Assuming I know my load information, i.e. FPS, BC, twist and all that, and if I know the speed and direction of wind (wind value) what is the formula for calculating hold? I read somewhere that there are standard deviations for wind allowance, but the article I was reading was referring to a .308. Do those values hold true for other calibers?
Advanced Marksmanship wind doping
- Thread starter jbarlow22-250
- Start date
Re: wind doping
No.
No.
Re: wind doping
No. A standard deviation is based upon an array of data that has been determined to be in a state of process control. Too many variables to employ a "standard deviation".
No. A standard deviation is based upon an array of data that has been determined to be in a state of process control. Too many variables to employ a "standard deviation".
Re: wind doping
So what kind of calculations or formulas do I use to accurately determine my hold off?
So what kind of calculations or formulas do I use to accurately determine my hold off?
Re: wind doping
Take your Data, go to:
JBM Ballistics Calculator
Take the wind and change to 5MPH or 10 MPH and then print the data you get and this way you have calculated wind hold without having to do long hand for your bullet.
Or you can work this backwards to get some additional data to do it long hand.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Code:</div><div class="ubbcode-body ubbcode-pre" ><pre> range(100's) * wind speed (mph)
Constant = --------------------------------
Wind hold from ballistic program</pre></div></div>
Take your Data, go to:
JBM Ballistics Calculator
Take the wind and change to 5MPH or 10 MPH and then print the data you get and this way you have calculated wind hold without having to do long hand for your bullet.
Or you can work this backwards to get some additional data to do it long hand.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Code:</div><div class="ubbcode-body ubbcode-pre" ><pre> range(100's) * wind speed (mph)
Constant = --------------------------------
Wind hold from ballistic program</pre></div></div>
Re: wind doping
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Take the wind and change to 5MPH or 10 MPH
</div></div>
Why not change it to 1mph and then you have a constant?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Take the wind and change to 5MPH or 10 MPH
</div></div>
Why not change it to 1mph and then you have a constant?
Re: wind doping
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cpt. obvious</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Take the wind and change to 5MPH or 10 MPH
</div></div>
Why not change it to 1mph and then you have a constant? </div></div>
Differences between 1mph and 2mph and 8mph aren't accurately reflected when you take dope based on 1mph and multiply it by 10 for 10mph wind. That's why you typically see it calculated at 5mph, 10mph, etc...you can double the 5mph hold or halve the 10mph hold and be reasonably close. The same isn't said for 1mph multiplied by 10.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cpt. obvious</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Take the wind and change to 5MPH or 10 MPH
</div></div>
Why not change it to 1mph and then you have a constant? </div></div>
Differences between 1mph and 2mph and 8mph aren't accurately reflected when you take dope based on 1mph and multiply it by 10 for 10mph wind. That's why you typically see it calculated at 5mph, 10mph, etc...you can double the 5mph hold or halve the 10mph hold and be reasonably close. The same isn't said for 1mph multiplied by 10.
Re: wind doping
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LawnMM</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cpt. obvious</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Take the wind and change to 5MPH or 10 MPH
</div></div>
Why not change it to 1mph and then you have a constant? </div></div>
Differences between 1mph and 2mph and 8mph aren't accurately reflected when you take dope based on 1mph and multiply it by 10 for 10mph wind.
</div></div>
Could you elaborate on that?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LawnMM</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cpt. obvious</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Take the wind and change to 5MPH or 10 MPH
</div></div>
Why not change it to 1mph and then you have a constant? </div></div>
Differences between 1mph and 2mph and 8mph aren't accurately reflected when you take dope based on 1mph and multiply it by 10 for 10mph wind.
</div></div>
Could you elaborate on that?
Re: wind doping
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LawnMM</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cpt. obvious</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Take the wind and change to 5MPH or 10 MPH
</div></div>
Why not change it to 1mph and then you have a constant? </div></div>
<span style="font-weight: bold">Differences between 1mph and 2mph and 8mph aren't accurately reflected when you take dope based on 1mph and multiply it by 10 for 10mph wind. That's why you typically see it calculated at 5mph, 10mph, etc...you can double the 5mph hold or halve the 10mph hold and be reasonably close. The same isn't said for 1mph multiplied by 10.</span> </div></div>
<span style="font-weight: bold">WRONG!</span> If you know the wind drift with a given wind velocity, you can calculate exactly for any other using a linear relationship. Check any program, that's how it's done. The "normal" (most used) wind for calculations is 10 mph at 90ª, so it is easy to convert to any other wind speed and angle of incidence.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LawnMM</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cpt. obvious</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Take the wind and change to 5MPH or 10 MPH
</div></div>
Why not change it to 1mph and then you have a constant? </div></div>
<span style="font-weight: bold">Differences between 1mph and 2mph and 8mph aren't accurately reflected when you take dope based on 1mph and multiply it by 10 for 10mph wind. That's why you typically see it calculated at 5mph, 10mph, etc...you can double the 5mph hold or halve the 10mph hold and be reasonably close. The same isn't said for 1mph multiplied by 10.</span> </div></div>
<span style="font-weight: bold">WRONG!</span> If you know the wind drift with a given wind velocity, you can calculate exactly for any other using a linear relationship. Check any program, that's how it's done. The "normal" (most used) wind for calculations is 10 mph at 90ª, so it is easy to convert to any other wind speed and angle of incidence.
Re: wind doping
I wasn't making any kind of statement it was just a suggestion.
Though this year I predict a lot is going to be discussed when it comes to wind effects, particularly differences from right to left and velocity. Old methods maybe tossed out the window by many.
I wasn't making any kind of statement it was just a suggestion.
Though this year I predict a lot is going to be discussed when it comes to wind effects, particularly differences from right to left and velocity. Old methods maybe tossed out the window by many.
Re: wind doping
Tiro, I disagree. Wind delection (in inches or MOA) is not linear, although close at shorter distances. It is based off crosswind speed and lag time (the difference between bullet flight time in air vs in a vacuum). Real bullets slow down. Throw in spin drift or other effects as you see fit.
Tiro, I disagree. Wind delection (in inches or MOA) is not linear, although close at shorter distances. It is based off crosswind speed and lag time (the difference between bullet flight time in air vs in a vacuum). Real bullets slow down. Throw in spin drift or other effects as you see fit.
Re: wind doping
Tiro - I think the problem with a 1 mph wind chart is that some numbers get rounded to 0 that are significant at 10 mph. For example, at 10 mph a wind hold may be .5 MIL, but the chart may round the 1 mph value of .05 to zero or .1. Now the error at 10 mph is .5 MIL. It depends on how many digits the chart displays.
Squid - Are you saying that I can't take my 500 yard 10 mph wind dope and double it for shooting 1000 yards?
Or, are you saying that I can't take my 500 yard 10 mph wind and double it for 20 mph wind still at 500 yards?
Tiro - I think the problem with a 1 mph wind chart is that some numbers get rounded to 0 that are significant at 10 mph. For example, at 10 mph a wind hold may be .5 MIL, but the chart may round the 1 mph value of .05 to zero or .1. Now the error at 10 mph is .5 MIL. It depends on how many digits the chart displays.
Squid - Are you saying that I can't take my 500 yard 10 mph wind dope and double it for shooting 1000 yards?
Or, are you saying that I can't take my 500 yard 10 mph wind and double it for 20 mph wind still at 500 yards?
Re: wind doping
Like LL said:
for the average 308 round (175gr @ 2600FPS) you can use a constant of 10. So lets say a 400 meter shot with a 7mph half value wind R to L.
So:
4x3.5=14.0
14.0/10(or your constant)= 1.4(or round to 1.25 or 1.5 MOA Right adjustment) for you shot. When you start to get out there (700meter+) dont forget to factor spin drift into your rounding up or down (given direction of twist or wind)
Like LL said:
for the average 308 round (175gr @ 2600FPS) you can use a constant of 10. So lets say a 400 meter shot with a 7mph half value wind R to L.
So:
4x3.5=14.0
14.0/10(or your constant)= 1.4(or round to 1.25 or 1.5 MOA Right adjustment) for you shot. When you start to get out there (700meter+) dont forget to factor spin drift into your rounding up or down (given direction of twist or wind)
Re: wind doping
I use the following method from Accuracy 1st:
1. Convert range to tenths, e.g. 300m = .3, 500m = .5, etc. up to 600m. For ranges 700 and up, add .1, e.g. 700m = .8, 1000m = 1.1, etc.
2. For 308, formula is Range (in meters) x (wind value mph/4). Looks like this: 600m(.6) x (12mph/4) = 1.8 mil hold into wind.
3. 300wm is same formula, just divide wind by 5 instead of 4.
