100-200 yd. I couldn't pick up any change in mirage at that distance and there is little long grass, brush, or trees, so I was at the mercy of the flags. I knew the wind was coming up the valley and hitting the end of the ridge, thus diverting it straight across the end of the range from right to left, but I grossly underestimated the effect it would have in that final 100-200 yd. I know the projectile has slowed greatly at that point, I just didn't think the effect at that wind velocity would be so great during the last hundred yards or so. Any suggestions on how to better estimate the magnitude of wind during the latter part of a trajectory?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Theoverwatch
Advanced Marksmanship Target Wind Value
Replies
5
Views
517
JustSendit
JustSendit
L
PRS Talk Quick compound/complex wind calls
Replies
8
Views
620
3guns2hands
3
Milirad
Rifle Scopes Burris Eliminator 6 Accuracy Range Test Review
Replies
5
Views
231
Milirad
Milirad
DangerRanger
Short barrel wind deflection
Replies
9
Views
469
DangerRanger
DangerRanger
Airik Farley
Tips For Getting Rounds on Target With A New Rifle / Shooter
Replies
7
Views
416
BOI1947
B
Top Bottom
Back