Comments for Some Gunner Zen

Some Gunner Zen

Sat, 28 Jun 2008 07:59:44 -0600

Provided by our Northron friends.

Comment from BillT on 2008-06-29

Sun, 29 Jun 2008 10:26:40 -0600

...which allows you more accurately to predict how *much* the spin imparted to the projectile...

And the spin imparted to the excuse for *why* the little bullet doesn't hit the big target on the first shot is directly above...

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2008-06-29

Sun, 29 Jun 2008 06:53:09 -0600

BC - used to be, back in my father's day and my very early days, you would dedicate a gunnery trip to calibration. I've forgotten the name of the radar system, but we had a radar chronograph that was very much like the chronographs hand-loaders use to measure bullet velocity - scaled to suit, of course, And you went through a precise process of recording the meteorological conditions, projectile weight, propellant temps, etc, firing multiple rounds, to come up with your MVV, or muzzle velocity variation, which you used to develop a correction to your elevation to account for wear in the bore.

Then you might reorganize the platoons or even batteries to group guns by their mvvs.

Basically, that's how we *used* to answer the question.

Now, with miniturization and computers, many armies put chronographs on all their guns, and link them to the ballistic computers, which are also tracking the other variables, and the system keeps a rolling mvv by gun and computes individual corrections by gun, so you don't have to go through the grouping game. So, if you were to find yourself in a situation where you were firing max charges and shooting a lot of rounds - in the old days, by the end of that set of missions, you'd be shooting short - possibly short enough to notice on the ground. With the chronographs on the guns linked to the computers - every round fired adds to the accuracy of the mvv (assuming people are doing their jobs about inputting the other data).

Comment from bc on 2008-06-29

Sun, 29 Jun 2008 00:31:59 -0600

That is one round. How many rounds must be fired to have a statistically significant sample?

Comment from Kevin on 2008-06-28

Sat, 28 Jun 2008 23:32:04 -0600

Well, it sure looks like a Red Dot, but my second guess was derived from it's origin.

I figgered since our Northen neighbors politically correct government bureacratic critters are so concerned about Global Warming, that it was a 'carbon footprint' recorder.

Judging from the blast in the picture, there's gonna be a lot of cap n' trade swapping to take care of the carbon credits used up by this gun.

Imagine the consternation caused by a Brigade shoot! The horror, the horror!

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2008-06-28

Sat, 28 Jun 2008 18:00:58 -0600

No actually, it's more about "make sure you know how *far* and at what speed the shell is traveling... which allows you more accurately to predict how *much* the spin imparted to the projectile is going to affect drift...

Comment from J.M. Heinrichs on 2008-06-28

Sat, 28 Jun 2008 13:15:16 -0600

I heard it was called a "make shell go straighter thingy", ...

Cheers

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2008-06-28

Sat, 28 Jun 2008 12:41:19 -0600

Kevin - trying to fix a double-post, I inadvertently deleted the post that had your comment on it. It was unintentional, I assure you.

For those who care - Kevin said "That's the largest Red Dot sight I've ever seen."

[waits for laughter to die down]

It's actually a radar chronograph, measuring the muzzle velocity of the departing round. One of the little tools gunners use to keep the rounds less "Ubique" and more accurate.

There, that should have defanged Heinrichs...