I have searched and searched but I didnt think to ask here before i buy one which one on i Phone seems to work the best if any?
- Thread starter Magforce
- Start date
Re: Which one ? The Ballistics Calculator i Phones
Found a few threads in a couple seconds simply by searching iPhone using the Google "Custom Search Engine" in the box on the right...
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1707761
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1959706
Found a few threads in a couple seconds simply by searching iPhone using the Google "Custom Search Engine" in the box on the right...
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1707761
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1959706
Re: Which one ? The Ballistics Calculator i Phones
Note that Ballistic FTE erroneously lumps spin drift and wind drift together fir zeroing data: it computes the trajectory as if the rifle either was not zeroed for windage adjustment at all - or was zeroed for the CURRENT wind (that you're trying to compute the trajectory for).
I submitted bug report to Jonathan, let's see if/when he gets around to fixing it.
KAC Bullet Flight does not have that problem. Fewer features than Ballistic FTE, but streamlined and a breeze to use - especially in the field. I recommend sticking to it for critical applications. <span style="font-style: italic">When at home - I love to study comparison charts generated by Ballistic FTE.</span>
Note that Ballistic FTE erroneously lumps spin drift and wind drift together fir zeroing data: it computes the trajectory as if the rifle either was not zeroed for windage adjustment at all - or was zeroed for the CURRENT wind (that you're trying to compute the trajectory for).
I submitted bug report to Jonathan, let's see if/when he gets around to fixing it.
KAC Bullet Flight does not have that problem. Fewer features than Ballistic FTE, but streamlined and a breeze to use - especially in the field. I recommend sticking to it for critical applications. <span style="font-style: italic">When at home - I love to study comparison charts generated by Ballistic FTE.</span>
Re: Which one ? The Ballistics Calculator i Phones
Look at bullet drop. This is the one I use. It is dead nuts accurate.
Look at bullet drop. This is the one I use. It is dead nuts accurate.
Re: Which one ? The Ballistics Calculator i Phones
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: furtaker_.223</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Look at bullet drop. This is the one I use. It is dead nuts accurate. </div></div>
The free one?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: furtaker_.223</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Look at bullet drop. This is the one I use. It is dead nuts accurate. </div></div>
The free one?
Re: Which one ? The Ballistics Calculator i Phones
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: VjjR</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: furtaker_.223</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Look at bullet drop. This is the one I use. It is dead nuts accurate. </div></div>
The free one?</div></div>
That is the one I use. It is really close to the adaptave card.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: VjjR</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: furtaker_.223</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Look at bullet drop. This is the one I use. It is dead nuts accurate. </div></div>
The free one?</div></div>
That is the one I use. It is really close to the adaptave card.
Re: Which one ? The Ballistics Calculator i Phones
There is another factor that may be important for you.
I tend to push the software (any software) that I use to the limits and sometimes beyond. That means - I like it when the author makes himself available for help with rough edges and bug fixes if/when appropriate.
Ballistic FTE is rather poorly documented, and the author's attitude (in my opinion a least, and I've released enough software to the public to be qualified to judge) leaves something to be desired. You're very lucky if Jonathan dignifies you with a reply, let alone an answer.
Bullet Flight is better documented - but what's more important is that Robert stands behind it: it's likely that you receive a reply the same day you ask your question. And if in the end it turns out to be your mistake (as it happened a couple of times with me), he won't make you feel like an idiot.
To summarize - I like Ballistic FTE and love tinkering with its various features, but when it comes to placing a shot on target I run Bullet Flight.
<span style="font-style: italic">Two recent examples. I'm digesting the results of a recent shoot. I've entered banded G7 BC's for Hornady A-MAX 178gr bullet into both programs, and was observing trajectories and making comparisons. FTE gave me 0.5mRad elevation difference. I checked with online JBM - it was spot-on with Bullet Flight. I thought: what the heck?! FTE is using JBM engine, so if any program agrees with JBM - it should've been FTE?! I double-checked my inputs, and they all look "kosher" and - more importantly - the same for all the three (FTE, Bullet Flight, JBM), except that: (a) of course in JBM I cannot input zeroing weather, (b) in JBM I can't input banded BC - it uses its own library which shouldn't matter as my BC's come from Bryan Litz's book and so do the JBM's BCs, (c) Bullet Flight doesn't let me input the distance to the chrono. Anyway, I'm puzzled with this - so I'm sending my question with a help-plea request and the relevant screenshots (inputs and trajectory from JBM, inputs and trajectory from Bullet Flight, inputs and trajectory from FTE) to Jonathan. As before, like throwing into a black hole. I'll post here if I ever get a reply. Same with my bug report on zeroed wind drift mixed with zeroed spin drift - it went into a black hole...</span>
There is another factor that may be important for you.
I tend to push the software (any software) that I use to the limits and sometimes beyond. That means - I like it when the author makes himself available for help with rough edges and bug fixes if/when appropriate.
Ballistic FTE is rather poorly documented, and the author's attitude (in my opinion a least, and I've released enough software to the public to be qualified to judge) leaves something to be desired. You're very lucky if Jonathan dignifies you with a reply, let alone an answer.