Thanks to Todd Hodnett and Magpul, Enjoy!!
I use the following method from Accuracy 1st:
1. Convert range to tenths, e.g. 300m = .3, 500m = .5, etc. up to 600m. For ranges 700 and up, add .1, e.g. 700m = .8, 1000m = 1.1, etc.
2. For 308, formula is Range (in meters) x (wind value mph/4). Looks like this: 600m(.6) x (12mph/4) = 1.8 mil hold into wind.
3. 300wm is same formula, just divide wind by 5 instead of 4.
Thanks to Todd Hodnett and Magpul, Enjoy!!
Re: wind doping
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bete Noire</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I use the following method from Accuracy 1st:
1. Convert range to tenths, e.g. 300m = .3, 500m = .5, etc. up to 600m. For ranges 700 and up, add .1, e.g. 700m = .8, 1000m = 1.1, etc.
2. For 308, formula is Range (in meters) x (wind value mph/4). Looks like this: 600m(.6) x (12mph/4) = 1.8 mil hold into wind.
3. 300wm is same formula, just divide wind by 5 instead of 4.
Thanks to Todd Hodnett and Magpul, Enjoy!!</div></div>
I always wondered what people did before the video came out... wind must have been a great mystery to all ...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bete Noire</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I use the following method from Accuracy 1st:
1. Convert range to tenths, e.g. 300m = .3, 500m = .5, etc. up to 600m. For ranges 700 and up, add .1, e.g. 700m = .8, 1000m = 1.1, etc.
2. For 308, formula is Range (in meters) x (wind value mph/4). Looks like this: 600m(.6) x (12mph/4) = 1.8 mil hold into wind.
3. 300wm is same formula, just divide wind by 5 instead of 4.
Thanks to Todd Hodnett and Magpul, Enjoy!!</div></div>
I always wondered what people did before the video came out... wind must have been a great mystery to all ...
Re: wind doping
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bete Noire</div><div class="ubbcode-body">PS. If anyone know a formula for 50 BMG, I would like to have it. Thanks!! </div></div>
Why dont you just run the load through at ballistics program and figure out with wind constnt for the given ranges(s). Your should only have to remember one formula, just knw the veriable constant for the rounds at the given range. When it comes to "field math" Id say forget the decimal thing and K.I.S.S. Then again I dont make cool DVDs or own my own tactical company (i.e. Magpul math ref) just a guy with a rifle.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bete Noire</div><div class="ubbcode-body">PS. If anyone know a formula for 50 BMG, I would like to have it. Thanks!! </div></div>
Why dont you just run the load through at ballistics program and figure out with wind constnt for the given ranges(s). Your should only have to remember one formula, just knw the veriable constant for the rounds at the given range. When it comes to "field math" Id say forget the decimal thing and K.I.S.S. Then again I dont make cool DVDs or own my own tactical company (i.e. Magpul math ref) just a guy with a rifle.
Re: wind doping
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BGEFIVEFOURONE</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bete Noire</div><div class="ubbcode-body">PS. If anyone know a formula for 50 BMG, I would like to have it. Thanks!! </div></div>
Why dont you just run the load through at ballistics program and figure out with wind constnt for the given ranges(s). Your should only have to remember one formula, just knw the veriable constant for the rounds at the given range. When it comes to "field math" Id say forget the decimal thing and K.I.S.S. Then again I dont make cool DVDs or own my own tactical company (i.e. Magpul math ref) just a guy with a rifle.
</div></div>
I like the way you think. In general, folks who have trouble with wind are taking bits and pieces of information from multiple sources; and, this sort map makes getting to the desired destination difficult. I use a spotting scope to understand mid range wind velocity and direction when possible. I supplement this with knowledge of what wind looks like from its effects and feel. My formula is: distance to target divided by 100 times velocity in MPH, measured as full, half, or no value according to wind clock, divided by the constant of 10, for any distance, even distances where 10 will not be yield the best answer. The answer is in MOA of drift, which matches my MOA graduated sight adjustments, making quick and accurate adjustments possible if I choose to make an adjustment rather than favor. Now, why use a constant of 10 for all distances for most .223, 5.56 and .308/7.62 work, even when constants somewhere around 11 to 15 might be more appropriate? More appropriate assumes that you have the wind velocity exactly right; but, this is far from certain, so even with an appropriate constant, this does not assure a more exact hit. What is assured however when the most appropriate constant is used is more time needed to process the formula, which, by the time it's finished may no longer be relevant. This is also why we put 5 or 10 MPH wind into our formula in many cases rather than let's say 7 or 12 MPH wind, it keeps the math so simple it can all be done while behind the sight and still get good results.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BGEFIVEFOURONE</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bete Noire</div><div class="ubbcode-body">PS. If anyone know a formula for 50 BMG, I would like to have it. Thanks!! </div></div>
Why dont you just run the load through at ballistics program and figure out with wind constnt for the given ranges(s). Your should only have to remember one formula, just knw the veriable constant for the rounds at the given range. When it comes to "field math" Id say forget the decimal thing and K.I.S.S. Then again I dont make cool DVDs or own my own tactical company (i.e. Magpul math ref) just a guy with a rifle.
</div></div>
I like the way you think. In general, folks who have trouble with wind are taking bits and pieces of information from multiple sources; and, this sort map makes getting to the desired destination difficult. I use a spotting scope to understand mid range wind velocity and direction when possible. I supplement this with knowledge of what wind looks like from its effects and feel. My formula is: distance to target divided by 100 times velocity in MPH, measured as full, half, or no value according to wind clock, divided by the constant of 10, for any distance, even distances where 10 will not be yield the best answer. The answer is in MOA of drift, which matches my MOA graduated sight adjustments, making quick and accurate adjustments possible if I choose to make an adjustment rather than favor. Now, why use a constant of 10 for all distances for most .223, 5.56 and .308/7.62 work, even when constants somewhere around 11 to 15 might be more appropriate? More appropriate assumes that you have the wind velocity exactly right; but, this is far from certain, so even with an appropriate constant, this does not assure a more exact hit. What is assured however when the most appropriate constant is used is more time needed to process the formula, which, by the time it's finished may no longer be relevant. This is also why we put 5 or 10 MPH wind into our formula in many cases rather than let's say 7 or 12 MPH wind, it keeps the math so simple it can all be done while behind the sight and still get good results.
Re: wind doping
DFOOSKING,
You're question has been answered no less than 3x, if I answer it again, this will make 4.
First off, how are you doping the wind beyond 600 yards ?
Second, aside from some localized effects of terrain, wind generally blows in a prevailing fashion from one direction and does not blow against itself. Terrain features under certain conditions can give you the appearance of wind blowing from another direction, but that is usually pretty localized and not necessarily directly countering the prevailing wind. So it is really dependent on where you are, and what the terrain looks like.
if you're question is just a plain old hypothetical one, its shows a certain misunderstanding that cannot be answered as easily as saying, "Hold X" because the local conditions based on the terrain features will have a greater effect.
Thirdly, and for anyone, if you are attempting to do long hand math in the field, or ever some of these formulas that require sliding scales or constants, you have already lost. This goes for ranging too, if you are breaking out a calculator and doing math, the problem is already gone by you. There are much easier ways which only require a little bit of study and some prior proper planning.
To address multiple wind, without going out to one area and shooting it for 1000s of rounds until you know it. The answer is a ballistic calculator with a multiple wind feature. Several of them have it, you turn on the multi wind feature and input different directions and values to give you a best guess on the hold.
Any other time you are far better off having a chart based on your rifle to calculate the wind. All those formulas are great if your gun was build in 1982, using the numbers they use, but most people have different specs on their barrel and bullets. So having a chart printed off from JBM liked I posted above is a better first step. A ballistic calculator for real time adjustments are better to get you moving but trying to do the math using a constant from 40 years ago is not going to help you, and once you figure out the answer, the wind has probably changed because rarely is it moving in a linear fashion.
Shooting in the wind takes practice, no doubt, but mainly because people are second guessing themselves, taking too much time to develop a hold, or completely not understanding the effects of wind and terrain across a field. Square ranges and fields are not the same, and flat rate formulas rarely work for everyone the same way.
DFOOSKING,
You're question has been answered no less than 3x, if I answer it again, this will make 4.
First off, how are you doping the wind beyond 600 yards ?
Second, aside from some localized effects of terrain, wind generally blows in a prevailing fashion from one direction and does not blow against itself. Terrain features under certain conditions can give you the appearance of wind blowing from another direction, but that is usually pretty localized and not necessarily directly countering the prevailing wind. So it is really dependent on where you are, and what the terrain looks like.
if you're question is just a plain old hypothetical one, its shows a certain misunderstanding that cannot be answered as easily as saying, "Hold X" because the local conditions based on the terrain features will have a greater effect.
