Hitech are M2 50cals on buffs better ?

[AKDejaVu]

Two planes are 1500 yards apart.  Front plane and Back plane.  Front is directly in front of Back.

Both are traveling at 400mph.

A) If Back plane fires at Front plane... how far would the bullet have to travel to hit Front Plane?... at... lets say 1200 fps.

B) If Front plane fires at Back plane... how far would the bullet have to travel to hit Back plane?  lets say at 800 fps.

When you set up the target and fire at it, you are simulating the above scenario.  If you think both A and B is the same distance...  you are sorely mistaken.

AKDejaVu

[hitech]

How about heading west at 700 fps relative to the ground.

If the 300 fps is relative to the ground and the 1000fps is relative to the gun.




How it would be done with an axis system where north is Y and positive X is east.

Plane Vel
{300,0,0}

Bullet Vel relative to the gun
{-1000,0,0}


Net Vel  relative to the ground.
{-700,0,0}


Wind speed from the north at 20 fps
{0,-20,0}

Air Vel for caculating drag would be
{-700,-20,0}


Not what is the speed of the bullet relative to the air?

[Seeker]

African or European?

[Puck]

It gets better.  When deflection firing bomber guns you don't lead the con, you trail it on a shot behind the 3-9 line.  The velocity imparted on the bullet from the motion of the bomber causes it to hit a point further "forward" than you think.  I don't have the reference handy at work, but the sights on bomber guns were calibrated so you know how much to trail the enemy fighter based on deflection angle, with a 90 degree deflection requiring 3 rads and a 0 degree deflection requiring 0 rads.

As for speed, using ground speed as a reference, yes, the bullet going out the tail gun has a lower velocity than a bullet from the nose, but then you have to figure the speed of the aircraft that's racing to meet it.  Bomber speed of 400 fps, fighter converging at 500 fps.

Fire a bullet at 1000 fps.  Relative to a fixed point the bullet is traveling at 600 fps.  Relative to the bomber is is traveling at 1000 fps, relative to the poor schmuck behind the bomber the bullet is traveling at 1100 fps.

If that same fighter is in front of the bomber, with the same velocity, and you fire from the nose guns.  Relative to the fixed point the bullet is moving at 1400 fps, relative to the bomber it is moving at 1000 fps, and relative to the fighter it's moving at 900 fps.  Given the lower relative speed from the front it will take longer to traverse the same distance, increasing drop, drag, and stability decay.

HTH.  HAND.

[hitech]

And in case anyone is realy interested how it is done in AH.

Vel.x = 0;
Vel.y = 0;
Vel.z = Weapon->WeaponClass->SimParams.InitialSpeed;
maROT_POINT(RotVel,Vel,HardPnt->Matrix);
maROT_POINT(Vel,RotVel,Weapon->Sim.CurrentAtt.Matrix);

|if(ParentObject != NULL)
|{
|     if(ParentObject->Sim != NULL)
|     {
|           maINC_POINT(Vel,ParentObject->Sim->CurrentPos.Vel);
|     }
|     else
|     {
|           maINC_POINT(Vel,HardPnt->Vel);
|     }
|}
|else
|{
|       maINC_POINT(Vel,HardPnt->Vel);
|}

[Puck]

I get the feeling HT is tired of this discussion.

-several points for indentation errors.

-sever million points for...oh, wait, this ISN'T the monistary.  Nevermind.  

[BenDover]

ermmm, my head hurts

[Wilbus]

Not a programmer so I'm not even gonna try and understand that Hitech, all I wanted was a straight yes or no to my question, not in any way saying AH is wrong in it, just wanna know if what I am saying is right or wrong.

The bullet should travel slower if fired at the opposit direction of the plane heading, isn't this right?

[batdog]

It'll travel slower..but not have as much resistence from air flow from going foward I think. Thats why it has greater range to the rear?

Its like when you initaly fire foward and your hitting 300+ then there is that sudden "wall" of air rushing INTO your plane so to speak....like walking into the wind, that the bullet must deal with. When you fire from the rear...they're is no such thing..or its effects are min anyway.


xBAT

[Samm]

Wilbus using your example . The bullet would be slower (700fps) in relation to the ground only, but it is still moving at 1000fps away from the gun that fired it .  So yes it's actuall airspeed is slower, consequently it looses energy and speed at a slower rate, thus giving it a longer range than a bullet being fired foward . However to the p51 traveling 300fps chasing the b17 the bullet is still traveling 1000fps relative to the p51 . And will smack his plane with more energy than his 50cal bullets will strike the b17 .

Eskimo posted a more comprehensive explaination in the thread that I posted a link to, check it .

[RAS]

hehehe Seeker....that was a good movie

RASCAL

[Wilbus]

Rgr thanks, all I wanted to confirm, it does travel slower.

That it actually hits a plane harder then normal because all (almost) planes are going up fast from the rear is another thing.

[hitech]

Wilbus you might still be missing the point, even if the rear plane was not gaining on the buff i.e. the same speed, the bullet still hits harder.

And btw I did give you a straight answer before.

How about heading west at 700 fps relative to the ground.

If the 300 fps is relative to the ground and the 1000fps is relative to the gun.

[Wilbus]

Didn't mean to sound rude HT, I appologize if I did.

Didn't quite understand your direct answer before.

What I asked (I think) was not wether the bullet hit harder or not, just wether it was slower or not, and it is

Thanks for answering.

[Puck]

Originally posted by Wilbus
What I asked (I think) was not wether the bullet hit harder or not, just wether it was slower or not, and it is

Thanks for answering.

Slower relative to what?  

Everything depends on reference point, velocity more than most.  Orbital mechanics can make you insane; the math is easy, keeping track of reference points can be a nightmare (particularly when you start doing trans-orbital stuff, and the reference point changes occasionally...)