Do snipers take the coriolis effect into consideration?
>>29771913
Depends on the range.
>>29771913
No. There are long-distance competitive shooters who say they only judge wind at 75 yards and go with that. Forget the coriolis effect.
wind variations over the range required for it to matter make a bigger difference than you can adjust for
>>29771913
Go above about a KM, then a sniper should if he really wants to get a kill.
>>29771913
Snipers? No
Naval artillery? Probably
Yes: http://thearmsguide.com/5329/external-ballistics-the-coriolis-effect-6-theory-section/
At this distance.
>>29771913
Only once flight time of the bullet gets over like 3 seconds.
>>29772211
Look at those tripple dubs.
im moist.
>>29772190
At this distance wh
>>29771913
Yes.
Honestly it can come into effect when shooting .22's past about 200yd.
>>29771988
Naval artillery?
Yeah, since the beginning of the 20th century
Coriolis does not noticeably affect tank guns.
The effect of a spinning projectile is compensated for in real guns. Oversized BB guns like the Abrams gun are not subject to that effect.
The earth is flat
The more prudent question would be:
Do snipers take into account the variations in local gravity and any magnetic anomalies that could in theory, alter the bullet's trajectory?
>>29773294
Stfu tripfaggot
>>29773294
> magnetic anomalies
> affecting a mostly lead bullet
>>29773335
Get cancer lol
>>29773349
And water is wet. Your point being?
>>29773264
/thread
Max range on US canon artillery is ~30km. I remember asking about the Coriolis effect in OBC and the response I got was that it wasn't a significant enough effect at those ranges. However, firing solution software may take it into account. Therefore, I imagine sniper bullets are too fast and too short a range.
The rifling of the barrel will make for a more significant effect on the ballistic path. IIRC from the 155mm firing tables, a high angle artillery shot at max range required a a deflection offset of some 30 or 40 meters left because rifling causes the round to drift to the right.
IIRC, the Paris gun of WWI took into account the Coriolis effect and would aim some 45km left of Paris in order to land rounds in the city. That thing was crazy though, and it was firing rounds that reached the edge of space. Part of that 45km offset is due to rifling as well. My numbers may be off but I'm too lazy to look this stuff up.
>tl;dr Coriolis effect only matters over much longer distances with considerable time of flight, not so much on a rifle bullet, and barrel rifling causes more drift than Coriolis effect.
>>29773448
This is called spin drift
>>29773484
Or just "drift" in the arty firing tables.
I remember seeing a video of a dude who shot a plate at a very long range, once facing a direction then facing the other, with the exact same point of aim, (in a vice iirc) he had like 2 or 3 inches of difference, big deal.
>>29773793
What range? And if you're shooting center of mass of a dude, 2-3" doesn't really matter.
>>29773793
i remember this video, was 1000yrds
in war, it might not matter but for long range paper punches it does.
best solution, only shoot north to south.
>>29775794
Shooting North or South is what generates the Coriolis effect.
Shooting East or West is what generates the Eötvos effect.
>>29771913
>Do snipers take the coriolis effect into consideration?
yes
>>29773930
>if you're shooting center of mass of a dude, 2-3" doesn't really matter
>I'm retarded enough to think gun barrels shoot a bullet perfectly straight except for ONE factor
No, they add up, you fucktard.