Thirdly, and for anyone, if you are attempting to do long hand math in the field, or ever some of these formulas that require sliding scales or constants, you have already lost. This goes for ranging too, if you are breaking out a calculator and doing math, the problem is already gone by you. There are much easier ways which only require a little bit of study and some prior proper planning.
To address multiple wind, without going out to one area and shooting it for 1000s of rounds until you know it. The answer is a ballistic calculator with a multiple wind feature. Several of them have it, you turn on the multi wind feature and input different directions and values to give you a best guess on the hold.
Any other time you are far better off having a chart based on your rifle to calculate the wind. All those formulas are great if your gun was build in 1982, using the numbers they use, but most people have different specs on their barrel and bullets. So having a chart printed off from JBM liked I posted above is a better first step. A ballistic calculator for real time adjustments are better to get you moving but trying to do the math using a constant from 40 years ago is not going to help you, and once you figure out the answer, the wind has probably changed because rarely is it moving in a linear fashion.
Shooting in the wind takes practice, no doubt, but mainly because people are second guessing themselves, taking too much time to develop a hold, or completely not understanding the effects of wind and terrain across a field. Square ranges and fields are not the same, and flat rate formulas rarely work for everyone the same way.
Re: wind doping
I could have posted this on its own thread but while we are talking wind doping which I think is the most interesting of shooting subjects how about a 12 oclock when you are shooting high angle such as 10 mph wind at a 50deg angle down a 1000 yard sight plane ,now how do you handle that as it will have an effect on your elevation ??
I could have posted this on its own thread but while we are talking wind doping which I think is the most interesting of shooting subjects how about a 12 oclock when you are shooting high angle such as 10 mph wind at a 50deg angle down a 1000 yard sight plane ,now how do you handle that as it will have an effect on your elevation ??
Re: wind doping
You dope the angle / elevation based off the cosine and you dope the wind the full distance, not the adjusted.
Whether or not it effects the elevation is gonna be based on a lot of factors.
At Thunder Ranch we watched the wind slap against the side of a hill, the snow was failing and you can see the updrafts. When shooting a 168gr out of Clint Smith's rifle beyond the max effective range, which in this case, we were shooting about 1200 yards, the bullet was carried 10ft over the target for a majority of the shots. Because the bullet was clearly transonic the updraft simply lifted it at the end of its life. You can't really know that until you shoot it.
You dope the angle / elevation based off the cosine and you dope the wind the full distance, not the adjusted.
Whether or not it effects the elevation is gonna be based on a lot of factors.
At Thunder Ranch we watched the wind slap against the side of a hill, the snow was failing and you can see the updrafts. When shooting a 168gr out of Clint Smith's rifle beyond the max effective range, which in this case, we were shooting about 1200 yards, the bullet was carried 10ft over the target for a majority of the shots. Because the bullet was clearly transonic the updraft simply lifted it at the end of its life. You can't really know that until you shoot it.
Re: wind doping
I am a long way from claiming any expert knowledge here, which is why I will let the numbers from Loadbase 3.0 do the talking.
I used my parameters from my system:
GAP HRT .308, Hornady 168 grain TAP, MV 2652 (chronographed), BC .230 g7
Using Multiple Wind Zone option (only out to 1000)
Zone 1 - 5mph wind 270* for 0-500 yards
Zone 2 - 5mph wind 90* for 500-1000 yards
Corrections @ 100 yard increments for simplicity sake
I will also use MILS since most here use this system
(again, these are the numbers generated from the program)
100 - 0.1
200 - 0.2
300 - 0.4
400 - 0.5
500 - 0.7
600 - 0.8
700 - 0.8
800 - 0.7
900 - 0.6
1000 - 0.4
As you can see, the programs clearly shows the bullets return to its original flight path, but not a full recovery.
FWIW!
I am a long way from claiming any expert knowledge here, which is why I will let the numbers from Loadbase 3.0 do the talking.
I used my parameters from my system:
GAP HRT .308, Hornady 168 grain TAP, MV 2652 (chronographed), BC .230 g7
Using Multiple Wind Zone option (only out to 1000)
Zone 1 - 5mph wind 270* for 0-500 yards
Zone 2 - 5mph wind 90* for 500-1000 yards
Corrections @ 100 yard increments for simplicity sake
I will also use MILS since most here use this system
(again, these are the numbers generated from the program)
100 - 0.1
200 - 0.2
300 - 0.4
400 - 0.5
500 - 0.7
600 - 0.8
700 - 0.8
800 - 0.7
900 - 0.6
1000 - 0.4
As you can see, the programs clearly shows the bullets return to its original flight path, but not a full recovery.
FWIW!
Re: wind doping
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You dope the angle / elevation based off the cosine <span style="color: #CC0000">and you dope the wind the full distance, not the adjusted.</span>
Whether or not it effects the elevation is gonna be based on a lot of factors.
At Thunder Ranch we watched the wind slap against the side of a hill, the snow was failing and you can see the updrafts. When shooting a 168gr out of Clint Smith's rifle beyond the max effective range, which in this case, we were shooting about 1200 yards, the bullet was carried 10ft over the target for a majority of the shots. Because the bullet was clearly transonic the updraft simply lifted it at the end of its life. You can't really know that until you shoot it. </div></div>
I would have thought in this situation the winds affect on the projectile would have the equal affect as it would say coming from a side angle wind -say for me 1.5 mills left or right wind only now I would need to adjust this on my elevation to give it a little more verticle -am I wrong ?Why would I use the lasered unadjusted length rather than the true length ?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You dope the angle / elevation based off the cosine <span style="color: #CC0000">and you dope the wind the full distance, not the adjusted.</span>
Whether or not it effects the elevation is gonna be based on a lot of factors.
At Thunder Ranch we watched the wind slap against the side of a hill, the snow was failing and you can see the updrafts. When shooting a 168gr out of Clint Smith's rifle beyond the max effective range, which in this case, we were shooting about 1200 yards, the bullet was carried 10ft over the target for a majority of the shots. Because the bullet was clearly transonic the updraft simply lifted it at the end of its life. You can't really know that until you shoot it. </div></div>
I would have thought in this situation the winds affect on the projectile would have the equal affect as it would say coming from a side angle wind -say for me 1.5 mills left or right wind only now I would need to adjust this on my elevation to give it a little more verticle -am I wrong ?Why would I use the lasered unadjusted length rather than the true length ?
Re: wind doping
Sniper1*
Your shooting 1000(meters?) You need to be thinking about your spin drift aswell, not to mention if your shooting 1K in wind with a 168gr, you need to be thinking about switching to a 175gr.
Che:
Im not sure if this is what your asking, but pretend your standing on a mountain 500 meters above your target (we will say a goat...) the goat is 300 meters away from the base of the hill (your position) How do you figure out your elevation hold and windage hold? Well LOS says you are 583.095 meters (we will say 583 meters) from the goat (LOS, again) So you pick up your rifle to shoot. But that cool ACI says your holding the rifle at a 50* angle. What does that mean to us? It means you do alittle math and multiply your LOS (583) by .64 (cosine of 50*) getting 373 meters. This (373meter DOPE) will be your elevation hold, and 583 meter DOPE, because your only shooting 373 Meters worth of gravity if that makes any sence, but the bullets fighting 583 meters worth of wind. Take care,
BGE
Sniper1*
Your shooting 1000(meters?) You need to be thinking about your spin drift aswell, not to mention if your shooting 1K in wind with a 168gr, you need to be thinking about switching to a 175gr.
Che:
Im not sure if this is what your asking, but pretend your standing on a mountain 500 meters above your target (we will say a goat...) the goat is 300 meters away from the base of the hill (your position) How do you figure out your elevation hold and windage hold? Well LOS says you are 583.095 meters (we will say 583 meters) from the goat (LOS, again) So you pick up your rifle to shoot. But that cool ACI says your holding the rifle at a 50* angle. What does that mean to us? It means you do alittle math and multiply your LOS (583) by .64 (cosine of 50*) getting 373 meters. This (373meter DOPE) will be your elevation hold, and 583 meter DOPE, because your only shooting 373 Meters worth of gravity if that makes any sence, but the bullets fighting 583 meters worth of wind. Take care,
BGE
Re: wind doping
Yes , I see why but now how do we handle that pressure against the the bullet with the effect on elevation as it will be pushing the bullet to hit in front of the target .Lowlight might be correct there is no way to know until you shoot it but if we presume it is a consistant wind from 12pm it has to act like a bullet with a wind coming from its side one thinks
Yes , I see why but now how do we handle that pressure against the the bullet with the effect on elevation as it will be pushing the bullet to hit in front of the target .Lowlight might be correct there is no way to know until you shoot it but if we presume it is a consistant wind from 12pm it has to act like a bullet with a wind coming from its side one thinks
Re: wind doping
Most headwinds have a very small effect elevation wise and not worth worrying about. Especially when you consider most targets, in the vertical are usually taller with a enough fudge room.
