How the hell will you find itI drew it small scale because it's roughly the dimesions I intent to build it to, for testing from a 6mm pneumatic
I believe I heared someone say that you like to work in scales familiar to you...
How the hell will you find itI drew it small scale because it's roughly the dimesions I intent to build it to, for testing from a 6mm pneumatic
This is not for long range shooting, as I made it clear I have neither the space nor the opportunity to shoot in public available. I just want to see if an unfinned elongated projectile can be stabilised by forward CG alone.Labtecpower wrote:How the hell will you find it
I believe my retort was along the lines of my clearly not having to compensate for anythingI believe I heared someone say that you like to work in scales familiar to you...
Here be the epic projectile shape thread.I'm sure JSR or RAG can dig up the simulation that RAG ran for the standard projectile shapes.
hectmarr wrote:You have to make many weapons, because this field is long and short life
hectmarr wrote:You have to make many weapons, because this field is long and short life
CG = -23.622mm.dewey-1 wrote:As long as the CG is 25 mm or less it will be stable.
Seven pages-worth of heated debate is enough to convince me that this is a touchy subject. I just know that most subsonic model rockets use an airfoil shape for their fins to minimize air resistance. But I digress. I don't want to start an argument on a subject that's already been discussed by minds that are more learned than mine.jackssmirkingrevenge wrote:Here be the epic projectile shape thread.
I do know a bit about this, though. Round surfaces create a detached shockwave in supersonic flight that greatly increases air resistance, don't they?Saefroch wrote:Round-nose projectiles do better supersonic.
I think so. But if you want to make a high-school physics teacher look unintelligent, ask them why a G6 is better than a G7 supersonic, but not subsonic. Few know.danielrowell wrote:I do know a bit about this, though. Round surfaces create a detached shockwave in supersonic flight that greatly increases air resistance, don't they?
Indeed, especially as even the theoretical models so far seem to give very slightly different valuesIt would be interesting to compare the actual results to a 3D model.
It wasn't a simulation, it was just a collation and visualisation of the data from various real world tests. Still, it's surprisingly hard to find the numbers for some of those tests.saefroch wrote:I'm sure JSR or RAG can dig up the simulation that RAG ran for the standard projectile shapes.
Well, G6 only starts beating G7 past about Mach 3, and there's only really a hair's breadth in it.But if you want to make a high-school physics teacher look unintelligent, ask them why a G6 is better than a G7 supersonic, but not subsonic.
hectmarr wrote:You have to make many weapons, because this field is long and short life