Coriolis Effect shooting east and west ??

[mdesign]

Any comments on the accuracy of the information/guidance in this video??


If sighting in and collecting data should be done going north and south, would a ballistic calculator adjust the data when shooting east and west?

 

[_Windrider_]

Any comments on the accuracy of the information/guidance in this video??


If sighting in and collecting data should be done going north and south, would a ballistic calculator adjust the data when shooting east and west?

If you have it turned on it would. Depending on which one you use, it’s effects can be overstated at the shorter ranges.

 

[mdesign]

The comments on the video indicate that all things being equal bullets fired to the west will hit lower than bullets fired to the east. Maybe as much as 1 MOA in the POI between the two groups at 1000 yds?

 

[_Windrider_]

The comments on the video indicate that all things being equal bullets fired to the west will hit lower than bullets fired to the east. Maybe as much as 1 MOA in the POI between the two groups at 1000 yds?

At 1k it’s likely depending on caliber you need to compensate but at 500, nope.

 

[Marine52]

While the Gunwerks range experiment is a good example of the “Eotvos” effect, their explanation is wrong. Coriolis results in “perceived” trajectory variations caused by earth’s rotating reference frame. Eotvos is independent of Coriolis and comes into play when shooting east-west, west-east and diminishes as the shot approaches a north-south line. It has a real impact on bullet trajectory due to centrifugal forces. Anyway, the impact is marginal even at 1000 yards and if you shoot KD with spotters, like F-Class, you don't need to worry about it.​

 

[LastShot300]

While the Gunwerks range experiment is a good example of the “Eotvos” effect, their explanation is wrong. Coriolis results in “perceived” trajectory variations caused by earth’s rotating reference frame. Eotvos is independent of Coriolis and comes into play when shooting east-west, west-east and diminishes as the shot approaches a north-south line. It has a real impact on bullet trajectory due to centrifugal forces. Anyway, the impact is marginal even at 1000 yards and if you shoot KD with spotters, like F-Class, you don't need to worry about it.​

It depends since many authors consider the Eötvos effect as the Coriolis "vertical deflection". So, Coriolis yields two deflections, one horizontal (the usual one) plus the vertical one, which some call Eötvos. Both are apparent forces, not real forces in the physical sense which gives meaning to the notion of the "apparent motion" when referred to a non-inertial frame of reference.

 

[Lowlight]

Hornady concluded the ground effect deflection is equal to about 15fps of SD at 1500m... their data is here on SH.

We drag our atmosphere with us, as well everything starts off attached to the Earth. The numbers are not adjusted for this fact, it's why Felix Baumgartner did not end up in the Pacific Ocean, instead, despite floating to the edge of space in a balloon and free falling back down to Earth he only landed 23 miles from his starting point. Raw data wise, if we calculated it, the software would tell us to wait something like 275 miles away from where he actually landed.

Guys try to say it's because Point A is spinning at speed A, and Point B is spinning at speed B, so the difference needs to be figure, ya, not so much, I think math wise it was figured to like 13fps variation, Lindy calculated that for us years ago and here Hornady is saying 15fps at 1500m

For me, never use it, don't care out it, turn this junk off in my software, it's wrong anyways.

 

[Marine52]

It depends since many authors consider the Eötvos effect as the Coriolis "vertical deflection". So, Coriolis yields two deflections, one horizontal (the usual one) plus the vertical one, which some call Eötvos. Both are apparent forces, not real forces in the physical sense which gives meaning to the notion of the "apparent motion" when referred to a non-inertial frame of reference.

You are correct in that coriolis, eotvos, and centrifugal “forces” are not real forces in the discipline of physics since they do not appear in an inertial framework. I was responding to the OP question regarding the accuracy of the info in the Gunwerks video. Eotvos (or vertical Coriolis if you want to call it that) has a real impact on bullet trajectory due to centrifugal acceleration, not because the target is “dropping and moving away” when shooting to the east as explained in the video. Again, the impact is insignificant for most shooters.

 

[LastShot300]

You are correct in that coriolis, eotvos, and centrifugal “forces” are not real forces in the discipline of physics since they do not appear in an inertial framework. I was responding to the OP question regarding the accuracy of the info in the Gunwerks video. Eotvos (or vertical Coriolis if you want to call it that) has a real impact on bullet trajectory due to centrifugal acceleration, not because the target is “dropping and moving away” when shooting to the east as explained in the video. Again, the impact is insignificant for most shooters.

 

[mdesign]

Thanks for all the replies, learned some things.

 

[Sixfivesavage]

Hornady concluded the ground effect deflection is equal to about 15fps of SD at 1500m... their data is here on SH.

We drag our atmosphere with us, as well everything starts off attached to the Earth. The numbers are not adjusted for this fact, it's why Felix Baumgartner did not end up in the Pacific Ocean, instead, despite floating to the edge of space in a balloon and free falling back down to Earth he only landed 23 miles from his starting point. Raw data wise, if we calculated it, the software would tell us to wait something like 275 miles away from where he actually landed.

Guys try to say it's because Point A is spinning at speed A, and Point B is spinning at speed B, so the difference needs to be figure, ya, not so much, I think math wise it was figured to like 13fps variation, Lindy calculated that for us years ago and here Hornady is saying 15fps at 1500m

For me, never use it, don't care out it, turn this junk off in my software, it's wrong anyways.

Frank, on a 4500ab kestrel, do you turn it off?

 

[Lachesis]

Hi,
i know the Video above. I think it is abt 6 Years old already. I contacted Gunwerks when i saw it first cos i do think its not quite right. I asked the Guy there why they speak abt Coriolis-Movements just in the Y-Direction(above and down) and not also in X. There r X-Movements too for sure. He was very diplomatically and just promised me a "new Set of Equations" in some years. Till now i havent heard abt it.

But i think like Lowlight said, its Junk in the nowadays programs. But for sure its worth to calculate it in a right way. I have worked on it some years now and meanwhile i am convinced among all the effects and things to think abt before shooting, Coriolis and Eötvös is the only thing what can be calculated very precisely. More precise then the drag-curve, or the Spin.

I disagree mit Marine52, if there would be a program in offer which could calculate it precisely it would be highly wanted. Cos, why should i accept a failure of abt 13cm in a shooting on 1000m in any direction, when its possible to avoid the failure?

Furthermore i think that the Words "Coriolis " and "Eötvös" doesnt fit the problem with shooting sufficient.

For example it is written in literature abt ballistics, that one has no Coriolis when shooting to north or south. Well of cos there is no Coriolis, but there is still a movement. The same nature of movement we call Coriolis in another case. So i think it would be good to leave this names and find a better one. And we should learn more abt the movements we called Coriolis and Eötvös and their nature.

Sorry for poor english, but would be nice to get in talk abt this

good nite