The issue with a headwind is more the fish tail factor, that is normally not "straight" from 12, but bounces from 11 to 1 so you have elements of a sideways effect which is the bigger issue than elevation.
I have yet to see any real, measurable effect of a headwind on elevation. Maybe a particular range shooting F Class someone might see a .25 change here or there, but in the field you'd be hard pressed to acknowledge it.
The new Tubb Reticle the DTR has the dissimilar wind effects built in, with gains for side effects, because the bullet is climbing the walls of air a bit, or being forced down. So you have the elevation factor built into his reticle, gaining from the right, dropping to the left. So that will be talked about more and more has his reticle becomes more public.
Most headwinds have a very small effect elevation wise and not worth worrying about. Especially when you consider most targets, in the vertical are usually taller with a enough fudge room.
The issue with a headwind is more the fish tail factor, that is normally not "straight" from 12, but bounces from 11 to 1 so you have elements of a sideways effect which is the bigger issue than elevation.
I have yet to see any real, measurable effect of a headwind on elevation. Maybe a particular range shooting F Class someone might see a .25 change here or there, but in the field you'd be hard pressed to acknowledge it.
The new Tubb Reticle the DTR has the dissimilar wind effects built in, with gains for side effects, because the bullet is climbing the walls of air a bit, or being forced down. So you have the elevation factor built into his reticle, gaining from the right, dropping to the left. So that will be talked about more and more has his reticle becomes more public.
Re: wind doping
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Most headwinds have a very small effect elevation wise and not worth worrying about. Especially when you consider most targets, in the vertical are usually taller with a enough fudge room.
The issue with a headwind is more the fish tail factor, that is normally not "straight" from 12, but bounces from 11 to 1 so you have elements of a sideways effect which is the bigger issue than elevation.
I have yet to see any real, measurable effect of a headwind on elevation. Maybe a particular range shooting F Class someone might see a .25 change here or there, but in the field you'd be hard pressed to acknowledge it.
The new Tubb Reticle the DTR has the dissimilar wind effects built in, with gains for side effects, because the bullet is climbing the walls of air a bit, or being forced down. So you have the elevation factor built into his reticle, gaining from the right, dropping to the left. So that will be talked about more and more has his reticle becomes more public. </div></div> Frank , I hope I am not labouring something you have answered already but what I mean is the apparent 12pm wind is not actually that even though it is coming straight at you .Once you point the rifle down on a 50deg angle you are not sending a projo into the wind but down it hence my question on elevation needing to be adjusted due to a actual pressure now pushing the bullet down on the projo's full length and not just the hollow point -I hope that makes sense
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Most headwinds have a very small effect elevation wise and not worth worrying about. Especially when you consider most targets, in the vertical are usually taller with a enough fudge room.
The issue with a headwind is more the fish tail factor, that is normally not "straight" from 12, but bounces from 11 to 1 so you have elements of a sideways effect which is the bigger issue than elevation.
I have yet to see any real, measurable effect of a headwind on elevation. Maybe a particular range shooting F Class someone might see a .25 change here or there, but in the field you'd be hard pressed to acknowledge it.
The new Tubb Reticle the DTR has the dissimilar wind effects built in, with gains for side effects, because the bullet is climbing the walls of air a bit, or being forced down. So you have the elevation factor built into his reticle, gaining from the right, dropping to the left. So that will be talked about more and more has his reticle becomes more public. </div></div> Frank , I hope I am not labouring something you have answered already but what I mean is the apparent 12pm wind is not actually that even though it is coming straight at you .Once you point the rifle down on a 50deg angle you are not sending a projo into the wind but down it hence my question on elevation needing to be adjusted due to a actual pressure now pushing the bullet down on the projo's full length and not just the hollow point -I hope that makes sense
Re: wind doping
I see you are more asking about a 360 degree wind thing...
In the situation you are talking I can see where the wind deflection would be vertical because you have the wind pushing "down" on the rounds and not necessarily talking about a headwind as it is normally understood.
If the distance was far enough and the wind strong enough, then sure it would be another line to figure, but still I don't' think you would be able to really know without shooting it first. I am not sure I have looked that hard, and in the mountains shooting, 95% of the time your dope is less than necessary, I haven't; really noted needing more because of a wind issue ?
I suppose the answer would be yes, it would push the wind down.
I see you are more asking about a 360 degree wind thing...
In the situation you are talking I can see where the wind deflection would be vertical because you have the wind pushing "down" on the rounds and not necessarily talking about a headwind as it is normally understood.
If the distance was far enough and the wind strong enough, then sure it would be another line to figure, but still I don't' think you would be able to really know without shooting it first. I am not sure I have looked that hard, and in the mountains shooting, 95% of the time your dope is less than necessary, I haven't; really noted needing more because of a wind issue ?
I suppose the answer would be yes, it would push the wind down.
Re: wind doping
My point had nothing to do with what I shoot or don't shoot. It was strictly an example based totally on theory. The theory of multiple wind zones affecting a bullet equally relative to distance and not compensating for bullet speed. Clearly, LB must consider this somewhat important!
My point had nothing to do with what I shoot or don't shoot. It was strictly an example based totally on theory. The theory of multiple wind zones affecting a bullet equally relative to distance and not compensating for bullet speed. Clearly, LB must consider this somewhat important!
Re: wind doping
Ch'e
Same principal I posted about the wind using LB3.
When I input my information:
GAP HRT .308, Hornady 168 grain TAP, MV 2652 (chronographed), BC .230 g7
Using the following wind conditions and shot angle:
60* Angle (most extreme the program would allow)
No Wind 12 o'clock (20mph) 6 o'clock (20 mph)
Yards (MILS)
100 - 0.4 0.4 0.4
200 - 0.2 0.2 0.2
300 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1
400 - -0.6 -0.6 -0.6
500 - -1.2 -1.2 -1.1
600 - -1.8 -1.9 -1.8
700 - -2.6 -2.7 -2.5
800 - -3.5 -3.6 -3.4
900 - -4.6 -4.7 -4.4
1000 - -5.8 -6.1 -5.6
These number specifically represent the path in MILS. Nothing else taken into consideration.
Side note- When wind is entered either from 90* or 270* the elevation adjustments remained the same as NO WIND.
Again, this is a theory based solution generated by a computer program. No real world data from me on this.
Ch'e
Same principal I posted about the wind using LB3.
When I input my information:
GAP HRT .308, Hornady 168 grain TAP, MV 2652 (chronographed), BC .230 g7
Using the following wind conditions and shot angle:
60* Angle (most extreme the program would allow)
No Wind 12 o'clock (20mph) 6 o'clock (20 mph)
Yards (MILS)
100 - 0.4 0.4 0.4
200 - 0.2 0.2 0.2
300 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1
400 - -0.6 -0.6 -0.6
500 - -1.2 -1.2 -1.1
600 - -1.8 -1.9 -1.8
700 - -2.6 -2.7 -2.5
800 - -3.5 -3.6 -3.4
900 - -4.6 -4.7 -4.4
1000 - -5.8 -6.1 -5.6
These number specifically represent the path in MILS. Nothing else taken into consideration.
Side note- When wind is entered either from 90* or 270* the elevation adjustments remained the same as NO WIND.
Again, this is a theory based solution generated by a computer program. No real world data from me on this.
Re: wind doping
When I changed the program to show the Linear path it shows an 18.7" deviation in elevation between a 20mph 12 o'clock and 6 o'clock wind.
FWIW
When I changed the program to show the Linear path it shows an 18.7" deviation in elevation between a 20mph 12 o'clock and 6 o'clock wind.
FWIW
Re: wind doping
LL is dead right. The effects of head/tailwnds are directly related to how they affect time-of-flight. More time results in more drop and drift'; less, the opposite. There's no more to it, no mysterious 'lift' effects, etc. For a given computed trajectory, there is a linear relationship between the effects of different wind strengths. Forces like coriolis and magnus are simply additional problems to be added or subtracted from the original basic solution.
The difficulty with computing extended trajectories relates directly to the accuracy of the data being inputted. When LL asks how one is doping the wind at greeater distances, this is what he refers to.
I can't read wind direction and velocity variances along a trajectory with anywhere near the degree of precision the computation can predict. I'm far from alone in possessing this weakness. Any calculation is only as accurate is the input data, As distances increase, input data reliability degrades, and so does the reliability of any resulting computation.