Bullet Flight is better documented - but what's more important is that Robert stands behind it: it's likely that you receive a reply the same day you ask your question. And if in the end it turns out to be your mistake (as it happened a couple of times with me), he won't make you feel like an idiot.
To summarize - I like Ballistic FTE and love tinkering with its various features, but when it comes to placing a shot on target I run Bullet Flight.
<span style="font-style: italic">Two recent examples. I'm digesting the results of a recent shoot. I've entered banded G7 BC's for Hornady A-MAX 178gr bullet into both programs, and was observing trajectories and making comparisons. FTE gave me 0.5mRad elevation difference. I checked with online JBM - it was spot-on with Bullet Flight. I thought: what the heck?! FTE is using JBM engine, so if any program agrees with JBM - it should've been FTE?! I double-checked my inputs, and they all look "kosher" and - more importantly - the same for all the three (FTE, Bullet Flight, JBM), except that: (a) of course in JBM I cannot input zeroing weather, (b) in JBM I can't input banded BC - it uses its own library which shouldn't matter as my BC's come from Bryan Litz's book and so do the JBM's BCs, (c) Bullet Flight doesn't let me input the distance to the chrono. Anyway, I'm puzzled with this - so I'm sending my question with a help-plea request and the relevant screenshots (inputs and trajectory from JBM, inputs and trajectory from Bullet Flight, inputs and trajectory from FTE) to Jonathan. As before, like throwing into a black hole. I'll post here if I ever get a reply. Same with my bug report on zeroed wind drift mixed with zeroed spin drift - it went into a black hole...</span>
Re: Which one ? The Ballistics Calculator i Phones
Bullet Flight seems to be pretty good from what i have seen so far.
Bullet Flight seems to be pretty good from what i have seen so far.
Re: Which one ? The Ballistics Calculator i Phones
I have Bullet Flight and FTE.
I quickly figured out BF, and it works well for multiple rifles.
I haven't spent that much time with FTE.
So my vote is for Bullet Flight.
I have Bullet Flight and FTE.
I quickly figured out BF, and it works well for multiple rifles.
I haven't spent that much time with FTE.
So my vote is for Bullet Flight.
Re: Which one ? The Ballistics Calculator i Phones
For those who use Ballistic FTE - did you notice that it got the wind input backwards?
JBM states that it got the wind angles backwards:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JBM Web site</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wind Angle: angle of the wind direction. A wind blowing downrange has an angle of zero, a wind blowing to the shooter's right has an angle of 90, a headwind, an angle of 180 and a wind blowing to the shooter's left has an angle of 270 degrees.</div></div>
FTE - unlike JBM - claims to adhere to the military/aviation/marine/sane style of wind input:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ballistic Web site</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wind angles work like this: 0° = headwind, 90° = crosswind (right to left), -90° = crosswind (left to right). You can use any angle, of course, not just these. You can also enter input in O'Clock format; e.g. 3:00 will automatically translate to 90°.</div></div>
But the actual wind direction in FTE is reversed. I compared JBM output with FTE, and sure as heck JBM windage at 270 degrees matches FTE windage at 270 degrees (which contradicts what FTE claims to do) - and matches BulletFlight windage at 90 degrees (which is correct).
I don't even want to report this to Jonathan, as it would probably go to the same bit-bucket as all the previous unanswered reports.
For those who use Ballistic FTE - did you notice that it got the wind input backwards?
JBM states that it got the wind angles backwards:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JBM Web site</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wind Angle: angle of the wind direction. A wind blowing downrange has an angle of zero, a wind blowing to the shooter's right has an angle of 90, a headwind, an angle of 180 and a wind blowing to the shooter's left has an angle of 270 degrees.</div></div>
FTE - unlike JBM - claims to adhere to the military/aviation/marine/sane style of wind input:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ballistic Web site</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wind angles work like this: 0° = headwind, 90° = crosswind (right to left), -90° = crosswind (left to right). You can use any angle, of course, not just these. You can also enter input in O'Clock format; e.g. 3:00 will automatically translate to 90°.</div></div>
But the actual wind direction in FTE is reversed. I compared JBM output with FTE, and sure as heck JBM windage at 270 degrees matches FTE windage at 270 degrees (which contradicts what FTE claims to do) - and matches BulletFlight windage at 90 degrees (which is correct).
I don't even want to report this to Jonathan, as it would probably go to the same bit-bucket as all the previous unanswered reports.
Re: Which one ? The Ballistics Calculator i Phones
Just get both , KAC and JBM is not that expensive...Both work fine on my ipod...
Just get both , KAC and JBM is not that expensive...Both work fine on my ipod...
Re: Which one ? The Ballistics Calculator i Phones
I used bullet flight this past Sunday at a tactical shoot. We shot out to 100-800 yards, and bullet flight was right on. And it was the free version I was using. Works great.
I used bullet flight this past Sunday at a tactical shoot. We shot out to 100-800 yards, and bullet flight was right on. And it was the free version I was using. Works great.