This is one of the reasons why a good 1/2MOA rifle at 100yd magically becomes a good 2MOA rifle at 1000yd. It's not about the rifle, it's about the individual shooter's ability to <span style="font-style: italic">estimate</span> distant wind values. Without precise measurements, there is no precise POA/POI solution.
What's more, what we can see is usually in constant flux. Often a good solution for the observed condition becomes obsolete even before the sear breaks.
Errors do not necessarily add upon each other. Some cancel out; and it's a sage shooter who can tell which is which. I'm not that sage.
Anything which is indistinguishable from magic becomes precisely the same thing as magic. Show a caveman a trajectory calulator, and he's gonna call you a magician (and you'll be very lucky if that's all that happens).
Greg
LL is dead right. The effects of head/tailwnds are directly related to how they affect time-of-flight. More time results in more drop and drift'; less, the opposite. There's no more to it, no mysterious 'lift' effects, etc. For a given computed trajectory, there is a linear relationship between the effects of different wind strengths. Forces like coriolis and magnus are simply additional problems to be added or subtracted from the original basic solution.
The difficulty with computing extended trajectories relates directly to the accuracy of the data being inputted. When LL asks how one is doping the wind at greeater distances, this is what he refers to.
I can't read wind direction and velocity variances along a trajectory with anywhere near the degree of precision the computation can predict. I'm far from alone in possessing this weakness. Any calculation is only as accurate is the input data, As distances increase, input data reliability degrades, and so does the reliability of any resulting computation.
This is one of the reasons why a good 1/2MOA rifle at 100yd magically becomes a good 2MOA rifle at 1000yd. It's not about the rifle, it's about the individual shooter's ability to <span style="font-style: italic">estimate</span> distant wind values. Without precise measurements, there is no precise POA/POI solution.
What's more, what we can see is usually in constant flux. Often a good solution for the observed condition becomes obsolete even before the sear breaks.
Errors do not necessarily add upon each other. Some cancel out; and it's a sage shooter who can tell which is which. I'm not that sage.
Anything which is indistinguishable from magic becomes precisely the same thing as magic. Show a caveman a trajectory calulator, and he's gonna call you a magician (and you'll be very lucky if that's all that happens).
Greg
Re: wind doping
Great point Greg!
We are reading the wind, which means what we are seeing is already passed. Predicting the wind, well, that's a new ballgame. Time of flight of an average .308 bullet for 1k, what about 1.5 to 1.75 seconds. I don't know about you, but I can't see that far into the future. This is where experience and time behind the rifle play a huge role.
Like I said, I am not claiming any expert experience here, just showing computer math at work. The computer doesn't drink coffee, have a heartbeat, breathe, flinch, or any other accuracy degrading component.
Enough, computers time, I'm going to shoot!
Great point Greg!
We are reading the wind, which means what we are seeing is already passed. Predicting the wind, well, that's a new ballgame. Time of flight of an average .308 bullet for 1k, what about 1.5 to 1.75 seconds. I don't know about you, but I can't see that far into the future. This is where experience and time behind the rifle play a huge role.
Like I said, I am not claiming any expert experience here, just showing computer math at work. The computer doesn't drink coffee, have a heartbeat, breathe, flinch, or any other accuracy degrading component.
Enough, computers time, I'm going to shoot!
Re: wind doping
I think the only real, best computer lives between one's ears. There is no substitute for practice and experience; their lessons are indispensible.
What the senses detect, and how that transfers directly into the thought process is an interface which can be neither duplicated nor improved upon at present, or likely for a long time to come.
Tools are simply that, inanimate without the human input; and by definition, that interface will never be anything even near perfect, while the time required guarantees an obsolete solution.
It's that human/computer/human interface that complicates all the issues.
As I have said a few times now, the best time for computers is back at home; creating a set of baseline ballpark comeups and drifts. A stock chart. The mind sees the local current environment and applies its nuances to the baseline chart on the 'glance and hunch' level. Charts provide the basic dope; observation provides the hold-off. Used correctly, they can even be reverse-engineered to provide a coarse, then refinable, shoot/observe/adjust-dope/hold rangefinding capacity.
I think that trying to use the computer on the fly in the field may be very helpful, but it does it at the cost of delays and at least somewhat obsolescent solutions. I see it as potentially as much a hindrance as a help. Key buttons and fingers are often the most maddening source of frustration and delay.
Greg
I think the only real, best computer lives between one's ears. There is no substitute for practice and experience; their lessons are indispensible.
What the senses detect, and how that transfers directly into the thought process is an interface which can be neither duplicated nor improved upon at present, or likely for a long time to come.
Tools are simply that, inanimate without the human input; and by definition, that interface will never be anything even near perfect, while the time required guarantees an obsolete solution.
It's that human/computer/human interface that complicates all the issues.
As I have said a few times now, the best time for computers is back at home; creating a set of baseline ballpark comeups and drifts. A stock chart. The mind sees the local current environment and applies its nuances to the baseline chart on the 'glance and hunch' level. Charts provide the basic dope; observation provides the hold-off. Used correctly, they can even be reverse-engineered to provide a coarse, then refinable, shoot/observe/adjust-dope/hold rangefinding capacity.
I think that trying to use the computer on the fly in the field may be very helpful, but it does it at the cost of delays and at least somewhat obsolescent solutions. I see it as potentially as much a hindrance as a help. Key buttons and fingers are often the most maddening source of frustration and delay.
Greg
Re: wind doping
Good stuff. This skill set improvement will be my primary focus this year.
Good stuff. This skill set improvement will be my primary focus this year.
Re: wind doping
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SagebrushShooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Good stuff. This skill set improvement will be my primary focus this year. </div></div>
How will you go about developing this skill? What knowledge, equipment, and practice schedule will get you to your destination? Of all that's been mentioned here, is there a how to do it procedure you intend to process? What I'm getting at is much of what I've read on this thread and others in this forum about wind are very abstract observations on the matter. Actually using the useful information revealed here, which could conclude what sight adjustment is necessary to hit the target may be difficult to roll with since this information has been buried under a mountain of thoughts which do not clarify what action the shooter should take.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SagebrushShooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Good stuff. This skill set improvement will be my primary focus this year. </div></div>
How will you go about developing this skill? What knowledge, equipment, and practice schedule will get you to your destination? Of all that's been mentioned here, is there a how to do it procedure you intend to process? What I'm getting at is much of what I've read on this thread and others in this forum about wind are very abstract observations on the matter. Actually using the useful information revealed here, which could conclude what sight adjustment is necessary to hit the target may be difficult to roll with since this information has been buried under a mountain of thoughts which do not clarify what action the shooter should take.
Re: wind doping
You would have been more helpfull adding your thoughts of how to wind read.
test wind at shooter for speed and azmith
look at vegetation and how it moves
mirage direction and its angle
terrain that alters wind flow
ACWAG= A Considered wild arse guess
observing these things and shooting alot you will gain more experiance to understand wind while obsserving
You would have been more helpfull adding your thoughts of how to wind read.
test wind at shooter for speed and azmith
look at vegetation and how it moves
mirage direction and its angle
terrain that alters wind flow
ACWAG= A Considered wild arse guess
observing these things and shooting alot you will gain more experiance to understand wind while obsserving
Re: wind doping
<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: SagebrushShooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Good stuff. This skill set improvement will be my primary focus this year. </div></div>
How will you go about developing this skill? What knowledge, equipment, and practice schedule will get you to your destination? Of all that's been mentioned here, is there a how to do it procedure you intend to process? What I'm getting at is much of what I've read on this thread and others in this forum about wind are very abstract observations on the matter. Actually using the useful information revealed here, which could conclude what sight adjustment is necessary to hit the target may be dificult since this information has been buried under a mountain of thoughts which to not clarify what action the shooter should take. </div></div>
Here's what I'm gonna do:
1. Go to JBM's Website and input my data for my cartridge and get two different wind cards made. One for 5mph and one for 10mph full value.
2. Take Lowlight's formula listed above and find the computer generated constant (C) that JBM used by working the formula backwards.
3. Go to Kinko's and laminate said wind cards and put them in my data book.
4. Head out to my personal steel range where I have 0.5 MOA-2.0 MOA sized targets out to 950 yds and see how the computer generated data matches up with my real world adjustments and generated formula.
5. Record my results. Now I will know if my wind reading is shit or not. The ballistic programs are pretty good these days. If my card says adjust 1.5 mils and the real world is 2.0 mils, I must be missing 0.5 mil (velocity or direction) on my wind call.
6. Vaaawwwllaaa!!! I have learned something!
-SBS
<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: SagebrushShooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Good stuff. This skill set improvement will be my primary focus this year. </div></div>
How will you go about developing this skill? What knowledge, equipment, and practice schedule will get you to your destination? Of all that's been mentioned here, is there a how to do it procedure you intend to process? What I'm getting at is much of what I've read on this thread and others in this forum about wind are very abstract observations on the matter. Actually using the useful information revealed here, which could conclude what sight adjustment is necessary to hit the target may be dificult since this information has been buried under a mountain of thoughts which to not clarify what action the shooter should take. </div></div>
Here's what I'm gonna do:
1. Go to JBM's Website and input my data for my cartridge and get two different wind cards made. One for 5mph and one for 10mph full value.
2. Take Lowlight's formula listed above and find the computer generated constant (C) that JBM used by working the formula backwards.
3. Go to Kinko's and laminate said wind cards and put them in my data book.
4. Head out to my personal steel range where I have 0.5 MOA-2.0 MOA sized targets out to 950 yds and see how the computer generated data matches up with my real world adjustments and generated formula.
5. Record my results. Now I will know if my wind reading is shit or not. The ballistic programs are pretty good these days. If my card says adjust 1.5 mils and the real world is 2.0 mils, I must be missing 0.5 mil (velocity or direction) on my wind call.
6. Vaaawwwllaaa!!! I have learned something!
-SBS
Re: wind doping
It was 3 AM my time, I was "tagging" the thread. Thanks for letting me know I should contribute to the thread next time Mommy. I wasn't aware that my post didn't have anything productive to add about wind reading. Total surprise to me...
It was 3 AM my time, I was "tagging" the thread. Thanks for letting me know I should contribute to the thread next time Mommy. I wasn't aware that my post didn't have anything productive to add about wind reading. Total surprise to me...
Re: wind doping
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SagebrushShooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It was 3 AM my time, I was "tagging" the thread. Thanks for letting me know I should contribute to the thread next time Mommy. I wasn't aware that my post didn't have anything productive to add about wind reading. Total surprise to me... </div></div>I think you are aiming at the wrong guy ? My post was to Stirlingshooter as shown top left corner of my post -mind you and I dont know how you would have arrived at your comments from me or anyone else???Mommy ?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SagebrushShooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It was 3 AM my time, I was "tagging" the thread. Thanks for letting me know I should contribute to the thread next time Mommy. I wasn't aware that my post didn't have anything productive to add about wind reading. Total surprise to me... </div></div>I think you are aiming at the wrong guy ? My post was to Stirlingshooter as shown top left corner of my post -mind you and I dont know how you would have arrived at your comments from me or anyone else???Mommy ?
Re: wind doping
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ch'e</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SagebrushShooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It was 3 AM my time, I was "tagging" the thread. Thanks for letting me know I should contribute to the thread next time Mommy. I wasn't aware that my post didn't have anything productive to add about wind reading. Total surprise to me... </div></div>I think you are aiming at the wrong guy ? My post was to Stirlingshooter as shown top left corner of my post -mind you and I dont know how you would have arrived at your comments from me or anyone else???Mommy ? </div></div>
Sometimes the brain doesn't always work as well as it should. I'm enjoying this topic, and don't want to sidetrack the discussion any further. I don't feel like trying to explain, cause it was stupid in the first place.
-SBS
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ch'e</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SagebrushShooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It was 3 AM my time, I was "tagging" the thread. Thanks for letting me know I should contribute to the thread next time Mommy. I wasn't aware that my post didn't have anything productive to add about wind reading. Total surprise to me... </div></div>I think you are aiming at the wrong guy ? My post was to Stirlingshooter as shown top left corner of my post -mind you and I dont know how you would have arrived at your comments from me or anyone else???Mommy ? </div></div>
Sometimes the brain doesn't always work as well as it should. I'm enjoying this topic, and don't want to sidetrack the discussion any further. I don't feel like trying to explain, cause it was stupid in the first place.
-SBS
Re: wind doping
No problem at all .The basic points I made are mostly it but we all could expand on them
No problem at all .The basic points I made are mostly it but we all could expand on them
Re: wind doping
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ch'e</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You would have been more helpfull adding your thoughts of how to wind read.
test wind at shooter for speed and azmith
look at vegetation and how it moves
mirage direction and its angle
terrain that alters wind flow
ACWAG= A Considered wild arse guess
observing these things and shooting alot you will gain more experiance to understand wind while obsserving
</div></div>
I think LL produced a chart regarding what the effects of wind look like. I use a similar chart, for example an 8 to 12 mph wind will raise dust and loose paper. After appraising the mid-range wind's velocity in mph and direction, using the the wind clock, I give the wind a full, half or no value. This is input to my formula, which uses a constant of 10 for just about every .223, 5.56, and .308 cartridge/rifle I shoot. This yields a counter in MOA. Since I shoot with irons most of the time I usually convert MOA to inches of favor if wind is not prevailing. For prevailing winds, I will click to counter; and, I will watch mirage between shots to discern wind change, which may cause me to readjust my sight. I keep up with my adjustments by recording them between shots. Competing in EIC matches has been a good indicator of my understanding for wind as well as marksmanship in general.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ch'e</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You would have been more helpfull adding your thoughts of how to wind read.
test wind at shooter for speed and azmith
look at vegetation and how it moves
mirage direction and its angle
terrain that alters wind flow
ACWAG= A Considered wild arse guess
observing these things and shooting alot you will gain more experiance to understand wind while obsserving
</div></div>
I think LL produced a chart regarding what the effects of wind look like. I use a similar chart, for example an 8 to 12 mph wind will raise dust and loose paper. After appraising the mid-range wind's velocity in mph and direction, using the the wind clock, I give the wind a full, half or no value. This is input to my formula, which uses a constant of 10 for just about every .223, 5.56, and .308 cartridge/rifle I shoot. This yields a counter in MOA. Since I shoot with irons most of the time I usually convert MOA to inches of favor if wind is not prevailing. For prevailing winds, I will click to counter; and, I will watch mirage between shots to discern wind change, which may cause me to readjust my sight. I keep up with my adjustments by recording them between shots. Competing in EIC matches has been a good indicator of my understanding for wind as well as marksmanship in general.
Re: wind doping
I find shootiing club range and open rangee a little different given one doesnt have flags . I myself win a bit in comps with shots out as far as 1k so can also read wind enough to do ok. The thing with wind though is it isnt like learning math 1 plus 1 equals 2 because wind will change the formula and humble you at will .You can only do all the basics, plus use your experiance of similar conditions and shots and check the out come and continue that road of learning no matter how long you have shot for .
I find shootiing club range and open rangee a little different given one doesnt have flags . I myself win a bit in comps with shots out as far as 1k so can also read wind enough to do ok. The thing with wind though is it isnt like learning math 1 plus 1 equals 2 because wind will change the formula and humble you at will .You can only do all the basics, plus use your experiance of similar conditions and shots and check the out come and continue that road of learning no matter how long you have shot for .
Re: wind doping
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ch'e</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I find shootiing club range and open rangee a little different given one doesnt have flags . I myself win a bit in comps with shots out as far as 1k so can also read wind enough to do ok. The thing with wind though is it isnt like learning math 1 plus 1 equals 2 because wind will change the formula and humble you at will .You can only do all the basics, plus use your experiance of similar conditions and shots and check the out come and continue that road of learning no matter how long you have shot for .</div></div>
Well, it is actually like 1 plus 1 equals 2 since trajectory is consistently altered with either a measured sight adjustment or favor; that's to say, in set conditions an adjustment will have a certain effect. Whether the effect is the one desired is dependent on proper appraisal of all of the factors/conditions which effect the flight of the bullet: drag, gravity, temp, and wind. Appraisal is taken from observation: the effects of wind, as well as mirage. Observation can also reveal the presence of prevailing wind where the shooter can sync to such for more predictable results. There are other strategies for sure, I've tried many; but, I've abandoned most, now simply taking the mid range wind as, so far, reading mid range wind has given me better results than attempting to judge value of a composite in a timely manner.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ch'e</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I find shootiing club range and open rangee a little different given one doesnt have flags . I myself win a bit in comps with shots out as far as 1k so can also read wind enough to do ok. The thing with wind though is it isnt like learning math 1 plus 1 equals 2 because wind will change the formula and humble you at will .You can only do all the basics, plus use your experiance of similar conditions and shots and check the out come and continue that road of learning no matter how long you have shot for .</div></div>
Well, it is actually like 1 plus 1 equals 2 since trajectory is consistently altered with either a measured sight adjustment or favor; that's to say, in set conditions an adjustment will have a certain effect. Whether the effect is the one desired is dependent on proper appraisal of all of the factors/conditions which effect the flight of the bullet: drag, gravity, temp, and wind. Appraisal is taken from observation: the effects of wind, as well as mirage. Observation can also reveal the presence of prevailing wind where the shooter can sync to such for more predictable results. There are other strategies for sure, I've tried many; but, I've abandoned most, now simply taking the mid range wind as, so far, reading mid range wind has given me better results than attempting to judge value of a composite in a timely manner.
Re: wind doping
<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: ch'e</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I find shootiing club range and open rangee a little different given one doesnt have flags . I myself win a bit in comps with shots out as far as 1k so can also read wind enough to do ok. The thing with wind though is it isnt like learning math 1 plus 1 equals 2 because wind will change the formula and humble you at will .You can only do all the basics, plus use your experiance of similar conditions and shots and check the out come and continue that road of learning no matter how long you have shot for .</div></div>
Well, it is actually like 1 plus 1 equals 2 since trajectory is consistently altered with either a measured sight adjustment or favor; that's to say, in set conditions an adjustment will have a certain effect. Whether the effect is the one desired is dependent on proper appraisal of all of the factors/conditions which effect the flight of the bullet: drag, gravity, temp, and wind. Appraisal is taken from observation: the effects of wind, as well as mirage. Observation can also reveal the presence of prevailing wind where the shooter can sync to such for more predictable results. There are other strategies for sure, I've tried many; but, I've abandoned most, now simply taking the mid range wind as, so far, reading mid range wind has given me better results than attempting to judge value of a composite in a timely manner. </div></div>the 1 plus 1 -2 is saying the the wind alters to change the configeration constantly so its never just that equation .Often when I read you I get the feeling you are just speaking about wind on a flat square range which is easier to deduce than say where I often shoot which is different places often with hills ,valleys trees and other obsticles .For example on Satuday I was shooting into the bottom area of valley parallel to me at 865y .The wind couldnt be guaged for angle from our position or strength by mirage as it was swirling all around us .I had earlier taken a compass bearing and a reading with my Kestral of 255deg 17-25 mph from a clear postion at the top of a hill .Now the only thing that was registering around the area were different areas of trees and they were different closer ,middle and behind the target - first shot 17mph 10 oclock I missed as I had allowed for to much wind , 2nd it was dead 14mph 10 oclock wind -truth was though it kept changing with gusts in the valley so the trees helped but it was still a bit of luck also
<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: ch'e</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I find shootiing club range and open rangee a little different given one doesnt have flags . I myself win a bit in comps with shots out as far as 1k so can also read wind enough to do ok. The thing with wind though is it isnt like learning math 1 plus 1 equals 2 because wind will change the formula and humble you at will .You can only do all the basics, plus use your experiance of similar conditions and shots and check the out come and continue that road of learning no matter how long you have shot for .</div></div>
Well, it is actually like 1 plus 1 equals 2 since trajectory is consistently altered with either a measured sight adjustment or favor; that's to say, in set conditions an adjustment will have a certain effect. Whether the effect is the one desired is dependent on proper appraisal of all of the factors/conditions which effect the flight of the bullet: drag, gravity, temp, and wind. Appraisal is taken from observation: the effects of wind, as well as mirage. Observation can also reveal the presence of prevailing wind where the shooter can sync to such for more predictable results. There are other strategies for sure, I've tried many; but, I've abandoned most, now simply taking the mid range wind as, so far, reading mid range wind has given me better results than attempting to judge value of a composite in a timely manner. </div></div>the 1 plus 1 -2 is saying the the wind alters to change the configeration constantly so its never just that equation .Often when I read you I get the feeling you are just speaking about wind on a flat square range which is easier to deduce than say where I often shoot which is different places often with hills ,valleys trees and other obsticles .For example on Satuday I was shooting into the bottom area of valley parallel to me at 865y .The wind couldnt be guaged for angle from our position or strength by mirage as it was swirling all around us .I had earlier taken a compass bearing and a reading with my Kestral of 255deg 17-25 mph from a clear postion at the top of a hill .Now the only thing that was registering around the area were different areas of trees and they were different closer ,middle and behind the target - first shot 17mph 10 oclock I missed as I had allowed for to much wind , 2nd it was dead 14mph 10 oclock wind -truth was though it kept changing with gusts in the valley so the trees helped but it was still a bit of luck also
Re: wind doping
Since you are using a spotting scope to see mirage, wind value/direction is easily understood; and, since you can focus the spotting scope at mid range, by turning the focus knob about a 1/4 turn left from target focus, understanding mid range wind velocity is not too difficult, especially when the range features aids to understanding wind that you have described as obstacles. I'd suggest just trying out the mid range method. Add it to your repertory. The bottom line is wind is fleeting. To get a good hit requires a quick response. The mid range wind countering technique has been proven to be an effective means of getting good first round hits even when the shooter observes many contradictions. At any rate, what I see, and I'm not talking about you, are shooters who have hardly developed their basic marksmanship skills, take their limited knowledge to the long line and blame their dismal results on wind. Thing is, even with knowledge to counter the wind correctly, these shooters still get bad hits for a multitude of reasons and will abandon whatever assumptions are right, swarming to others, which at best detour progress or perhaps totally arrest development. Interestingly, I have also seen many shooters who have had basic marksmanship instruction and because training was not focused these shooters could still not knock down a 300 meter target. These same shooters, revisiting basic marksmanship, given proper instruction and doing what they have been told to do, typically can knock down 600 meter targets just by following step by step instructions which remove the shooter's own notions about how to do it with actual methods that work.
Since you are using a spotting scope to see mirage, wind value/direction is easily understood; and, since you can focus the spotting scope at mid range, by turning the focus knob about a 1/4 turn left from target focus, understanding mid range wind velocity is not too difficult, especially when the range features aids to understanding wind that you have described as obstacles. I'd suggest just trying out the mid range method. Add it to your repertory. The bottom line is wind is fleeting. To get a good hit requires a quick response. The mid range wind countering technique has been proven to be an effective means of getting good first round hits even when the shooter observes many contradictions. At any rate, what I see, and I'm not talking about you, are shooters who have hardly developed their basic marksmanship skills, take their limited knowledge to the long line and blame their dismal results on wind. Thing is, even with knowledge to counter the wind correctly, these shooters still get bad hits for a multitude of reasons and will abandon whatever assumptions are right, swarming to others, which at best detour progress or perhaps totally arrest development. Interestingly, I have also seen many shooters who have had basic marksmanship instruction and because training was not focused these shooters could still not knock down a 300 meter target. These same shooters, revisiting basic marksmanship, given proper instruction and doing what they have been told to do, typically can knock down 600 meter targets just by following step by step instructions which remove the shooter's own notions about how to do it with actual methods that work.
Re: wind doping
Sterling you are reading a 17 MPH mirage... ? When there is mirage at that wind speed usually all you see it is laying over and moving like a river... not any real differences in gusts and flow pattern because after about 12 MPH mirage becomes less than useful, as in, it is not nearly as effective as reading a 3-5 MPH winds with it. The pattern is too tight and the wind is much too strong for mirage to be helpful.
Also in the context of what che is saying, in the field, especially in the area of angles, hills and ridges, the terrain is more important than saying "mid range" mirage is the answer. On a flat range yes, because there you are looking at Max Ord, roughly anyway and the conditions on a square range tend to be more consistent so you want the information which has the biggest effect. Where is the bullet at the highest point in its flight where the wind has the least amount of ground resistance -- Mid Range.
But in the field, you have to look at terrain, you may have the wind being blocked or channelled before, during or after mid range flight. As well with angle shooting you may not have the differences in air layers to to see a mirage. if you are shooting across a canyon you can't see a mirage in the middle 1000 ft above the valley floor, because the air layers are the same. Mirage requires about a 4 degree difference in temperature between the layers, which is why it sits across the ground, the air is different temperature than the dirt, if you rise above the ground like on a tower or in the mountains, you lose the separations.
This is what he is saying about 1+ 1 not being a cut and dry 2 as you are trying to make it. On a square range in a competition format, sure, you can say exactly what you are and be correct 99% of the time. but in the field your competition truism is probably only 25% correct. There are 75% MORE outside factors effecting the shot, to include his increased wind velocity which changes the game. How many competitions have shot with the winds being over 15MPH ? Go back and look at your data and see if you remained as consistent as the shot at 5 MPH ? If the answer is no, you now see something of what he is talking about. No sighters, on demand, it is not the same as a competition format.
This is his main point with your answers.
Sterling you are reading a 17 MPH mirage... ? When there is mirage at that wind speed usually all you see it is laying over and moving like a river... not any real differences in gusts and flow pattern because after about 12 MPH mirage becomes less than useful, as in, it is not nearly as effective as reading a 3-5 MPH winds with it. The pattern is too tight and the wind is much too strong for mirage to be helpful.
Also in the context of what che is saying, in the field, especially in the area of angles, hills and ridges, the terrain is more important than saying "mid range" mirage is the answer. On a flat range yes, because there you are looking at Max Ord, roughly anyway and the conditions on a square range tend to be more consistent so you want the information which has the biggest effect. Where is the bullet at the highest point in its flight where the wind has the least amount of ground resistance -- Mid Range.
But in the field, you have to look at terrain, you may have the wind being blocked or channelled before, during or after mid range flight. As well with angle shooting you may not have the differences in air layers to to see a mirage. if you are shooting across a canyon you can't see a mirage in the middle 1000 ft above the valley floor, because the air layers are the same. Mirage requires about a 4 degree difference in temperature between the layers, which is why it sits across the ground, the air is different temperature than the dirt, if you rise above the ground like on a tower or in the mountains, you lose the separations.
This is what he is saying about 1+ 1 not being a cut and dry 2 as you are trying to make it. On a square range in a competition format, sure, you can say exactly what you are and be correct 99% of the time. but in the field your competition truism is probably only 25% correct. There are 75% MORE outside factors effecting the shot, to include his increased wind velocity which changes the game. How many competitions have shot with the winds being over 15MPH ? Go back and look at your data and see if you remained as consistent as the shot at 5 MPH ? If the answer is no, you now see something of what he is talking about. No sighters, on demand, it is not the same as a competition format.
This is his main point with your answers.
Re: wind doping
Reading the wind at 3/4 range to target has produced good results for many years. That is hard enough and only achievable through experience, and careful, structured shot procedures and data book study.
Print up some data cards for your caliber from JBM at a 10 MPH full value wind. Im of the mindset that that combination will do you well for just about everything with a little bit of brain work on your part. If its a 5 mph wind at full value, divide the above answer by 2. If its a 2-3 mph full value divide the answer above by 4. If its a 10 mph at quarter value, divide the answer by 4 and you have it.
Its all about mindset, dicipline and stucture when you go to the range. Its very easy to start off structured, but with a little time behind the gun it can be easy to loose track of why your there and just start putting rounds down range without documenting your calls, plots, and wind readings.Remember, its not how many rounds down range you put, its about quality rounds down range with a specific purpose. In this case its building your wind reading skills.
Study up on the information here. Study the effects of temperature, and wind on the mirage.
Study up on the affect the wind has on surrounding objects in your area. LL had a good post earlier outlining this.
If you have a Kestrel, use it @ your firing position. Take a guess of wind velocity and direction by using the affect the wind has on the surroundings @ your firing position and then compare it to the readings your Kestrel gives you. You dont even need to be at the range to do this.(Make sure you make your guess BEFORE you look at the kestrel lol).
Take your spotting scope to the range, back the focus off to the 3/4 range and watch the mirage. Study it. Learn it. practice reading it. It will be more difficult at different temperatures and wind speeds, but when that shot needs to break, you need to be able to make that wind call accurately regardless of the environment. Read the mirage, and observe the surrounding objects in that area. Make a comparison between the two and make a call.
Document everything in your data book. A call/shot undocumented is a round wasted and information lost. Read the wind, both speed and direction, make your adjustment, apply the fundamentals, take your shot, apply proper followthrough, CALL YOUR SHOT, document your hit, ANALIZE your wind call, adjustment taken, fundamentals, shot call and your impact. Make the proper adjustment and do it again.
Only through the above steps taken over and over again will your wind reading skills begin to develop.
Once you are able to read the wind accurately with your spotting scope, move to your wind reading with the scope on your rifle without dialing it back to 3/4 range. This is difficult to do, but can be done and in my mind is the only realistic way it should be done. Keep your scope focused on target, use "off center vision" to observe the mirage. Observe the affects on the environment through your rifle scope, make your wind call, adjustment, apply the fundamentals, make your shot, call your shot, observe your impact, if the shot was not at the desired location, immediately conduct a followup shot on target using the proper hold, and observe your shot impact, all without disturbing your position and NPA. Then document it.
Once at home, you can sit down and analize your data book. This is of course the main purpose of the data book.
1. Analize the shooter/bullet/rifle performance under different weather conditions.
IMO the above stated precedure is a sure fire way to improve your wind reading skills and through many rounds fired with that particular rifle, scope, bullet combination, you will find that the time it takes you to do the above stated procedure will decrease dramatically, and will be able to be accomplished in a matter of seconds or less behind the rifle.
Hope that helps.
(EDIT.......apparently LL was typing the same time I was, so as to clarify, LL is exactly right on all counts. My post was directed at firing on a square range and relatively flat, and the starts of learning to read the wind based on mirage and the affects the wind has on the surrounding terrain/environment.
Shooting on a 360 degree range, with canyons, draws, hills, brings about an entirely different set of problems needing to be solved in order to put rounds on target. That being said........the reading of the mirage accurately, and the method for obsevation of the wind on terrain, doesnt change, only the distances in which you take your readings and the procedures taken afterwards.
Reading the wind at 3/4 range to target has produced good results for many years. That is hard enough and only achievable through experience, and careful, structured shot procedures and data book study.
Print up some data cards for your caliber from JBM at a 10 MPH full value wind. Im of the mindset that that combination will do you well for just about everything with a little bit of brain work on your part. If its a 5 mph wind at full value, divide the above answer by 2. If its a 2-3 mph full value divide the answer above by 4. If its a 10 mph at quarter value, divide the answer by 4 and you have it.
Its all about mindset, dicipline and stucture when you go to the range. Its very easy to start off structured, but with a little time behind the gun it can be easy to loose track of why your there and just start putting rounds down range without documenting your calls, plots, and wind readings.Remember, its not how many rounds down range you put, its about quality rounds down range with a specific purpose. In this case its building your wind reading skills.
Study up on the information here. Study the effects of temperature, and wind on the mirage.
Study up on the affect the wind has on surrounding objects in your area. LL had a good post earlier outlining this.
If you have a Kestrel, use it @ your firing position. Take a guess of wind velocity and direction by using the affect the wind has on the surroundings @ your firing position and then compare it to the readings your Kestrel gives you. You dont even need to be at the range to do this.(Make sure you make your guess BEFORE you look at the kestrel lol).
Take your spotting scope to the range, back the focus off to the 3/4 range and watch the mirage. Study it. Learn it. practice reading it. It will be more difficult at different temperatures and wind speeds, but when that shot needs to break, you need to be able to make that wind call accurately regardless of the environment. Read the mirage, and observe the surrounding objects in that area. Make a comparison between the two and make a call.
Document everything in your data book. A call/shot undocumented is a round wasted and information lost. Read the wind, both speed and direction, make your adjustment, apply the fundamentals, take your shot, apply proper followthrough, CALL YOUR SHOT, document your hit, ANALIZE your wind call, adjustment taken, fundamentals, shot call and your impact. Make the proper adjustment and do it again.
Only through the above steps taken over and over again will your wind reading skills begin to develop.
Once you are able to read the wind accurately with your spotting scope, move to your wind reading with the scope on your rifle without dialing it back to 3/4 range. This is difficult to do, but can be done and in my mind is the only realistic way it should be done. Keep your scope focused on target, use "off center vision" to observe the mirage. Observe the affects on the environment through your rifle scope, make your wind call, adjustment, apply the fundamentals, make your shot, call your shot, observe your impact, if the shot was not at the desired location, immediately conduct a followup shot on target using the proper hold, and observe your shot impact, all without disturbing your position and NPA. Then document it.
Once at home, you can sit down and analize your data book. This is of course the main purpose of the data book.
1. Analize the shooter/bullet/rifle performance under different weather conditions.
IMO the above stated precedure is a sure fire way to improve your wind reading skills and through many rounds fired with that particular rifle, scope, bullet combination, you will find that the time it takes you to do the above stated procedure will decrease dramatically, and will be able to be accomplished in a matter of seconds or less behind the rifle.
Hope that helps.
(EDIT.......apparently LL was typing the same time I was, so as to clarify, LL is exactly right on all counts. My post was directed at firing on a square range and relatively flat, and the starts of learning to read the wind based on mirage and the affects the wind has on the surrounding terrain/environment.
Shooting on a 360 degree range, with canyons, draws, hills, brings about an entirely different set of problems needing to be solved in order to put rounds on target. That being said........the reading of the mirage accurately, and the method for obsevation of the wind on terrain, doesnt change, only the distances in which you take your readings and the procedures taken afterwards.
Similar threads
